Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sihong Wu, Lecturer, School of Business, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

The resurgence of nationalism across the globe is not just a political issue. It’s emerging as a powerful force that multinational companies cannot afford to ignore.

Recent events such as Brexit, Russia’s war in Ukraine and the United States election can have far-reaching implications for businesses.

These events can influence investor confidence and alter government restrictions on foreign companies.

Managers are increasingly faced with a key question: should they push forward with new initiatives targeting international markets or hang on and wait for acceptance from those local communities?

There is ongoing debate over whether going global can directly help a company’s ability to innovate. Entering international markets can allow a business to gain new knowledge through connecting global production networks, accessing global talent and creating diversified global teams.

But what happens when a company’s plans to go global clash with nationalist sentiment – either at home or abroad?

Our research looked at how two factors – a country’s focus on technological progress, and its nationalist sentiment – can affect companies’ decisions when it comes to expanding into the global market.

These factors are particularly important when it comes to the spread of new technology that might be perceived to go against national interests.

While it may be obvious that companies need to take the political temperature of a new market, our research highlights the complexity of national sentiments – and how these can alter internal business decisions.

Different reactions

In our study of companies from 27 countries, we found multinationals react differently to nationalist attitudes in their home country versus nationalism in the foreign countries where they operate.

We identified four broad scenarios.

• There are more opportunities for a business to adopt innovative strategies when there is little to no competition over who gets the new technology first. This lack of nationalist sentiment allows the company to innovate using ideas from both countries.

• When nationalist sentiment is strong in a company’s home country, a company’s technological development efforts tend to align with its government’s priorities.

• In foreign countries with strong nationalist sentiments, managers often struggle with bringing new technologies to the market. This is, in part, due to difficulties in gaining acceptance in the local community.

• Where nationalism is strong in both a company’s home country and the country it wants to enter, it becomes harder to successfully introduce new technologies. This is often due to local resistance as well as conflicts between nationalist groups and others.

Progress vs national identity

Over the past two decades, there have been several examples of companies struggling to make inroads due to nationalist sentiment – either at home or abroad. There have also been a few success stories.

While we examined companies from multiple countries, China’s political relations with other nations provide several examples of why considering nationalism is important to multinational companies.

Aluminium company Chinalco, for example, failed in it’s bid to buy Australia’s Rio Tinto in 2008. The Chinese company encountered significant resistance due to concerns surrounding its status as a state-owned enterprise.

China’s Huawei has also faced difficulties in its efforts to expand its 5G technology. This is, in part, due to nationalist sentiment in concerns in countries such as the US and Australia over threats to national security and the need for technological sovereignty.

Our study also found that when nationalism and technological advances are combined, they can create a sense of techno-nationalism (when a country prioritises technological progress to enhance its global power). This can further influence a multinational company’s decision to stay or expand in a particular market.

Volkswagen, for example, was once a major player in China’s electric vehicle market. It now faces barriers to maintaining its market share in the country. The Chinese government is, instead, focusing on nurturing and supporting domestic manufacturers – sidelining the German company.

Similarly, Intel has responded to the US government’s push for semiconductor self-sufficiency by boosting domestic production, aiming to reduce reliance on foreign partners.

These examples highlight how the combination of nationalism and technological development goals can affect multinational companies.

Gaining local and global acceptance

Throughout our research, we found that to gain acceptance in a foreign market, multinational companies need to build a positive public image and foster genuine relationships.

Partnering with local businesses and non-governmental organisations can help them increase the credibility of their new ideas and acquire support support for developing new projects based on local needs.

When expanding overseas, companies also need to reduce the perception of excessive government involvement or political motives. Increasing transparency can help ease local and global concerns about the development and spread of new technology.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Nationalism is surging – changing the way companies do business overseas – https://theconversation.com/nationalism-is-surging-changing-the-way-companies-do-business-overseas-241905

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bridgette Glover, PhD Candidate in Media and Communications, University of New England

From hot flashes to hysteria, film and TV have long represented menopause as scary, emotional and messy.

Recently, celebrities have been sharing their personal menopause experiences on social media, helping to re-frame the conversation in popular culture.

We are also seeing more stories about menopause on television, with real stories and depictions that show greater empathy for the person going through it.

Menopause is having a moment. But will it help women?

The change onscreen

This is not what we’re used to seeing on our screens. Countless sitcoms, from All in the Family (1971–79) to Two and a Half Men (2003–15) have used the menopause madness trope for laughs.

Retro sitcom That ‘70s Show (1998–2006) used mom Kitty’s menopause journey as comedic fodder for multiple episodes. When she mistakes a missed period for pregnancy, Kitty’s surprise menopause diagnosis results in an identity crisis alongside mood swings, hot flashes and irritability.

But the audience is not meant to empathise. Instead, the focus is on how Kitty’s menopause impacts the men in her family. Having to navigate Kitty’s symptoms, her veteran husband likens the experience to war: “I haven’t been this frosty since Korea”.

Even when male characters are not directly involved, women are determined to reject menopause because they see it as a marker of age that signals a loss of desirability and social worth. In Sex and the City (1998–2004), Samantha describes herself as “day-old bread” when she presumes her late period signifies menopause.

This is a popular framing of menopause in post-feminist TV of the 1990s and early 2000s. While the menstruating body is constructed as uncontrollable and in need of management, the menopausal body requires management and maintenance to reject signals of collapse.

These storylines erase the genuine experiences of confusion, discomfort and transformation that come with menopause.

A cultural moment arrives

Since 2015, stories of menstruation have increased in popular culture.

Series like comedy Broad City (2014–19) and comedy-drama Better Things (2016–22) directly call out the lack of menopause representations. When Abbi in Broad City admits she “totally forgot about menopause”, a woman responds “Menopause isn’t represented in mainstream media. Like, no one wants to talk about it”.

Similarly, in Better Things, while watching her three daughters stare at the TV Sam laments: “No one wants to hear about it, which is why nobody ever prepared you for it”.

And lack of preparation becomes a key theme for perimenopausal Charlotte in the Sex and the City reboot, And Just Like That … (2021–) when she has a “flash period”.

Fleabag (2016–19) included a groundbreaking monologue about menopause delivered by Kristen Scott-Thomas, playing a successful businesswoman. She describes menopause as “horrendous, but then it’s magnificent”.

[…] your entire pelvic floor crumbles, and you get fucking hot, and no one cares. But then you’re free. No longer a slave. No longer a machine with parts.

Scripted by Phoebe Waller-Bridge, this celebrated monologue critiques the post-feminist notion of striving to be the “idealised feminine body”. Through this new feminist lens, menopause is acknowledged as both painful – physically and emotionally – and necessary for liberation.

Today’s menopause on screen

Alongside more recent series like The Change (2023), multiple documentaries including The (M) Factor (2024), and arguably even films like The Substance (2024), social media has become a prolific space for raising awareness about menopause.

Celebrities use social media to share tales of perimenopause and menopause, often in real time.

Last year, actor Drew Barrymore experienced her “first perimenopausal hot flash” during her talk show.

And ABC News Breakfast guest host, Imogen Crump, had to pause her news segment, saying

I could keep stumbling through, but I’m having such a perimenopausal hot flush right now, live on air.

Both Barrymore and Crump shared clips of their live segments to their social media pages, to challenge stigma and create conversations. Crump even posted to LinkedIn to raise awareness in a professional setting.

In a podcast interview clip shared to Instagram, writer and skincare founder, Zoë Foster Blake describes perimenopause as a “real mental health thing”, because of the lack of awareness. Recalling conversations with other perimenopausal women, Foster Blake says “We all think we’re crazy. We don’t know what the fuck is going on”.

Feeling “crazy” is a constant theme in these conversations. As actor and menopause awareness advocate Naomi Watts points out, this is largely thanks to Hollywood. Despite the stigmatising media stereotype of “crazy lady that shouts”, Watts argues that with “support and community”, women experiencing perimenopause and menopause “can thrive”.

In fact, Watts believes menopause should be celebrated: “we know ourselves better, we’re wiser for our cumulative experiences”.

Medical professionals like American doctors Marie Clare Haver and Corinne Menn have been well-positioned to share their expertise and experiences via social media. They are catching and helping fuel a wave of advocacy and awareness for midlife women’s health.

Building community

After watching the menopause madness trope on our screens for decades, we are now seeing perimenopause and menopause depicted with more empathy. These depictions allow viewers – those who menstruate, who have menstruated, and who know menstruators – to feel seen and be informed.

By sharing their experiences on social media and adding to these new screen stories, celebrities are building a community that makes the menopausal journey less lonely and helps those on it remember their worth.

Bridgette Glover does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Menopause is having a moment. How a new generation of women are shaping cultural attitudes – https://theconversation.com/menopause-is-having-a-moment-how-a-new-generation-of-women-are-shaping-cultural-attitudes-241784

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

The Albanese government will develop and legislate a “Digital Duty of Care” to place the onus on platforms to keep people safe and better prevent online harms, Communications Minister Michelle Rowland has announced.

In a speech to the Sydney Institute on Wednesday night, Rowland said a change of approach was needed.

“To date, the Online Safety Act has been a crucial tool for incentivising digital platforms to remove illegal content, usually applied remedially and case by case. However, it does not, in a fundamental sense, incentivise the design of a safer, healthier, digital platforms ecosystem.

“What’s required is a shift away from reacting to harms by relying on content regulation alone, and moving towards systems-based prevention, accompanied by a broadening of our perspective of what online harms are.”

The change would bring Australia into line with the United Kingdom and European Union approaches. Platforms would have to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harms, underpinned by risk assessment and risk mitigation and informed by safety-by-design principles.

A duty of care was “a common law concept and statutory obligation that places a legal obligation to take reasonable steps to protect others from harm. It is a proven, workable and flexible model,” Rowland said.

“This, as part of a growing global effort, will deliver a more systemic and preventative approach to making online services safer and healthier.

“Where platforms seriously and systemically breach their duty of care we will ensure the regulator can draw on strong penalty arrangements,” Rowland said.

The duty of care model was recommended by a review of the Online Safety Act, which went to the government last month. The government brought forward the statutory review of the act by a year to ensure online safety laws were up to date.

The government says legislating a duty of care will mean tech platforms will need to continually identify and mitigate potential risks as technology and services alter.

The changes will support the existing complaint and removal schemes for illegal and harmful material. under the Online Safety Act.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Government to impose ‘duty of care’ on digital platforms: Communiations Minister Rowland – https://theconversation.com/government-to-impose-duty-of-care-on-digital-platforms-communiations-minister-rowland-243598

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roy Green, Emeritus Professor of Innovation, University of Technology Sydney

Productivity is the greatest structural problem in our economy, according to Treasurer Jim Chalmers. He says there is “no higher priority for reform”.

Announcing a A$900 million productivity fund to be shared with the states, the treasurer told a meeting of the Australian Business Economists on Wednesday Australia’s productivity challenges would take time to turn around.

The boost comes on top of measures in the ambitious $22.7 billion Future Made in Australia initiative announced as part of the federal budget in May.

The new fund is similar to a scheme under the Keating and Howard governments. That scheme helped the states launch competition reforms, including introducing national food standards and lifting retail trading restrictions.

Chalmers told Wednesday’s gathering:

Our productivity problem didn’t show up two years ago, it showed up two decades ago. And not just in Australia but in almost every comparable country. The Productivity Commission’s five-yearly review of our productivity performance had to concede that growth in the last full decade was the slowest in 60 years.

Stalled productivity growth has translated into real wage stagnation and a prolonged cost-of-living crisis.

A A$900 million productivity fund will help, but fixing productivity is going to require some big changes by government, industry, and research and education institutions.

Causes of lower growth and productivity

Much of the drop in productivity growth occurred during the commodity boom, when a high Australian dollar made our trade-exposed industries less competitive.

This particularly affected manufacturing, which historically had been the major source of increasing productivity. Manufacturing was only just finding its feet in global markets after the tariff reductions of the late 1980s and 90s.

While the slowdown is global, Australia is finding it much harder to deal with due to our dependence on resources, such as iron ore and coal. This is a phenomenon observed across most of the industrialised world. Economists have come up with various explanations.

Have we already done our best innovating?

One line of thinking, associated with US economist Bob Gordon, is the slowdown can be explained simply by the fact that the most fundamental innovations are behind us.

By this he means such things as urban sanitation, commercial flight and telecommunications. Nothing since compares, and of course he has a point. We could probably live without an iPhone, but not so much without modern dentistry.

Counting the intangibles

Another explanation makes it a measurement issue. Productivity is a measure of the outputs of an enterprise or a country per unit of the inputs required to produce them. Traditionally these outputs have been physical goods.

What happens when the outputs are intangible, such as software or internet services? However unlikely, this could mean we have raging productivity but are not detecting it in the data.

The explanation which has had most influence is that the digital revolution, with the further development of machine learning, robotics and artificial intelligence, has indeed had an impact on productivity.

However, it is concentrated in “frontier firms,” which drive technological change and innovation.

Why we need more ‘frontier firms’

The extent to which this impact is reflected in national data depends on the share of frontier firms in the economy and the rate of deployment of technologies and skills to the larger group of laggard firms.

Even in the 1980s, just before a decade-long productivity boom, US economist and Nobel laureate Bob Solow lamented

You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics.

Simply put, the problem in Australia is we have too few frontier firms, too many laggards and too slow a rate of technology adoption.

Lifting productivity more challenging here than overseas

As a result, the productivity slowdown is harder to fix here than in other countries, with Treasury downgrading its forecasts from 1.5% growth to 1.2%. Real wage growth not only compares unfavourably with elsewhere but has gone backwards in recent years.

Treasury analysis attributes much of the continuing decline in productivity growth to “Australia’s changing mix of industries”. This has seen more people working in services where productivity grows more slowly.

However, the increased role of services is common to most countries. The factors specific to Australia are the low manufacturing share of GDP and the failure of mining to compensate, despite massive resource exports.

In fact, it can be argued Australia’s reliance on unprocessed raw materials is part of the problem. While fuelling consumption at the height of the commodity boom, they reduced our capacity to grow globally competitive, knowledge-intensive industries. We therefore have a less complex, less diverse export mix than any other advanced economy.

Clearly, Chalmers’ proposed measures to strengthen national competition policy and enable the states to update and streamline planning regulations will not fix this problem on their own.

At most, they will help create conditions to set up new frontier firms and scale existing ones to innovate more successfully in global markets.

The government’s major effort to diversify our narrow trade and industrial structure, and in so doing reinvigorate productivity growth, is its new industrial policy framework. This is still taking shape.

It features Future Made in Australia and is a combined commitment to achieve net zero emissions with policies to simultaneously build economic resilience and complexity.

The government is also undertaking a “strategic examination” of its research and development policies. These must drive the industrial transformation necessary for both productivity improvement and a sustainable, decarbonised economy. New approaches to collaboration between industry and researchers in “innovation ecosystems”, where Australia has again fallen behind, are needed.

Restoring Australia’s productivity growth is a huge task. It will largely be driven by the development and adoption of new technologies, as the Technology Council of Australia has argued in a new report. But there is also an important role for “non-technology innovation”, such as business model design and systems integration.

This brings us back to the quality of Australian management, which has been found wanting, especially in small to medium companies, by comparison with international counterparts. Ultimately, transformational change will depend on managers at the enterprise level, drawing on the talent and creativity of their workforces.

We shall find out soon enough whether we are up for the productivity task, which will benefit from a bipartisan approach and policy continuity across governments. Our future living standards and social cohesion depend on it.

Roy Green does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Jim Chalmers has provided an extra $900 million to boost productivity. But this ‘high priority’ problem is going to need an across the board effort – https://theconversation.com/jim-chalmers-has-provided-an-extra-900-million-to-boost-productivity-but-this-high-priority-problem-is-going-to-need-an-across-the-board-effort-243557

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies, Australian National University

Donald Trump’s re-election as the US president last week comes at a time of extreme volatility in the Middle East.

The president-elect has promised to end all wars. In his usual impulsive and unpredictable manner, he has pledged to resolve the Ukraine war within 24 hours of taking office and help Israel finish its Gaza and Lebanon operations quickly.

Yet the Middle East is a complex place. Trump will have much difficulty balancing his ardent support of Israel and his other ambitions in the region, especially given the changing dynamics between Iran and its rival, Saudi Arabia.

Here’s what Trump can expect when he takes office in a few months.

Collapse of talks between Israel and Hamas

Overshadowed by the US election was Qatar’s announcement that it has paused its role as a ceasefire mediator between Israel and Hamas.

The tiny, oil-rich emirate has worked hard over the past year to try to reach a deal to end the war. In the process, it made good use of its close relations with the United States, which has its largest Middle East military base in Qatar, and with Hamas, whose political leadership and office have been based in Doha. This, Qatar believed, would help it gain the confidence of the warring parties.

However, its efforts did not produce anything more than a brief ceasefire last year, which resulted in the release of more than 100 Israeli hostages in exchange for 240 Palestinian prisoners.

There are several reasons for this.

For one, the two sides cannot get past a couple of main sticking points. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has resolved to eliminate Hamas completely, ruling out a temporary truce. Hamas is demanding a complete end to the fighting and total Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza.

Meanwhile, Washington has failed to play a meaningful role in the talks. While repeatedly emphasising its desire for a ceasefire, the Biden administration did not at any point put tangible pressure on Israel beyond diplomatic rhetoric.

It has also refused to cut off military aid to Israel. Instead, it approved a US$20 billion (A$30 billion) arms sale to Israel in August. This means Netanyahu has had no compelling reason to divert from his mission.

A possible ceasefire in Lebanon

As the chances of a Gaza ceasefire have faded, hopes have been raised about a Lebanon ceasefire.

Washington has reportedly engaged in intensive diplomatic efforts to get Israel and Hezbollah to reach a common ground to end the fighting there.

Israel wants Hezbollah to be disarmed and pushed back at least beyond the Litani River in southern Lebanon – about 30km north of the Israeli border – with a security zone to be established between the two. Israel wants to maintain the right to strike Hezbollah if necessary, which Lebanese authorities are likely to reject.

Israel has considerably weakened Hezbollah in its bombing and ground invasion of southern Lebanon at the expense of massive civilian casualties.

However, just as Israel has not been able to wipe out Hamas, it has so far not succeeded in crippling Hezbollah to the extent it would be forced to accept a ceasefire on Israel’s terms. The militant group continues to possess sufficient political and military prowess to remain resilient.

Changing regional dynamics

Now, Trump re-enters the scene.

His electoral triumph has comforted Netanyahu’s government to the extent that his finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, has asked the relevant authorities to prepare for the formal annexation of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Trump has been a committed supporter of Israel for a long time. During his first presidency he recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and ordered the US embassy to move there. He also recognised Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which Israel seized from Syria in 1967.

He castigated Iran as the real villain in the region and withdrew the US from the multilateral Iran nuclear agreement. He also instigated the Abraham Accords, in which several Arab states normalised relations with Israel.

However, the Gaza and Lebanon wars, as well as the direct military exchanges between Israel and Iran over the past year, have changed the regional texture.

Trump has voiced unwavering backing of Israel against Hamas and Hezbollah, and is likely to resuscitate his “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran. This could involve strangling Tehran with stringent sanctions and blocking its oil exports, while seeking to isolate it internationally.

Meanwhile, as a transactional leader, Trump also wants to strengthen America’s lucrative economic and trade ties with the Arab governments of the region.

However, these countries have been shaken by the scale of Israel’s Gaza and Lebanon operations. Their populations are boiling over with frustration at their leaders’ inability to counter Israel’s actions. This is nowhere more evident than in Jordan.

As a result, Saudi Arabia – America’s richest and most consequential Arab ally in the region – has lately taken the lead in voicing strong opposition to Israel. Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has also made a path toward an independent Palestinian state a condition of normalising relations with Israel.

Further, Riyadh is strengthening its more than year-long rapprochement with its arch rival, Iran. The two countries’ defence ministers met last weekend, following a joint military exercise involving their navies.

In addition, Bin Salman has just convened a meeting of Arab and Muslim leaders in Riyadh to forge a consensual position in dealing with Israel and the incoming Trump administration.

Where is it all heading?

Trump will need to find a balance between his commitment to Israel and upholding America’s close relations with its traditional Arab allies. This will be crucial to ending the Middle East wars and rebuffing Iran.

Tehran is no longer as vulnerable to Trump’s venom as it may have been in the past. It is more powerful militarily and enjoys strong strategic relations with Russia, China and North Korea, as well as improved relations with regional Arab states.

Given the absence of a Gaza ceasefire, the thin hope of a halt to the Lebanon fighting, Netanyahu’s intransigence and Trump’s pursuance of an “Israel first” policy, the Middle East’s volatility is likely to persist.

It may prove to be as much of a headache for Trump as it was for Joe Biden in a very polarised and unpredictable world.

Amin Saikal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Donald Trump fancies himself a skilled dealmaker, but Middle East peace might be beyond him – https://theconversation.com/donald-trump-fancies-himself-a-skilled-dealmaker-but-middle-east-peace-might-be-beyond-him-243570

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nafis Alam, Professor and Head, School of Business, Monash University Malaysia

It can be hard to make sense of the price of bitcoin, which has swung wildly throughout its history. But in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s presidential victory in the United States, it’s reached unprecedented highs.

Last weekend, it surged past US$80,000 (A$122,492) for the first time. Then, on Tuesday, it briefly flirted with the US$90,000 threshold.

Many other cryptocurrencies also saw a significant boost.

In Trump, the crypto community sees a powerful new friend. Speaking at a major bitcoin conference in Nashville in July, he promised to create a friendlier business environment if re-elected:

We will have regulations, but from now on the rules will be written by people who love your industry, not hate your industry.

So, are things really looking up for crypto? Many of Trump’s plans have caused excitement in the sector – but there’s still good reason to be cautious.

Read more:
Trump’s economic vision is no longer a ‘maybe’. Here’s what it might mean for Australia and the world

Less red tape, more crypto

Trump has long been a strong supporter of government deregulation – favouring less intervention in many areas of the economy.

That could reduce regulatory pressure on cryptocurrencies and open the door for more rapid growth and innovation within the industry.

Overt government support could also attract more institutional investors by creating a favourable environment for digital assets.

Trump has flagged a wide range of pro-crypto policies, including building a government bitcoin stockpile, preventing the government from selling its cryptocurrency holdings, and even using cryptocurrency to address the national debt.

Furthering his pro-bitcoin stance, he’s also previously voiced opposition to “central bank digital currencies”, or CBDCs.

CBDCs are a relatively new digital form of money – and the US doesn’t have one yet. However, unlike decentralised cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, the value of a CBDC is determined by its issuing country’s central bank.

Trump’s previous criticisms of the US Federal Reserve have resonated with many cryptocurrency supporters who have advocated for decentralised financial systems.

A volatile US dollar

A Trump presidency could lead to substantial US dollar volatility against major currencies.

A cornerstone policy of Trump’s re-election campaign has been to impose tariffs of 10–20% on all imports to the US, and 60% on imports from China.

New or escalated tariffs could lead to trade tensions, impacting currency markets. This would likely strengthen the dollar temporarily, as domestic goods become more expensive.

But such uncertainty could also drive market speculation and fluctuations in the dollar.

If the dollar falls, some investors looking for alternatives may turn to cryptocurrencies as a hedge against inflation or currency devaluation.

Geopolitical risk

Trump’s presidency could bring increased geopolitical and domestic political tension. Is cryptocurrency a safe haven in such times? Some proponents have previously touted the asset class as a kind of “digital gold”.

On some occasions during Trump’s first presidency, it may appear to have acted like one.

In 2019, bitcoin’s price surged as US–China trade tensions escalated. It also spiked briefly in early 2020 when Iran struck two US military bases in retaliation for the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

Such a reputation may influence investor behaviour. However, previous research has challenged the idea that bitcoin acts as a safe haven, finding its price declined under heightened financial uncertainty.

Other research has found that bitcoin and fellow cryptocurrency Ethereum are not safe havens from many international equity markets. When included in a portfolio, they added to downside risk.

Is the euphoria justified?

The euphoria in the crypto market following Trump’s victory may be understandable. His support for digital currency could benefit investors and industry leaders seeking fewer regulations.

However, these markets remain inherently volatile. Less regulation could amplify this characteristic even further.

If Trump’s deregulation of cryptocurrency leads to increased speculation by investors, it could make the crypto market even more susceptible to bubbles and crashes. Global markets could have a rough ride ahead of them.

Nafis Alam does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The crypto community sees a powerful new friend in Donald Trump. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/the-crypto-community-sees-a-powerful-new-friend-in-donald-trump-heres-why-243366

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

Media coverage in Australia of the US presidential election and of the Voice referendum in October 2023 offer some pointers to what we might expect during next year’s federal election campaign.

They also suggest some ways in which the professional mass media might better respond to the challenges thrown up by the combination of disinformation, harmful speech and hyper-partisanship that disfigured those two campaigns.

The ideological contours of the Australian professional media, in particular its newspapers, have become delineated with increasing clarity over the past 15 years. In part this is a response to the polarising effects of social media, and in part it is a reflection of the increased stridency of political debate.

The right is dominated by News Corporation, with commercial radio shock jocks playing a supporting role. The left is more diffuse and less given to propagandising. It includes the old Fairfax papers, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, now owned by the Nine Entertainment Company, and Guardian Australia.

These contours are unlikely to change much, if at all, between now and the 2025 election.

Impartiality versus ‘bothsidesism’

Under these conditions, how might Australian journalism practice be adapted to better serve democracy under the pressures of an election campaign? The objective would be to contribute to the creation of a political culture in which people can argue constructively, disagree respectfully and work towards consensus.

In pursuing that objective, a central issue is whether and how the media are committed to the principle of impartiality in news reports. This principle is under sustained pressure, as was seen in both the presidential election and the Voice referendum.

We know from the words of its own editorial code of conduct that News Corp Australia does not accept the principle of impartiality in news reports. Paragraph 1.3 of that code states:

Publications should ensure factual material in news reports is distinguishable from other material such as commentary and opinion. Comment, conjecture and opinion are acceptable as part of coverage to provide perspective on an issue, or explain the significance of an issue, or to allow readers to recognise what the publication’s or author’s standpoint is on a matter.

This policy authorises journalists to write their news reports in ways that promote the newspaper’s or the journalist’s own views. This runs directly counter to the conventional separation of news from opinion accepted by most major media companies. This is exemplified by the policy of The Guardian, including Guardian Australia:

While free to editorialise and campaign, a publication must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

Appended to The Guardian’s code is the essay written in 1921 by C. P. Scott, first the editor and then the owner-editor of the Manchester Guardian, to mark the newspaper’s centenary. It includes these words: “Comment is free, but facts are sacred”. Referring to a newspaper’s public duty, he added: “Propaganda […] is hateful.”

In the present overheated atmosphere of public debate, impartiality has come to be confused with a discredited type of journalism known as “bothsidesism”.

“Bothsidesism” presents “both sides” of an issue without any regard for their relative evidentiary merits. It allows for the ventilation of lies, hate speech and conspiracy theories on the spurious ground that these represent another, equally valid, side of the story.

Read more:
‘Suicide for democracy.’ What is ‘bothsidesism’ – and how is it different from journalistic objectivity?

Impartiality is emphatically not “bothsidesism”. What particularly distinguishes impartiality is that it follows the weight of evidence. However, a recurring problem in the current environment is that the fair and sober presentation of evidence can be obliterated by the force of political rhetoric. As a result, impartiality can fall victim to its own detached passivity.

Yet impartiality does not have to be passive: it can be proactive.

During the presidential campaign, in the face of Trump’s egregious lying, some media organisations took this proactive approach.

When Trump claimed during his televised debate with Kamala Harris that Haitian immigrants were eating people’s pets in the town of Springfield, Ohio, the host broadcaster, the American Broadcasting Company, fact-checked him in real time. It found, during the broadcast, that there was no evidence to support his claim.

And for four years before that, The Washington Post chronicled Trump’s lies while in office, arriving at a total of 30,573.

Challenging misinformation

During the Voice referendum, many lies were told about what the Voice to Parliament would be empowered to do: advise on the date of Anzac Day, change the flag, set interest rates, and introduce a race-based element into the Constitution, advantaging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people over others.

These were rebutted by the relevant authorities but by then the lies had been swept up in the daily tide of mis- or disinformation that was a feature of the campaign. At that point, rebuttals merely oxygenate the original falsehoods.

More damaging still to the democratic process was the baseless allegation by Opposition Leader Peter Dutton that the Australian Electoral Commission had “rigged” the vote by accepting a tick as indicating “yes” but not accepting a cross as indicating “no”.

Opposition Senate leader, Simon Birmingham, also said allowing ticks but not crosses undermined the integrity of the process.

The electoral commissioner, Tom Rogers, was reported as repudiating these claims, but by then these lies had acquired currency and momentum.

A proactive approach to impartiality requires establishing the truthful position before or at the time of initial publication, then calling out falsehoods for what they are and providing supporting evidence. Neither the principle of impartiality nor any other ethical principle in journalism requires journalists to publish lies as if they might be true.

It would not have been a failure of impartiality to say in a news report that Dutton’s claims about a rigged referendum were baseless, with the supporting evidence.

That evidence, set out in an excellent example of proactive impartiality by the ABC’s election analyst Antony Green at the time, was that the ticks and crosses rule had been in place since 1988.

‘Proactive impartiality’ is the key to reporting the 2025 election

The question is, do Australia’s main media organisations as a whole have the resources and the will to invest in real-time fact-checking? The record is not encouraging.

In March 2024, the ABC dissolved its fact-checking arrangement with RMIT University, replacing it with an in-house fact-checking unit called ABC News Verify.

In 2023, a team led by Andrea Carson of La Trobe University published a study tracking the fate of fact-checking operations in Australia. Its findings were summarised by her in The Conversation.

Read more:
Is Australia’s golden age of third-party fact checking over?

In the absence of a fact-checking capability, it is hard to see how journalists can perform the kind of proactive impartiality that current circumstances demand.

On top of that, the shift from advertising-based mass media to subscription-based niche media is creating its own logic, which is antithetical to impartiality.

Mass-directed advertising was generally aimed at as broad an audience as possible. It encouraged impartiality in the accompanying editorial content as part of an appeal to the broad middle of society.

Since a lot of this advertising has gone online, the media have begun to rely increasingly on subscriptions. In a hyper-partisan world, ideological branding, or alternatively freedom from ideological branding, has become part of the sales pitch.

Where subscribers do expect to find ideological comfort, readership and ratings are at put risk when their expectations are disappointed.

Rupert Murdoch learned this when his Fox News channel in the US called the 2020 election for Joe Biden, driving down ratings and causing him to reverse that position in order to claw back the losses.

These are unpalatable developments for those who believe that fair, accurate news reporting untainted by the ideological preferences of proprietors or journalists is a vital ingredient in making a healthy democracy work. But that is the world we live in as we approach the federal election of 2025.

Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How should Australian media cover the next federal election? Lessons from the US presidential race – https://theconversation.com/how-should-australian-media-cover-the-next-federal-election-lessons-from-the-us-presidential-race-243267

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carolyn Heward, Lecturer, Clinical Psychology, James Cook University

Imagine spending years hiding who you are to fit into a group, only to become invisible once you leave. This is the reality for many women who serve in the military.

Our research has found ex-servicewomen face a double burden: first, via suppressing their femininity to fit into military culture, then struggling to be recognised as veterans at all.

The recent final report of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide has drawn attention to a very concerning statistic: ex-serving women are twice as likely to die by suicide compared to civilian women.

For those aged 25–34, they’re significantly more likely to need mental health care – 7.4% compared to 4.9% of civilian women their age.

Our paper reviewing the research evidence on military culture, identity and mental health uncovered a pattern that helps explain these statistics.

Playing a character

Women in the military often feel compelled to “play a character”. They feel they must change their behaviour, appearance and communication style to fit into a hypermasculine “warrior identity” that defines military culture.

One US study described the experience for women as:

being a female in a man’s world […] but if you’re going to play the female role, then you’re not going to be respected.

Another participant in a Canadian study explained that fitting in meant having to “prove yourself” and “work twice as hard, as a woman, to be considered half as good.”

This pressure to conform doesn’t just mean wearing a uniform. It often involves suppressing fundamental aspects of their identity by doing things such as hiding emotional responses during difficult situations because showing empathy is seen as “weak”, or downplaying their achievements to avoid standing out from their male peers.

Identity suppression can, over time, lead to profound stress, anxiety and other mental health challenges.

But the challenges for women don’t end when they leave service.

Becoming invisible

Society’s perception of veterans remains steadfastly male, leaving women’s service unrecognised and their struggles often unacknowledged.

Worse still, female veterans are accused of misrepresenting themselves. As one female veteran put it in a media report:

On ANZAC Day this year I got to wear both of my medals in civilian dress and someone came up and said ‘oh, you’ve got your medals on the wrong side, love’, or ‘whose medals are they?’ And you just have to say ‘they’re mine — why wouldn’t they be?’

This invisibility compounds the mental health impacts of service.

Women veterans report feeling excluded from veteran support services and communities, their service questioned or diminished.

Our research found this lack of recognition can trigger or worsen existing mental health conditions, creating a cycle of isolation and distress.

Australian military culture remains heavily masculine

While much of the research in our review is from international studies, the problem is acute in Australia.

Australian military culture remains heavily masculine despite increasing numbers of women in service.

Our research found women often experience harassment and betrayal when they don’t perfectly fit the hypermasculine military ideal, leading to feelings of exclusion and internalised inferiority.

The mental health impact is significant.

Ex-serving women in Australia show higher rates of anxiety disorders (41.9%) and PTSD (24.8%) compared to their male counterparts.

Almost one in five service members transitioning to civilian life experience very high levels of psychological distress. This is four times the rate in the general community.

The military urgently needs new recruits

The Australian Defence Force is facing what has been described as “an acute recruitment crisis”.

With the Australian Defence Force actively working to recruit more women, understanding and addressing the challenges military women face is crucial.

The current pattern of identity suppression followed by invisibility isn’t just harmful to individuals. It undermines efforts to build a more diverse and effective military force.

One anonymous submission to the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide said:

I can’t in good consciousness recommend the Army as a place to work for any female, which truly saddens me as someone who has many grandparents and great grandparents that were veterans and that I want to honour.

Where to from here?

There is an opportunity for the military to consider how to create space for different ways of being a successful service member. Currently, success is often measured by how well someone fits the warrior stereotype – tough, stoic and aggressive. But military effectiveness also requires leaders who can build teams, show judgement, and adapt to complex situations. These qualities don’t depend on conforming to a hypermasculine ideal.

In the broader community, we must expand our recognition of who veterans are and what they look like.

For the thousands of Australian families with women relatives currently serving or transitioning from the Australian Defence Force, understanding these challenges is the first step.

Recognition of women’s service – both during and after their military careers – isn’t just about acknowledgement.

It’s about preventing the devastating mental health impacts that come from having to hide who you are, then being ignored when you leave.

It’s time to recognise the true cost of asking women to suppress their identity to serve their country – and to ensure that when they finish serving, they’re no longer rendered invisible.

Carolyn Heward has previously worked as a Clinical Psychologist within both the Department of Defence and as a contracted health provider to the Australian Defence Force.

– ref. Our research reveals women suppress their femininity to fit into military culture – and struggle to be seen as veterans when they leave – https://theconversation.com/our-research-reveals-women-suppress-their-femininity-to-fit-into-military-culture-and-struggle-to-be-seen-as-veterans-when-they-leave-242699

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

The furore over Australia’s ambassador to Washington, Kevin Rudd, is a “self-licking icecream” created by some at Sky News, former defence chief and former ambassador to the United States, Dennis Richardson says.

Richardson told The Conversation on Wednesday that the whipping up of the issue  was driven by a combination of personal and political motives: to have Rudd removed from his post and to get at the Albanese government.

He said the Australian government should do “precisely nothing”
in response, except to express its confidence in the ambassador, who had been doing “an outstanding job”, working across the aisle in Washington.

Richardson, highly respected on both sides of politics, previously headed ASIO (1996–2005), the foreign affairs department (2010-12) and the defence department (2012-17).

He was ambassador to Washington in 2005–10.

Rudd has come under fire over his previous social media posts denigrating Trump, which last week he deleted. Sky recently played footage of him describing Trump as a “village idiot”.

Richardson said the present controversy around Rudd “is not an issue  that arose out of any normal process. This is an issue that’s been pursued by one news outlet.”

He said the origin went back to an interview British political figure Nigel Farage did with Trump earlier this year. Farage, resurrected what he described as some “most horrible things” Rudd had said about Trump. He said “our friends at Sky News Australia” had requested he ask the question.

Richardson said Trump’s response suggested he didn’t know who Rudd was, and his answer that “if he’s at all hostile, he will not be there long” was qualified.

Some presenters and other commentators on Sky had created a “self-licking ice cream” in relation to Rudd, Richardson said.

In political jargon a self-licking ice cream is described as “a self-perpetuating system that has no purpose other than to sustain itself”.

Richardson said Rudd had in the past said “some pretty strong stuff” about Trump – but so had people around the now president-elect, including the vice president-elect, JD Vance.

He pointed to a number of Liberals, including former ambassador to the US Joe Hockey and former prime minister Scott Morrison, who had said Rudd was doing a good job.

He said the campaign on Sky might well create a difficult situation. Some at Sky “may feed stuff to people around Trump or put questions [about Rudd] to people around Trump.”

A senior Trump aide, Dan Scavino, has posted on social media, replying to Rudd’s message congratulating Trump on his victory, an hourglass with the sand running.

On Sky this week, a former Trump White House press secretary Sean Spicer said “Mr Rudd is going to have some problems, Donald Trump doesn’t forget these kind of comments”.

Richardson said it would be “extraordinary” for a government to withdraw an ambassador because it thought he might not be acceptable to an incoming administration.

Who Australia’s ambassador was wouldn’t be in the top 200-300 issues in  the minds of the Trump administration, Richardson said.

“Left to itself this wouldn’t be an issue.”

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has said on his podcast Australia’s Future with Tony Abbott, “I am confident that Kevin has been hyper active on our behalf as he sees it in Washington. So I would be surprised if there is any pressure from the Americans to change our ambassador.

“I have no reason to think that Kevin is not doing a good job at present. He will do whatever he humanly can to win over senior people in the incoming administration. And he’s already done everything he humanly can to row back his previous ill-advised remarks about the incoming president.”

Opposition leader Peter Dutton told the ABC on Wednesday: “We’ve supported Kevin Rudd and we’ve made public commentary before about our support of the ambassador.

“It’s important that he does work in our country’s name. He’s been a very effective contributor to public debate, particularly as a former prime minister, he’s well respected. I hope that he’s able to form a relationship with the new administration as he’s done with the current one.”

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Former US ambassador accuses Sky News of creating a ‘self-licking ice cream’ to attack Kevin Rudd – https://theconversation.com/former-us-ambassador-accuses-sky-news-of-creating-a-self-licking-ice-cream-to-attack-kevin-rudd-243582

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

The furore over Australia’s ambassador to Washington, Kevin Rudd, is a “self-licking icecream” created by some at Sky News, former defence chief and former ambassador to the United States, Dennis Richardson says.

Richardson told The Conversation on Wednesday that the whipping up of the issue  was driven by a combination of personal and political motives: to have Rudd removed from his post and to get at the Albanese government.

He said the Australian government should do “precisely nothing”
in response, except to express its confidence in the ambassador, who had been doing “an outstanding job”, working across the aisle in Washington.

Richardson, highly respected on both sides of politics, previously headed ASIO (1996-2005), the foreign affairs department (2010-12) and the defence department (2012-17).

He was ambassador to Washington in 2005-10.

Rudd has come under fire over his previous social media posts denigrating Trump, which last week he deleted. Sky has recently played footage of him describing Trump as a “village idiot”.

Richardson said the present controversy around Rudd “is not an issue  that arose out of any normal process. This is an issue that’s been pursued by one news outlet.”

He said the origin went back to an interview British political figure Nigel Farage did with Trump earlier this year. Farage, resurrected what he described as some “most horrible things” Rudd had said about Trump. He said “our friends at Sky News Australia” had requested he ask the question.

Richardson said Trump’s response suggested he didn’t know who Rudd was, and his answer that “if he’s at all hostile, he will not be there long” was qualified.

Some presenters and other commentators on Sky had created a “self-licking ice cream” in relation to Rudd, Richardson said.

In political jargon a self-licking ice cream is described as “a self-perpetuating system that has no purpose other than to sustain itself”.

Richardson said Rudd had in the past said “some pretty strong stuff” about Trump – but so had people around the now president-elect, including the vice president-elect, JD Vance.

He pointed to a number of Liberals, including former ambassador to the US Joe Hockey and former prime minister Scott Morrison, who had said Rudd was doing a good job.

He said the campaign on Sky might well create a difficult situation. Some at Sky “may feed stuff to people around Trump or put questions [about Rudd] to people around Trump.”

A senior Trump aide, Dan Scavino, has posted on social media, replying to Rudd’s message congratulating Trump on his victory, an hourglass with the sand running.

On Sky this week, a former Trump White House press secretary Sean Spicer said “Mr Rudd is going to have some problems, Donald Trump doesn’t forget these kind of comments”.

Richardson said it would be “extraordinary” for a government to withdraw an ambassador because it thought he might not be acceptable to an incoming administration.

Who Australia’s ambassador was wouldn’t be in the top 200-300 issues in  the minds of the Trump administration, Richardson said.

“Left to itself this wouldn’t be an issue.”

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has said on his podcast Australia’s Future with Tony Abbott, “I am confident that Kevin has been hyper active on our behalf as he sees it in Washington. So I would be surprised if there is any pressure from the Americans to change our ambassador.

“I have no reason to think that Kevin is not doing a good job at present. He will do whatever he humanly can to win over senior people in the incoming administration. And he’s already done everything he humanly can to row back his previous ill-advised remarks about the incoming president.”

Opposition leader Peter Dutton told the ABC on Wednesday: “We’ve supported Kevin Rudd and we’ve made public commentary before about our support of the ambassador.

“It’s important that he does work in our country’s name. He’s been a very effective contributor to public debate, particularly as a former prime minister, he’s well respected. I hope that he’s able to form a relationship with the new administration as he’s done with the current one.”

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Dennis Richardson accuses Sky News of creating a ‘self-licking ice cream’ to attack Kevin Rudd – https://theconversation.com/dennis-richardson-accuses-sky-news-of-creating-a-self-licking-ice-cream-to-attack-kevin-rudd-243582

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Sharam, Senior Lecturer, School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University

There are 184,100 people on social housing waiting lists around the country, reflecting the impact of declining homeownership and escalating private rents.

However, building new social housing takes a lot of time and money. The Australian government’s $2 billion social housing plan, for example, will deliver only around 4,000 new homes.

But even for people with roofs over their heads, it doesn’t necessarily mean they live in the best house for their circumstances. Their homes could be too big, too small, or have yard space they struggle to maintain.

In some countries, social housing residents can simply exchange homes with one another. It’s called a “mutual exchange”. It could be highly effective in Australia for getting more people into homes without having to build any.

How does it work?

Research explains how mutual exchanges work.

A tenant interested in moving to a different social home lists their property on a public exchange (similar to holiday services such as HomeExchange). The tenant tells the platform what type of new home they are looking for and where it should ideally be located.

An algorithm then goes to work to identify:

• any direct (bilateral) matches in which two households could swap

• any closed-loop or multi-swap possibilities, known as “chains”.

This determines where household A could move into B’s home, while B could move into C’s home, and C could then move into A’s home.

Social landlords can also list vacant properties to spark a string of swaps, with the last property in the chain then becoming vacant. In theory, chains and strings can be very long.

Having a flow-on effect like this is great, as people obtain housing they prefer to the one they currently live in.

The matching can also accommodate the social landlords’ needs such as allocation policies, occupancy requirements and rental arrears. These are rules the algorithm handles easily.

There is, nevertheless, work the social landlord must do to facilitate moves. Internal processes and protocols must change to support mobility. After 20 years of operation in the United Kingdom, landlords have this down pat.

Why could it help?

Lack of tenant mobility has a big price tag. In 2010, a report found the annual cost of poor tenant mobility in the UK to be £542 million (just over A$1 billion).

Poor mobility reduces access to jobs and education, as well as to social supports and caregiving. Happier tenants look after their properties, pay their rent and are good neighbours.

When every dollar matters in putting roofs over heads, we should be looking to avoid such waste.

Allowing tenants to swap properties frees up stock and is a significant unrealised opportunity.

Mutual exchanges help 14,000 tenants in the UK move each year. Of these, 18% reside in under-occupied homes, and their willingness to move frees up more than 2,000 larger properties for families, getting more people off the waiting list.

That’s the equivalent of A$800 million in avoided costs (at a conservative build cost of $400,000 per house).

In other cases, it means hard-to-let properties are not left empty.

What’s the picture like in Australia?

In 2023, there were 60,730 underutilised public housing units in Australia. At the same time, there were 20,979 overcrowded households.

After getting these overcrowded households into these larger properties, another 80,000 people could be housed if the occupancy of the remaining roughly 40,000 larger homes was increased from one person to three.

Social housing building programs need to encourage lone-person households to transfer into smaller homes to maximise the overall number of people who can be housed. But this requires genuine choice.

Tenants currently have little opportunity to transfer or swap properties. In Australia, the individual choice and control principles that underpin the NDIS and aged-care provision are noticeably absent in social housing. A central plank of both is that the participant should have power over where and how they live.

As any tenant will tell you, turning down an offer entails the risk the next offer may be even less attractive, and offers soon run out.

As a result, many public tenants have set up Facebook swap groups. Such sites are not an efficient way to find a swap, but they attest to the considerable unmet demand for mobility.

This situation is very different from the UK, where right-to-move legislation guaranteed tenant mobility 20 years ago. Mutual exchanges were born out of this right.

Not only can tenants move, but they can also move between landlords. And it turns out encouraging tenants to exercise choice and “rightsize” involves little investment and delivers huge returns.

Many public housing estates are currently being demolished and rebuilt. Such renewal means there is an historically high need for relocations. Relocation opportunities are restricted as they depend on natural attrition and new builds, both of which are limited.

Mutual exchanges, however, create new opportunities for relocation and offer greater choice to tenants. And it is not only the initial choice. The right to mobility means the tenant can move again if they do not like where they relocate to.

Over time, some of the friendship and support circles broken up by renewal projects could be brought back together.

Estate renewal is often controversial. Tenants are often deeply anxious as they lose their community and connection to place, and get little choice over their future home. Offering greater choice is an inexpensive strategy that builds trust.

The author would like to acknowledge the work of University of South Australia Research Assistant, Joanne Wilson, in helping to write this article.

Andrea Sharam receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

Debbie Faulkner receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute

– ref. Want to slash social housing waitlists? We should allow tenants to swap homes – https://theconversation.com/want-to-slash-social-housing-waitlists-we-should-allow-tenants-to-swap-homes-240662

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

With the protest hikoi from the far north moving through Auckland on its way to Wellington, it might be said ACT leader David Seymour has been granted his wish of generating an “important national conversation about the place of the Treaty in our constitutional arrangements”.

Timed to coincide with the first reading of the contentious Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill on Thursday, the hikoi and other similar protests are a response to what many perceive as a fundamental threat to New Zealand’s fragile constitutional framework.

With no upper house, nor a written constitution, important laws can be fast-tracked or repealed by a simple majority of parliament. As constitutional lawyer and former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer has argued about the current government’s legislative style and speed, the country “is in danger of lurching towards constitutional impropriety”.

Central to this ever-shifting and contested political ground is te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi. For decades it has been woven into the laws of the land in an effort to redress colonial wrongs and guarantee a degree of fairness and equity for Māori.

There is a significant risk the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill would undermine these achievements, as it attempts to negate recognised rights within the original document and curtail its application in a modern setting.

But while the bill is almost guaranteed to fail because of the other coalition parties’ refusal to support it beyond the select committee, there is another danger. Contained in an explanatory note within the bill is the following clause:

The Bill will come into force if a majority of electors voting in a referendum support it. The Bill will come into force 6 months after the date on which the official result of that referendum is declared.

Were David Seymour to argue his bill has been thwarted by the standard legislative process and must be advanced by a referendum, the consequences for social cohesion could be significant.

The referendum option

While the bill would still need to become law for the referendum to take place, the option of putting it to the wider population – either as a condition of a future coalition agreement or orchestrated via a citizens-initiated referendum – should not be discounted.

One recent poll showed roughly equal support for and against a referendum on the subject, with around 30% undecided. And Seymour has had success in the past with his End of Life Choice Act referendum in 2020.

He will also have watched the recent example of Australia’s Voice referendum, which aimed to give a non-binding parliamentary voice to Indigenous communities but failed after a heated and divisive public debate.

The lobby group Hobson’s Pledge, which opposes affirmative action for Māori and is led by former ACT politician Don Brash, has already signalled its intention to push for a citizens-initiated referendum, arguing: “We need to deliver the kind of message that the Voice referendum in Australia delivered.”

The Treaty and the constitution

ACT’s bill is not the first such attempt. In 2006, the NZ First Party – then part of a Labour-led coalition government – introduced the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill.

That bill failed, but the essential argument behind it was that entrenching Treaty principles in law was “undermining race relations in New Zealand”. However, ACT’s current bill does not seek to delete those principles, but rather to define and restrain them in law.

This would effectively begin to unpick decades of careful legislative work, threaded together from the deliberations of the Waitangi Tribunal, the Treaty settlements process, the courts and parliament.

As such, in mid-August the Tribunal found the first iteration of ACT’s bill

would reduce the constitutional status of the Treaty/te Tiriti, remove its effect in law as currently recognised in Treaty clauses, limit Māori rights and Crown obligations, hinder Māori access to justice, impact Treaty settlements, and undermine social cohesion.

In early November, the Tribunal added:

If this Bill were to be enacted, it would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty/te Tiriti in modern times. If the Bill remained on the statute book for a considerable time or was never repealed, it could mean the end of the Treaty/te Tiriti.

Social cohesion at risk

Similar concerns have been raised by the Ministry of Justice in its advice to the government. In particular, the ministry noted the proposal in the bill may negate the rights articulated in Article II of the Treaty, which affirms the continuing exercise of tino rangatiratanga (self-determination):

Any law which fails to recognise the collective rights given by Article II calls into question the very purpose of the Treaty and its status in our constitutional arrangements.

The government has also been advised by the Ministry of Justice that the bill may lead to discriminatory outcomes inconsistent with New Zealand’s international legal obligations to eliminate discrimination and implement the rights of Indigenous peoples.

All of these issues will become heightened if a referendum, essentially about the the removal of rights guaranteed to Māori in 1840, is put to the vote.

Of course, citizens-initiated referendums are not binding on a government, but they carry much politically persuasive power nonetheless. And this is not to argue against their usefulness, even on difficult issues.

But the profound constitutional and wider democratic implications of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, and any potential referendum on it, should give everyone pause for thought at this pivotal moment.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The Treaty Principles Bill is already straining social cohesion – a referendum could be worse – https://theconversation.com/the-treaty-principles-bill-is-already-straining-social-cohesion-a-referendum-could-be-worse-243568

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marcus Carter, Professor in Human-Computer Interaction, ARC Future Fellow, University of Sydney

The Australian government has announced a plan to ban children under the age of 16 from social media. With bipartisan support, it’s likely to be passed by the end of the year.

While some experts and school principals support the ban, the move has also been widely challenged by social media experts and children’s mental health groups.

In a press conference on Friday, Communications Minister Michelle Rowland suggested the ban would include platforms such as TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, Facebook and YouTube. An exemption would be considered for some services, such as YouTube Kids.

Some media reports raised concerns about online games like Minecraft, Fortnite and Roblox falling under the ban, because people can communicate with others on these platforms. Platforms like Xbox Live or the PlayStation Network would potentially be in scope, too.

A government spokesperson told Australian Community Media that a new, robust definition of “social media” would be forthcoming in the legislation. Games and messaging platforms are likely to be exempt, but we don’t know for sure at this stage.

As experts in children’s online play, we argue it would be a mistake to ban children from social games. Games are crucial to children’s social lives and learning, and for their personal growth and identity development.

What do young people gain from games?

Games are widely popular, and 93% of Australian children aged 5–14 play videogames regularly. Two-thirds of children in Australia aged 9–12 play Minecraft at least once a month. Children and young people feel overwhelmingly positive about their online gameplay.

In a recent study by the eSafety Commissioner, over three-quarters of young gamers indicated that “gaming had helped them with skill development, such as learning something new, using digital technologies, solving problems and thinking faster”.

Minecraft has received particular attention for fostering creativity, collaboration and socially connecting young people.

In 2021, the Minecraft: Education Edition was being used in schools in 115 countries, including Australia. This version of the game contains free lessons on various subjects. In a study across six schools in Queensland, researchers found children who learned with Minecraft: Education Edition “overwhelmingly identified themselves as better mathematics students”.

Games offer rich spaces for play, which is critical for children’s identity formation, social lives and imagination. For instance, playing as a different character in an online game is an important form of playful identity exploration for children. (It’s valuable for adults, too.)

Two decades of research have also shown us that children derive enormous social benefits from playing digital games with other people. In a 2015 report by the Pew Research Center, 78% of teenagers said online games help them feel more connected to their friends.

A UNICEF review of research literature from earlier this year concluded that videogames can boost children’s wellbeing by making them feel competent, empowered and socially connected to others.

This is particularly important for vulnerable children. For instance, Autcraft, a parent-created Minecraft server for neurodivergent children, has been enormously successful in providing children with a comfortable and safe digital space to socially connect with their peers.

What about the risks?

However, games are not always safe spaces for young people.

Gaming culture is pervasively misogynistic, and games have played a role in mainstreaming far-right ideology by promoting meritocratic, racist and discriminatory ideologies.

Gaming platforms like Roblox – where over half of players are under the age of 13 – have also come under fire for not doing enough to protect their users from online grooming and child abuse material.

Increasingly, we’re also seeing the gamblification of games. In recent years, predatory monetisation models such as gambling-like lootboxes have become normalised.

In Australia, the Classification Board recently banned “in-game purchases with an element of chance” for children under 15. According to the definition, these are “mystery items players can use real money to buy, without knowing what item they will get”.

Incidentally, this decision demonstrates the ineffectiveness of blanket ban approaches. According to our yet-to-be-published research, numerous games with paid chance-based features such as lootboxes remain available on storefronts like Apple’s App Store, despite not complying with the new regulations.

A ban can’t make children’s online lives better

Just as all internet use isn’t bad, all games aren’t bad either. Parents may feel overwhelmed and under-informed about the videogames their children play, but bans can be easily circumvented. Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has expressed concerns that “some young people will access social media in secrecy”.

The risk is that a ban will take away the onus on these platforms to make them safer for children. Why design for users who aren’t legally allowed to be on the platform?

The government should be working in partnership with social media and online gaming platforms to ensure they are designed in children’s best interests, while allowing children the freedom to play and to access safer and richer digital lives.

Marcus Carter is a recipient of an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (#220100076) on ‘The Monetisation of Children in the Digital Games Industry’. He has previously received funding from Meta, TikTok and Snapchat, and has consulted for Telstra. He is a current board member, and former president, of the Digital Games Research Association of Australia.

Taylor Hardwick is employed under funding by the Australian Research Council (Future Fellowship #220100076; DECRA #240101275). She is a board member of Freeplay, a Melbourne-based independent games festival.

– ref. Online games should not be included in Australia’s social media ban – they are crucial for kids’ social lives – https://theconversation.com/online-games-should-not-be-included-in-australias-social-media-ban-they-are-crucial-for-kids-social-lives-243374

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne

Right now, people are lining up at the Geelong Botanic Gardens to see and smell the giant corpse flower, a rare plant that stinks like a dead body.

This is the titan arum. It’s a plant that makes news whenever it flowers in a botanic garden around the world. It’s sometimes called a lily, but it’s an arum, a genus not closely related to true lilies.

Why do people travel to see it? The huge arum might only bloom once a decade. It spends huge amounts of energy preparing to flower. And when it does, it’s spectacular. Its huge flowering structure (the spadix) can be up to three metres in height and one to two metres across, which is why it has the wonderfully apt Latin name of Amorphophallus titanium, which translates as “giant misshapen phallic-like”. But the spadix is actually not a flower – it’s an inflorescence. Its true flowers are small and hidden from view at the base.

The main reason people seek it out is because of its stench. The spadix stinks like a rotting animal carcass – and the strong smell spreads far and wide. The spadix lasts only one or two days.

But why would a plant spend so much time and energy doing this? The answer is reproduction – the titan arum needs pollinators such as flies, and flies like dead things. Many other plants use the same tactic to get insects to pay attention.

The stench of death

The corpse flower is native to the dense rainforests of Sumatra in Indonesia.

Many plants make their flowers attractive to bees, which like sweeter smells. But a large variety of insects can pollinate flowers. This arum has opted instead to attract flesh flies and carrion beetles, which polish off dead animals.

The corpse flower’s reddish-purple structure and stench of death attract these insects to what appears to be a rotting corpse. Even better, the plant heats up its flowering structure to about 32°C as it develops, to make it seem even more like a dead animal in a tropical rainforest. It’s a trick, and it’s a good one.

It can take decades for this plant to produce its first inflorescence and it takes a lot of the plant’s energy and reserves to produce such a huge warm structure. Mature specimens have a corm, a swollen stem base a bit like a bulb which can weigh over 100 kilograms. This is where the plant stores the energy it will need to make its giant stinky spadix.

Not surprisingly, it does not have the energy to flower every year. It might be five to ten years between flowering. But in ideal growing conditions, it can be as short as two to three years.

All of this effort goes towards making a structure at its best for about 24 hours before beginning to collapse. The titan arum’s female flowers are receptive for a very short time, meaning the window of opportunity for successful reproduction is brief.

Sometimes it’s good to be stinky

Other plants have evolved similar strategies to woo pollinators. They often earn similar monikers, such as carrion plants, corpse flowers or stinking plants.

Sumatran rainforests have produced another plant known as the corpse flower, the giant padma, Rafflesia arnoldii. This parasitic plant has no leaves or stems. It spends most of its life as long strands of fibre inside its host, a vine. But every now and again, it produces a giant flower, a metre across, and stinking of death.
In Australia, our most well known carrion species is an introduced succulent, the weedy carrion flower, Orbea variegata, which originates from southern Africa.

Worldwide, there are many other plants known for their rotten smell. The North American pawpaw, Asimina triloba and species from the African succulent genus Stapelia are carrion flowers.

Some orchids from the genius Bulbophyllum also pack an olfactory punch, though they can smell more like urine or animal dung. The goal is the same: attracting scavenging flies and beetles.

Our noses are collateral damage

While beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, scent depends on the nose of the sniffer. Smells humans find repulsive are very attractive if you’re a flesh fly.

Not all smells vile to humans are of corpses and carcasses.

The ginkgo tree, Ginkgo biloba, is famous for its golden foliage – and for its remarkable longevity as a living fossil. It’s also hugely resilient – six gingko trees survived the bombing of Hiroshima. But people tend to only plant male trees, as the female trees produce a fruit that smells like vomit for many people.

We don’t really know why it has this smell. But given it has been around 200 million years, the smell might have attracted a long extinct species to eat and spread the seeds.

Some of us are more susceptible than others. Many people complain when privets (Ligustrum spp.) are in flower, while others find some wattles (Acacia) nauseating. Even the popular hedge plant, red-tipped photinia (Photinia × fraseri) cops the occasional disparaging remark. Then there’s the ornamental pear, Pyrus calleryana, planted widely as a street tree in Australia’s southeast. Unfortunately, it smells like human semen to many people.

It’s not only plants which have learned how to make pungent smells. The wonderfully named stinkhorn fungi genus uses the same tactic as the titan arum to attract the insects and beetles it needs to spread its spores.

The anemone stinkhorn, Aseroe rubra, is found in many parts of Australia, often close to the coast. Another species, Phallus rubicundus, is found across the tropics, including northern parts of Australia. Like many stinkhorns it is slimy, smelly and reddish.

They are not generally considered toxic and people ask if they are edible. I don’t know because my response is, “Why would anyone even think of eating something that smells like that?”

It never ceases to amaze me that faking the appearance and stench of death has been so widely adopted by plants and fungi as a means of creating new life.

Gregory Moore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Corpse flowers and flesh flies: why so many plants and fungi stink like death warmed up – https://theconversation.com/corpse-flowers-and-flesh-flies-why-so-many-plants-and-fungi-stink-like-death-warmed-up-243572

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Edwards, Adjunct Research Fellow, Inclusive Futures, Griffith University

As another Australian summer approaches, many people are planning their holidays, looking forward to the joy travel brings. Yet for Australia’s 5.5 million people with a disability, what should be an exciting journey often becomes a significant challenge.

While the aviation industry is making some progress in accessibility, many barriers remain for disabled travellers. This is true for people with hidden disabilities like autism, whose needs have historically received less attention in transport.

For Autistic travellers, airports can be challenging environments, combining sensory experiences with social and procedural demands. And while some airports are developing accessible tourism initiatives, there’s still considerable work needed to achieve truly inclusive travel.

Read more:
Travellers with disability often face discrimination. What should change and how to complain

What makes airports overwhelming for Autistic travellers?

For many Autistic people, stepping into an airport feels like entering a perfect storm of sensory and social challenges.

Fluorescent lighting creates glare as it reflects off polished floors. Unpredictable announcements compete with the constant sound of crowds and rolling luggage. People are moving quickly in all directions. It creates an intensity that can rapidly become overwhelming.

Navigation presents another layer of difficulty, with unclear signage and procedures (such as getting through security) that often vary between airports. This unpredictability can amplify anxiety, especially when interacting with staff who may not understand hidden disabilities.

The result? Many Autistic people either struggle through the challenges or avoid air travel altogether, missing out on experiences others take for granted.

What do Autistic travellers say about Australian airports?

Our recently published research examined the experiences of Autistic adults and families who travelled through two Australian airports. These locations – Gold Coast and Sydney airports – have been implementing autism-friendly initiatives for more than five years. Both airports conduct staff training on hidden disabilities, participate in the Sunflower program (where people wear a sunflower symbol to voluntarily signal a hidden disability) and provide accessibility resources (such as sensory maps and visual stories).

Through our interviews with 13 Autistic travellers and family members we heard accounts of both positive experiences and ongoing challenges.

Rachel (names changed), a parent of someone with hidden disability told us it

[…] makes the trip so much harder when there are so many people, so loud, so close.

A key finding was the need for better control over sensory environments. While airports can’t eliminate all sensory stimuli, participants emphasised the importance of accessible, clearly marked quiet rooms. Autistic adult Aaron told us he felt subjected to a sensory assault almost

[…] as soon as you walk into the airport  […]  it’s so busy, and the lights are like that white light, and just that enough, is to be like, oh my god, what’s happening?

What these airports did well

Both airports provide sensory maps. These highlight high- and low-sensory areas within the airport. They also offer step-by-step visual guides showing what to expect at each stage of the airport journey. These resources and others help reduce anxiety by setting clear expectations.

However, many participants didn’t know these resources existed until prompted to look at them as part of the study.

The Hidden Disability Sunflower lanyard was praised by those we spoke to. When recognised, it led to more patient, supportive interactions with staff and helped ease travel anxiety. Aaron recalled an experience with an airport staff member.

She actually said to me, ‘oh, I can see you got the lanyard. Do you need any help?’ And I was like, ‘oh, thank you, but no, I’m okay.’ But that’s the first time that someone’s ever actually acknowledged it and asked me, so that was really good.

However, inconsistent awareness among staff and varying implementation across airports and airlines resulted in mixed experiences.

What could be better?

Autistic participants and family members strongly advocated for more visible signage about supports, ongoing hidden disability training for staff and proactive assistance – rather than waiting for travellers to request help.

Quiet rooms, with signs or maps to find them, could help Autistic adults and families who are currently paying for airport lounge membership to help manage travel overwhelm. Parent Rachel explained

We purposely purchase Qantas Club Lounge, which obviously costs us a fair bit of money each year, but we do that to try to get the children out of the high sensory environments […  it provides] an environment that’s a lot quieter and a space where my kids can just sit down and breathe.

Our findings suggest relatively simple changes can improve the travel experience for Autistic people. The challenge now lies in implementing these initiatives across Australia.

5 tips for your next trip

A bit of planning can make the airport experience much smoother for Autistic travellers or others with hidden disabilities.

1. Plan ahead

Look up each airport’s website for resources under “hidden disability”, “Sunflower” or accessibility sections. Sensory maps, visual guides, or quiet room locations can make a big difference.

2. Signal you might need support

Self-identification, like the Sunflower lanyards, provide a way to discreetly signal to staff you may need support. If staff don’t offer help, don’t hesitate to ask for assistance if and when you need it.

3. Manage sensory input

Items like noise-cancelling headphones or sunglasses can help manage loud noises or bright lights. Packing a small “sensory toolkit” can help minimise discomfort in crowded spaces.

4. Access special services

Many airports and airlines offer special assistance services, including priority boarding and navigation help. Contact them in advance to arrange this support.

5. Allow extra time

Giving yourself extra time reduces the pressure of rushing and allows you to use any available resources at a comfortable pace.

Everyone has a right to enjoy travel and all that the world has to offer. With a bit of preparation, your airport journey can be far less overwhelming.

Chris Edwards works for Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect), the organisation that received funding to support the implementation of autism-friendly initiatives at Gold Coast and Sydney airports. However, he was part of a separate team that conducted the research described in this article.

Ru Ying Cai works for Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect), the organisation that received funding to support the implementation of autism-friendly initiatives at Gold Coast and Sydney airports. However, she was part of a separate team that conducted the research described in this article.

Vicki Gibbs works for Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect), the organisation that received funding to support the implementation of autism-friendly initiatives at Gold Coast and Sydney airports. However, she was part of a separate team that conducted the research described in this article.

– ref. Airports and travel hubs can be overwhelming for Autistic people. Here’s what could help – https://theconversation.com/airports-and-travel-hubs-can-be-overwhelming-for-autistic-people-heres-what-could-help-243032

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Patrick Murray, Emeritus Professor of Aviation, University of Southern Queensland

At least three airlines cancelled flights between Australia and Bali this week after a volcano eruption in eastern Indonesia spewed a vast plume of volcanic ash into the air.

But while would-be holiday makers are naturally upset at having their plans disrupted, it’s worth remembering it’s not safe to fly planes through volcanic ash.

So, how do airlines decide it’s not safe to fly when a volcano erupts? And why is volcanic ash so dangerous for aircraft, anyway?

What does volcanic ash do to a plane?

Volcanic ash particles are very, very abrasive. They can cause permanent damage to windscreens in the aircraft and can even make windscreens look opaque – like someone has gone over them with sandpaper.

Imagine getting spectacles and scraping them over and over with sandpaper – that’s what you’d see if you were sitting in the cockpit.

Volcanic ash can also clog or damage external sensors, leading to erroneous readings, and can infiltrate an aircraft’s ventilation system. This can affect cabin air quality and lead to potential respiratory issues.

But the main issue, in fact, is the impact volcanic ash has on engines.

A jet engine works by drawing in air, compressing it, mixing it with fuel and igniting it. This creates high-pressure exhaust gases that are expelled backward, which pushes the engine (and the aircraft) forward.

The correct balance of fuel and airflow is crucial. When you disrupt airflow, it can cause the engine to stall.

Ash particles that get inside the engines will melt and build up, causing disruption of the airflow. This could cause the engine to “flame out” or stall.

Volcanic ash has a lot of silica in it, so when it melts it turns into something similar to glass. It won’t melt unless exposed to very high temperatures – but inside a jet engine, you do get very high temperatures.

There was a famous incident in 1982 where a British Airways Boeing 747 plane was flying in the vicinity of Indonesia and lost all four engines after it encountered volcanic ash spewing from Java’s Mount Galunggung.

Fortunately, the pilot was able to restart the engines and land safely, although the pilots were unable to see through the front windscreens.

How do airlines decide it’s not safe to fly when a volcano erupts?

The decision is made by each airline’s operational staff. Each airline’s operational team would be looking at the situation in real time today and making the decision based on their risk assessment.

Every airline has a process of risk management, which is required by Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Different airlines may tackle risk management in slightly different ways; you might have some cancelling flights earlier than others. But, in broad terms, the more sophisticated airlines would come to similar conclusions and they are likely all communicating with each other.

Mostly, they make the call based on the extent of the plume – how big the cloud of ash is and where it’s going, bearing in mind that winds vary with altitude. As you get stronger winds with altitude, the ash can drift quite far from the source.

There is also a United Nations agency called the International Civil Aviation Organization, which issues guidance on volcanic ash hazards. Various meteorological agencies around the world work together and liaise with aviation authorities to spread the word quickly if there is an eruption.

For airlines to resume flights, the ash needs to clear and there needs to be a low probability of further eruptions.

Passenger safety is the priority

The underpinning reason behind these flight cancellations is safety. If you lose engines and you can’t see out the window, the risk to passenger safety is obvious.

Naturally, people are upset about their holiday plans being held up. But it’s actually in passengers’ best interests to not fly through volcanic ash.

Patrick Murray has received funding in the past from the ARC. He was an airline pilot for 20 years and military pilot before that.

– ref. Airlines cancel flights after volcanic eruptions. An aviation expert explains why that’s a good thing – https://theconversation.com/airlines-cancel-flights-after-volcanic-eruptions-an-aviation-expert-explains-why-thats-a-good-thing-243576

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bruce Chapman, Emeritus Professor, College of Business and Economics, Australian National University

The Australian Greens have long argued tertiary students shouldn’t pay tuition charges. This means they want to see HECS – now called HELP – abolished.

But following the Albanese government’s recent plans to wipe 20% off student loans, on Monday, the Greens announced they want to the cancel all student debt. This would cost the federal budget around A$75 billion.

Mehreen Faruqi, the Greens’ higher education spokesperson, argued, “student debt can’t be fixed because student debt shouldn’t exist”.

Are these reforms sensible and equitable, and is this a proper budgetary reform? The answer to all questions is a resounding “no”. It also most disadvantages relatively poor taxpayers.

Why is this a bad idea?

Let’s start by asking, what is “free” higher education?

For economists like myself, this is a distracting question. There is no such thing as “free” higher education or, indeed, free anything. This is because someone, somewhere has to pay for it. Higher education services – like healthcare, food and roads – do not magically drop out of the sky. It costs money to run university campuses and infrastructure and to pay for teaching and research.

What “free” really means is a zero charge for students and graduates. And since our universities are public sector institutions, if students don’t pay fees, they need to be financed entirely by taxpayers.

Read more:
Albanese flags radical changes to student debt – with a 20% overall cut and drop in payment rates

Who benefits from uni?

A better question would be, is it equitable to have universities financed entirely by all taxpayers? To answer this, we also need to ask, who benefits from university education?

Here, there are two possibilities: society generally and individual graduates. We all agree there are social benefits in having people trained and educated at universities – this includes health professionals, teachers, engineers and lawyers.

This justifies the government subsidy, which has always been part of the HECS/HELP system. This means students cover part of the costs of their university education (once they are earning a certain amount) and the taxpayer covers the rest.

But if 100% of the costs are covered by taxpayers, it begs the question: do graduates also get private benefits from their education – such as higher salaries – which justifies them paying extra?

This is easy to answer: we know higher education delivers healthy returns to most graduates, both in terms of the amount of money you can make and the job opportunities you have.

This is obvious when we think about many professional incomes – such as, for example, those of lawyers, accountants and dentists, and compare these with non-graduate incomes – such as, for example, those of retail workers, factory workers, unskilled labourers and most hospitality workers.

Who is picking up the bill?

If there is no charge for a university degree, this means all taxpayers (including those without a university education) are fully subsidising graduates, who get lifetime advantages from their education.

In other words, calling for “free” universities is equivalent to supporting financial assistance going from the poor to the privileged.

Just about all political parties in Australia – and most governments around the world – agree this is not a not a wise idea.

By the same token, if we cancel all current HECS debt, we are asking all taxpayers to pick up the bill on behalf of uni graduates. According to the government, the average debt is $27,600.

This is also inequitable because it is equivalent to giving $27,600 to those with a HELP debt. The vast majority of these people will experience relatively high lifetime incomes, certainly far in excess of the incomes of the average taxpayer.

Bruce Chapman helped create the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) in 1989 and has been the advisor to the governments of many countries on student loan reform since.

– ref. The Greens want to cancel all student debt – but this will not make uni education ‘free’ – https://theconversation.com/the-greens-want-to-cancel-all-student-debt-but-this-will-not-make-uni-education-free-243361

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Russell Fewster, Lecturer in Performing Arts, University of South Australia

Much loved and respected Adelaide-based dancer, choreographer, director and producer Roz Hervey passed away last week. Her passing followed the diagnosis of motor neurone disease (MND) in 2022.

In her gracious manner, Hervey wrote a farewell letter stating:

In the next month or so I would have become totally dependent. I was always very clear that I do not want this. I wanted to leave the party while it’s still going, that time is now.

Hervey was able to access South Australia’s voluntary assisted dying scheme which, in her own words:

has made me so happy … to choose when I wanted to die, with dignity, surrounded by my beautiful family in my hometown.

I only met Hervey once at the performing arts market this year in Adelaide. I spoke to her having seen a video where she commented:

I could sit and cry in a corner – or live the best life possible.

I commended her for the grace and courage she had brought to her condition. Her modest reply was “what would you do?”. She was keen to come and see my production in the Fringe and was indeed renowned for seeing everything, such was her supportive nature.

Perhaps the most salient feature of her farewell letter is her comment she drew from Dr Seuss:

Don’t cry because it’s over, smile because it happened.

And indeed it did happen in Hervey’s outstanding career. She left a stellar mark on the state, national and international arts community.

A long, varied career

In a career that extended over 30 years, Hervey performed for companies such as Meryl Tankard Company, DV8, Sydney Front, Dance North, Theatre of Image, One Extra Company and Sue Healey.

She toured widely throughout Europe, South East Asia and Australia.

She worked closely with Force Majeure for over 10 years and her performance in Kate Champion’s Same, Same But Different (2002) won her the Ausdance award for outstanding performance by a female dancer.

Hervey choreographed for South Australian companies including Brink Productions, Slingsby, Patch Theatre Company and Theatre Republic. She also worked for major events such as the Adelaide Festival, DreamBig Festival and directed the Adelaide Fringe parade over a number of years.

For the past nine years she devised and produced work as the creative producer for Restless Dance Theatre, one of Australia’s preeminent dance companies working with artists with and without disability.

A belief in the arts

One might describe her energy as restless, but generous might be a more apt description. For her, a supportive community fostered such a diverse career:

As an artist I’ve been able to swap between roles; dancer, producer, director, dramaturg, teacher… That doesn’t necessarily happen in other cities, but because we’re such a small, tight-knit community in Adelaide, it enables artists to transition through career pathways and be supported in doing so.

Her passion and drive for her work came from a profound belief of the transformative capacity of the arts:

I’m a huge believer in the power of the arts to change perspectives. I have always used my art to challenge, and ignite audience discussion. I have seen how the arts has changed people.

Stepping into the love

Restless Dance said they are “heartbroken” but “will step into the love Roz shined on us”.

Head of dance at Creative Australia, Sarah Greentree, called Hervey “a powerhouse of Australian dance”.

State Theatre Company of South Australia artistic director Mitchell Butel described Hervey’s work as the concept creator and dramaturg on Restless’ Private View for the Adelaide Festival “helped make it one of my favourite festival shows ever”.

Theatre Republic, where Hervey served as a board member, said Hervey “was the embodiment of everything good about us humans”.

The most of every moment

Hervey created work that was able to have a profound impact on audiences. Those present at her work were witness to an authenticity that emanated from the performers she worked with.

As she said in 2021:

I am drawn to artists exploring the human condition who are not afraid of honesty. Authenticity is really important to me. On a daily basis it’s the Restless dancers, their honesty, authenticity and humour always make my day.

The authentic, warm hearted ways that Hervey lived her art and her life in making the most out of every moment until the end, shines a light for all artists seeking to balance the responsibilities of family and a life in art.

Russell Fewster does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘I have seen how the arts has changed people’: remembering Roz Hervey and her contribution to Australian dance – https://theconversation.com/i-have-seen-how-the-arts-has-changed-people-remembering-roz-hervey-and-her-contribution-to-australian-dance-243449

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pep Canadell, Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO Environment; Executive Director, Global Carbon Project, CSIRO

Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from fossil fuels continue to increase, year on year. This sobering reality will be presented to world leaders today at the international climate conference COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan.

Our latest annual stocktake shows the world is on track to reach a new record: 37.4 billion tonnes of CO₂ emitted from fossil fuels in 2024. This is an increase of 0.8% from the previous year.

Adopting renewable energy and electric vehicles is helping reduce emissions in 22 countries. But it’s not enough to compensate for ongoing global growth in fossil fuels.

There were also signs in 2023 suggesting natural systems may struggle to capture and store as much CO₂ in the future as they have in the past. While humanity is tackling deforestation and the growth in fossil CO₂ emissions is slowing, the need to reach an immediate peak and decline in global emissions has never been so acute.

The Global Carbon Project

The Global Carbon Budget is an annual planetary account of carbon sources and sinks, which soak up carbon dioxide and remove it from the atmosphere.

We include anthropogenic sources from human activities such as burning fossil fuels or making cement as well as natural sources such as bushfires.

When it comes to CO₂ sinks, we consider all the ways carbon may be taken out of the atmosphere. This includes plants using CO₂ to grow and CO₂ being absorbed by the ocean. Some of this happens naturally and some is being actively encouraged by human activity.

Putting all the available data on sources and sinks together each year is a huge international effort involving 86 research organisations, including Australia’s CSIRO. We also use computer models and statistical approaches to fill out the remaining months to the end of the year.

Fossil fuel emissions up

This year’s growth in carbon emissions from fossil fuels is mainly from fossil gas and oil, rather than coal.

Fossil gas carbon emissions grew by 2.4%, signalling a return to the strong long-term growth rates observed before the COVID pandemic. Gas emissions grew in most large countries, but declined across the European Union.

Oil carbon emissions grew by 0.9% overall, pushed up by a rise in emissions from international aviation and from India.

The rebound in international air travel pushed aviation carbon emissions up 13.5% in 2024, although it’s still 3.5% below the pre-COVID 2019 level.

Meanwhile, oil emissions from the United States and China are declining. It’s possible oil emissions have peaked in China, driven by growth in electric vehicles.

Coal carbon emissions went up by 0.2%, with strong growth in India, small growth in China, a moderate decline in the US, and a large decline in the European Union. Coal use in the US is now at its lowest level in 120 years.

The United Kingdom closed its last coal power plant in 2024, 142 years after the first one was opened. With strong growth in wind energy replacing coal, the UK CO₂ emissions have almost been cut in half since 1990.

Changing land use

Carbon emissions also come from land clearing and degradation. But some of that CO₂ can be taken up again by planting trees. So we need to examine both sources and sinks on land.

Global net CO₂ emissions from land use change averaged 4.1 billion tonnes a year over the past decade (2014–23). This year is likely to be slightly higher than average with 4.2 billion tonnes, due to drought and fires in the Amazon. That amount represents about 10% of all emissions from human activities, the rest owing to fossil fuels.

Importantly, total carbon emissions – the sum of fossil fuel emissions and land-use change emissions – have largely plateaued over the past decade, but are still projected to reach a record of just over 41 billion tonnes in 2024.

The plateau in 2014–23 follows a decade of significant growth in total emissions of 2% per year on average between 2004 and 2013. This shows humanity is tackling deforestation and the growth of fossil CO₂ emissions is slowing. However, this is not enough to put global emissions on a downward trajectory.

More countries are cutting emissions – but many more to go

Fossil CO₂ emissions decreased in 22 countries as their economies grew. These countries are mainly from the European Union, along with the United States. Together they represent 23% of global fossil CO₂ emissions over the past decade (2014–23).

This number is up from 18 countries during the previous decade (2004–13). New countries in this list include Norway, New Zealand and South Korea.

In Norway, emissions from road transport declined as the share of electric vehicles in the passenger car fleet grew – the highest in the world at over 25% – and biofuels replaced fossil petrol and diesel. Even greater reductions in emissions have come from Norway’s oil and gas sector, where gas turbines on offshore platforms are being upgraded to electric.

In New Zealand, emissions from the power sector are declining. Traditionally the country has had a high share of hydropower, supplemented with coal and natural gas. But now wind and particularly geothermal energy is driving fossil generation down.

We are projecting further emissions growth of 0.2% in China, albeit small and with some uncertainty (including the possibility of no growth or even slight decline). China added more solar panels in 2023 than the US did in its entire history.

Nature shows troubling signs

In the 1960s, our activities emitted an average of 16 billion tonnes of CO₂ per year globally. About half of these emissions (8 billion tonnes) were naturally removed from the atmosphere by forests and oceans.

Over the past decade, emissions from human activities reached about 40 billion tonnes of CO₂ per year. Again, about half of these emissions (20 billion tonnes) were removed.

In the absence of these natural sinks, current warming would already be well above 2°C. But there’s a limit to how much nature can help.

In 2023, the carbon uptake on land dropped 28% from the decadal average. Global record temperatures, drought in the Amazon and unprecedented wildfires in the forests of Canada were to blame, along with an El Niño event.

As climate change continues, with rising ocean temperatures and more climate extremes on land, we expect the CO₂ sinks to become less efficient. But for now, we expect last year’s land sink decline will recover to a large degree as the El Niño event has subsided.

Looking ahead

Our latest carbon budget shows global fossil fuel emissions continue to increase, further delaying the peak in emissions. Global CO₂ emissions continue to track in the middle of the range of scenarios developed by the Intergovenmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We have yet to bend the emissions curve into the 1.5–2°C warming territory of the Paris Agreement.

This comes at a time when it’s clear we need to be reducing emissions, to avoid worsening climate change.

We also identified some positive signs, such as the rapid adoption of renewable energy and electric cars as they become cheaper and more accessible, supporting the march toward a net-zero emissions pathway. But turning these trends into global decarbonisation requires a far greater level of ambition and action.

Pep Canadell receives funding from the National Environmental Science Program – Climate Systems Hub.

Corinne Le Quéré receives funding from the UK Natural Environment Research Council and the UK Royal Society. She was granted a research donation by Schmidt Futures (project CALIPSO – Carbon Loss In Plants, Soils and Oceans). Corinne Le Quéré is a member of the UK Climate Change Committee. Her position here is her own and does not necessarily reflect that of the Committee.

Glen Peters receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme.

Judith Hauck receives funding from the European Research Council (OceanPeak) and the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation program (OceanICU – Improving Carbon Understanding). The work reflects only the authors’ view; the European Commission and their executive agency are not responsible for any use that may be made.

Julia Pongratz receives funding from German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Pierre Friedlingstein receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme

Robbie Andrew receives funding from the Norwegian Environment Agency and the European Union’s Horizon Europe.

– ref. Global carbon emissions inch upwards in 2024 despite progress on EVs, renewables and deforestation – https://theconversation.com/global-carbon-emissions-inch-upwards-in-2024-despite-progress-on-evs-renewables-and-deforestation-243133

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Baron, Associate Professor, Philosophy of Science, The University of Melbourne

It’s a big year in America – for wildlife as well as for politics. I’m talking about periodical cicadas.

These curious creatures spend most of their lives in the ground, emerging after 13 or 17 years to eat, breed, die and repeat the cycle. For the first time in more than 200 years, two specific broods of the 13- and 17-year cicadas have emerged together: Brood XIX, in the southeastern United States, and Brood XIII, found in the country’s Midwest.

What’s more, this time the emergence of these broods also happens to coincide with an unrelated event on the other side of the world: the emergence of a big batch of Australian greengrocer cicadas, which have a seven-year life cycle.

This remarkable event has been 1,547 years in the making. Thinking about it sheds light on some of the deepest questions about mathematics.

Did we invent mathematics, or was it there all along?

Are mathematical facts created or discovered? Ask a mathematician, and they are likely to tell you that mathematical facts are discovered.

But this is perplexing: if such facts are discovered, what are we discovering? Are mathematical facts somehow “out there” before we discover them? Does that mean there’s some realm of pure mathematics that we uncover with our minds?

These sorts of questions quickly begin to feel pretty uncomfortable. We find ourselves in deep metaphysical territory, beset by questions about the nature of reality.

For it seems that in addition to the physical components of the world, there must also exist things like numbers, and even more exotic mathematical entities such as sets and functions. These seem to be real objects, that we gradually uncover through the activity of mathematics.

On the other hand, if we think of mathematics as an act of creation, these metaphysical questions disappear. Mathematics can be like a language we’ve invented to describe the world.

In this picture, mathematics is just a very precise way of speaking that happens to be useful.

Which brings us back to the cicadas: these little critters put pressure on the idea that mathematics is something we created ourselves.

Cicada life cycles

North American cicadas have life cycles that last for prime numbers of years. Why 13 or 17 years? Why not 12, 14, 15 or 16?

One explanation asks us to imagine the cicadas are hunted by periodical predators that spend most of their lives in the ground and then, after a period of time, emerge to hunt. In particular, suppose there are five species of predator, with life cycles of two, three, four, five, six and seven years.

A cicada will have the best chance of survival if it can emerge from the ground when its predators are lying dormant. The cicadas with the best chance of survival will therefore be those that manage to avoid emerging at the same time as their predators.

It turns out the best way to avoid periodical predators is to move to a life cycle that lasts a prime number of years.

To see this, suppose a cicada has 12-year life cycle. Whenever it comes out of the ground, there will be predators with two-, three-, four- and six-year life cycles on the hunt.

A cicada with a 14-year life cycle will overlap with predators possessing two- and seven-year life cycles, and a cicada with a 15-year life cycle will overlap with predators on three- and five-year cycles. Cicadas with 13- or 17-year life cycles, by contrast, will generally avoid all of these predators.

There is a general mathematical result that explains all of this, involving the lowest common multiple of two numbers: the smallest number that both can divide into evenly.

How often a cicada overlaps with a predator turns out to depend on the lowest common multiple of the cicada and predator life-cycles. For instance, a cicada with a 12-year life cycle and a predator with a two-year life cycle will overlap every 12 years, which is the lowest common multiple of two and 12. By contrast, a cicada with a 13-year life cycle and a predator with a 2-year life cycle will only overlap every 26 years.

As a general rule, having a prime-numbered life cycle is a very good way for a cicada to ensure it overlaps as little as possible with its predator.

Another theory suggests the prime-numbered life cycles actually help cicadas avoid interbreeding with other broods. Either way, similar mathematical logic applies.

This is also why Australian cicadas (with their seven-year cycle) overlap so infrequently with their US cousins (with 13- and 17-year cycles). The lowest common multiple of seven, 13 and 17 is 1,547!

What happens when mathematics explains biology?

As the US philosopher Alan Baker has argued, this biological explanation for why cicadas have prime-numbered life cycles relies heavily on mathematics. In this case, it seems like facts about mathematics explain facts about biology and evolution.

This is very hard to understand if mathematics is something we have simply created. If mathematics is a language we invented, why should it apparently guide the evolutionary history of cicadas? This would be a bit like saying the planets move the way they do because of how we talk about them in English.

Once we start looking for these explanations involving mathematics, they seem to be everywhere. To take an example from my own research: why do gears in machinery generally have prime numbers of teeth?

The answer is very similar to the cicada story. If gears have a prime-numbered amount of teeth, then the same two teeth will contact each other much less frequently than if the gear-teeth are not prime-numbered.

This ensures that if there is an imperfection on a specific pair of teeth, one from each gear, then the imperfections won’t keep striking each other. This way, the chance of the gear failing is minimised.

The end of an empire

One thousand, five hundred and forty-seven years is a long time – long enough to see empires rise and fall.

Indeed, the last time American and Australian cicadas emerged together, in the year 477, the Western Roman Empire was in the throes of collapse.

It is, of course, a coincidence that they have emerged again at what may be another turning point in Western civilisation. One can’t help but wonder, though: are the bugs to blame?

Sam Baron receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Prime time for cicadas: what a once-in-1,547-year bug population surge tells us about the nature of reality – https://theconversation.com/prime-time-for-cicadas-what-a-once-in-1-547-year-bug-population-surge-tells-us-about-the-nature-of-reality-242785

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Libby (Elizabeth) Sander, MBA Director & Assistant Professor of Organisational Behaviour, Bond Business School, Bond University

With the end of year holidays looming, it’s easy to imagine Australians are getting ready to check out of the workplace and head for the beach. But a recent survey shows Australians are not taking holidays nearly as often as they are entitled to.

The survey of more than 1,000 Australian workers, taken from July to September 2024, has found that employees have 160 million days of annual leave banked. More than one in five employees (22%) had accrued more than four weeks, with older workers having higher averages than their younger colleagues.

The findings coincide with another study showing nearly half of Australian workers report feeling burned out.

So how do Australians’ leave habits compare with workers in other countries, such as the United States and Japan? And can companies here force – or just encourage – workers to take a break?

It’s important to take leave

Not taking annual leave has negative effects on both mental and physical health for workers. But it can also impact a company’s bottom line.

Research has shown that not taking leave reduces employee’s motivation and increases the risk of burnout, leading to reductions in job satisfaction, absenteeism and lower productivity.

The University of Pittsburgh’s Mind-Body Centre found taking holidays increases positive emotions and reduces depression.

Why workers aren’t taking leave

The reasons for employees not taking leave are multifaceted and complex.

In uncertain economic times, employees may try to accrue annual leave as a financial buffer should it be required. With rising costs of living, employees who can’t afford to travel may also be reluctant to take leave and stay at home.

In some cases, organisations may have cultures where working long hours and not taking leave is viewed positively.

Research has shown that in some organisations, taking leave may be viewed as a lack of commitment, resulting in employees being concerned about job security and career progression.

Since the pandemic, employees continue to report staff shortages in many roles and increased workloads. Employees are less likely to take time off if they feel they may be burdening others if there is no one to take on their work.

Returning to work to an overflowing inbox and a mile high list of tasks mean employees are likely to take shorter holidays, not giving them sufficient time to take a meaningful break.

And while flexible work arrangements have been welcomed by workers, research shows the inability to switch off at the end of the day can spill over into annual leave.

Is leave hoarding worse in Australia?

Annual leave entitlements differ between countries. The standard entitlement for full-time workers in Australia is 20 days per year.

In the United States, the average worker is entitled to between 10 and 14 days of leave a year. But this does not carry over if unused. Despite this, American workers leave up to 55% of leave days unused.

German employees are entitled to 30 days of leave a year. Only 12% of employees accrue excess leave, in a country where taking regular holidays is a cultural norm.

In the United Kingdom, 65% of employees don’t take the full 28 days of leave available to them. And in Japan, a country renowned for long working hours, 20% of leave days are not taken, even though many Japanese workers only get 10 days leave a year.

Can companies force workers to take leave?

Employers can direct employees to take leave, but only where there is a holiday shutdown period or where an employee has accrued excessive leave.

The amount of notice employers are required to give staff to take leave is not generally specified, however it may be prescribed in relevant awards, enterprise agreements or the employer’s own policy.

The direction to take leave must also be reasonable, taking into consideration factors including the amount of notice given, usual practices in the organisation, timing, and the needs of the employee and the employer.

Employers don’t like holding large leave balances, as accrued annual leave is recorded as a liability on balance sheets. Further, the annual leave entitlement is paid at the rate the employee is on at the time of the leave, not their rate at the time of accrual.

How companies can get staff to take leave

Taking leave matters. One study shows year-end performance rose by 8% for every extra 10 hours of annual leave an employee took.

And there are added benefits for employees too. Using your holiday leave can help you get a promotion or pay rise.

There are a number of ways employers can encourage staff to take their annual leave entitlement. Promoting a culture of switching off after work and on vacation is one. It’s difficult for an employee to have a relaxing holiday while their phone is pinging across multiple different platforms.

Managers need to ensure adequate resources are provided and workloads are managed effectively.

Google has utilised AI tools to support employees in monitoring workloads and reallocating work across teams. Managers need to work closely with their teams to ensure they understand workload pressures and provide support.

Encouraging employees not to check in on leave is also essential.

Lead by example

Organisations should take steps to foster a supportive work culture, where wellbeing and taking regular breaks are prioritised. Senior managers need to model this behaviour in their own actions and their communications with their staff.

Sending an email telling staff to take leave and focus on well-being is likely to fall flat if managers are spending 60-plus hour weeks in the office, with little to no time away on leave.

Organisations can also provide incentives such as offering bonuses or other arrangements to encourage employees to take breaks.

And finally, education plays a key part in driving change. Employees may not be aware of the negative effects of not switching off from work and or taking regular holidays, leading to increased risk of disengagement and burnout.

Libby (Elizabeth) Sander does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Australian workers hoard more than 160 million days of untaken leave. So could you be forced to take a break? – https://theconversation.com/australian-workers-hoard-more-than-160-million-days-of-untaken-leave-so-could-you-be-forced-to-take-a-break-243352

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Thompson, Research Data Specialist, The University of Melbourne

For more than a millennium, many Andean peoples used an object called a “khipu” (also spelled “quipu” and pronounced “key-poo”) to record and communicate information.

Khipus were made with cords or strings with knots tied into them. And experts understand that many, but not all, of these knots were used to represent numbers.

In a new study published today, I make a numeric connection between two important khipus from history – the first being being the largest khipu ever known and the other one of the most complex.

What were khipus used for?

While khipus were used in earlier times, they were especially important to the Inca Empire, which lasted from around 1438 CE to 1532 CE (when the empire was conquered by the Spanish). Since the Inca did not leave any written records, khipus are understood to have been their main system of communication and record-keeping.

Khipus were commonly made from either cotton or fibres sourced from camelids (the group of animals that includes camels, llamas and alpacas). These materials could be dyed or left naturally coloured. Some khipus even include plant fibres, while several incorporate human hair.

It seems specially-trained khipu makers (“khipukamayuqs”) made very deliberate decisions when constructing these record-keeping tools. These decisions related to the colours used, the direction of spin and ply of the cord fibres, the spacing and type of the cord attachments, and the structure and position of the knots.

Early Spanish chroniclers wrote about the khipu’s various numeric applications, which included recording storehouse inventories, population censuses and tax and tribute obligations.

A new numeric connection

For more than a century, researchers have been studying khipu features in hopes that patterns may emerge from a collective view. In recent decades their data have been digitised, which is now freely available via the Open Khipu Repository and the Khipu Field Guide.

For my research, I analysed the data from two khipus found in northern Chile and first recorded by ethno-mathematician Marcia Ascher and anthropologist Robert Ascher in the 1970s. One of these is the largest khipu ever found – spanning more than five metres in length and comprising more than 1800 cords (see the picture below). The other khipu (pictured in the header image) has almost 600 cords in complicated arrangements.

I noticed both khipus used red/white “divider” cords to separate groups of either tens or sevens. The larger khipu was divided into ten groups, with each group having seven cords. The smaller khipu was divided into seven groups, with each group having ten cords (and many subsidiary cords).

After examining and manipulating the data, I realised the smaller and more complex khipu is a summary and reallocation of the information in the larger khipu. In other words, the two khipus record the same data, but represent it differently.

This is the most complicated numeric connection between khipus made to date. It was only possible because of the availability of data and digital tools that make searching for patterns easier – and which wouldn’t have been available to Marcia Ascher back in the 1970s.

New khipu clues

While the numbers in these two khipus are counting and allocating something, we don’t yet know what that was. Why would it be necessary to have two khipus recording the same information in two different ways? We can only speculate.

Perhaps the larger khipu recorded the collection of different amounts of food crops from the community, while the other recorded how these foods were distributed between those in need, or between storehouses. Both ways of looking at the numbers would have been important to the people who used these khipus.

Experts believe only a tiny fraction of the khipus made throughout history have survived. This is partly because the institutions that used them eventually either became obsolete or used other means of recording after the conquest, combined with a climate that was less than ideal for textile preservation.

Today, about 1,600 khipus remain, residing mainly in collections in the Americas and Europe. Fewer than half of these have had their features digitally saved in research databases.

Through continued digitisation efforts, we hope to discover more khipu clues – and make new numeric connections that add to our understanding of ancient Andean peoples.

Karen Thompson is a Khipu Field Guide (KFG) Affiliate. This entails providing data to, and correcting the data in, KFG. No funds are received under this informal arrangement.

– ref. The Incas used mysterious stringy objects called ‘khipus’ to record data. We just got a step closer to understanding them – https://theconversation.com/the-incas-used-mysterious-stringy-objects-called-khipus-to-record-data-we-just-got-a-step-closer-to-understanding-them-233875

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giovanni E. Ferreira, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, Institute of Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney

The drug semaglutide, commonly known by the brand names Ozempic or Wegovy, was originally developed to help people with type 2 diabetes manage their blood sugar levels.

However, researchers have discovered it may help with other health issues, too. Clinical trials show semaglutide can be effective for weight loss, and hundreds of thousands of people around the world are using it for this purpose.

Evidence has also shown the drug can help manage heart failure and chronic kidney disease in people with obesity and type 2 diabetes.

Now, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine has suggested semaglutide can improve knee pain in people with obesity and osteoarthritis. So what did this study find, and how could semaglutide and osteoarthritis pain be linked?

Osteoarthritis and obesity

Osteoarthritis is a common joint disease, affecting 2.1 million Australians. Most people with osteoarthritis have pain and find it difficult to perform common daily activities such as walking. The knee is the joint most commonly affected by osteoarthritis.

Being overweight or obese is a major risk factor for osteoarthritis in the knee. The link between the two conditions is complex. It involves a combination of increased load on the knee, metabolic factors such as high cholesterol and high blood sugar, and inflammation.

For example, elevated blood sugar levels increase the production of inflammatory molecules in the body, which can damage the cartilage in the knee, and lead to the development of osteoarthritis.

Weight loss is strongly recommended to reduce the pain of knee osteoarthritis in people who are overweight or obese. International and Australian guidelines suggest losing as little as 5% of body weight can help.

But losing weight with just diet and exercise can be difficult for many people. One study from the United Kingdom found the annual probability of people with obesity losing 5% or more of their body weight was less than one in ten.

Semaglutide has recently entered the market as a potential alternative route to weight loss. It comes from a class of drugs known as GLP-1 receptor agonists and works by increasing a person’s sense of fullness.

Semaglutide for osteoarthritis?

The rationale for the recent study was that while we know weight loss alleviates symptoms of knee osteoarthritis, the effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists was yet to be explored. So the researchers set out to understand what effect semaglutide might have on knee osteoarthritis pain, alongside body weight.

They randomly allocated 407 people with obesity and moderate osteoarthritis into one of two groups. One group received semaglutide once a week, while the other group received a placebo. Both groups were treated for 68 weeks and received counselling on diet and physical activity. At the end of the treatment phase, researchers measured changes in knee pain, function, and body weight.

As expected, those taking semaglutide lost more weight than those in the placebo group. People on semaglutide lost around 13% of their body weight on average, while those taking the placebo lost around 3% on average. More than 70% of people in the semaglutide group lost at least 10% of their body weight compared to just over 9% of people in the placebo group.

The study found semaglutide reduced knee pain significantly more than the placebo. Participants who took semaglutide reported an additional 14-point reduction in pain on a 0–100 scale compared to the placebo group.

This is much greater than the pain reduction in another recent study among people with obesity and knee osteoarthritis. This study investigated the effects of a diet and exercise program compared to an attention control (where participants are provided with information about nutrition and physical activity). The results here saw only a 3-point difference between the intervention group and the control group on the same scale.

The amount of pain relief reported in the semaglutide trial is also larger than that reported with commonly used pain medicines such as anti-inflammatories, opioids and antidepressants.

Semaglutide also improved knee function compared to the placebo. For example, people who took semaglutide could walk about 42 meters further than those on the placebo in a six-minute walking test.

How could semaglutide reduce knee pain?

It’s not fully clear how semaglutide helps with knee pain from osteoarthritis. One explanation may be that when a person loses weight, there’s less stress on the joints, which reduces pain.

But recent studies have also suggested semaglutide and other GLP-1 receptor agonists might have anti-inflammatory properties, and could even protect against cartilage wear and tear.

While the results of this new study are promising, it’s too soon to regard semaglutide as a “miracle drug” for knee osteoarthritis. And as this study was funded by the drug company that makes semaglutide, it will be important to have independent studies in the future, to confirm the findings, or not.

The study also had strict criteria, excluding some groups, such as those taking opioids for knee pain. One in seven Australians seeing a GP for their knee osteoarthritis are prescribed opioids. Most participants in the trial were white (61%) and women (82%). This means the study may not fully represent the average person with knee osteoarthritis and obesity.

It’s also important to consider semaglutide can have a range of side effects, including gastrointestinal symptoms and fatigue.

There are some concerns that semaglutide could reduce muscle mass and bone density, though we’re still learning more about this.

Further, it can be difficult to access.

I have knee osteoarthritis, what should I do?

Osteoarthritis is a disease caused by multiple factors, and it’s important to take a multifaceted approach to managing it. Weight loss is an important component for those who are overweight or obese, but so are other aspects of self-management. This might include physical activity, pacing strategies, and other positive lifestyle changes such as improving sleep, healthy eating, and so on.

Giovanni E. Ferreira receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

Christina Abdel Shaheed holds grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF).

– ref. New study suggests weight loss drugs like Ozempic could help with knee pain. Here’s why there may be a link – https://theconversation.com/new-study-suggests-weight-loss-drugs-like-ozempic-could-help-with-knee-pain-heres-why-there-may-be-a-link-243159

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Syed M Nawazish Ali, Research Fellow in Transport Electrification, RMIT University

This year, dozens of new models of electric vehicles have hit the Australian market – and more are coming. New models of battery electric and plug-in hybrids come with bigger batteries. The average battery electric now has a range of over 400 kilometres.

But until now, there’s been a missing piece of the puzzle. The batteries in most new electric cars are huge – much larger than a typical home battery. A BYD Seal might have a battery capacity of 60 to 80 kilowatt hours (kWh), while the average home battery installed in Australia is 11 to 12 kWh.

So why can’t you plug your car in and power your house?

Soon, you will be able to. The suite of technologies already exists. They’re known as vehicle to grid (V2G, where you export power to the grid), vehicle to house (V2H, where you run your house off your car) and vehicle to load (V2L, where you run electric devices off your car).

There’s a cost – you need a bidirectional charger able to send power both to and from the car. But experts expect substantial benefits.

With V2G, you can sell power back to the grid at peak times, helping the grid stay stable. With V2H, you can weather power outages or even go off grid. V2L would be useful for campers and tradies.

One reason it’s not here already is that regulations and processes haven’t been in place. On Saturday, climate change minister Chris Bowen announced progress on this front. Vehicle to grid would be up and running by Christmas. That’s a very ambitious timeline, as there’s more to it than just regulations. But it is a jump forward.

“When you pick your next EV you won’t be buying just a car, you’ll be buying a household battery on wheels,” Bowen has said.

What changed?

Vehicle to grid isn’t totally new in Australia.

In late 2022, South Australia became the first state to greenlight bidirectional chargers in homes. But these chargers only work with two EV models, the electric Nissan Leaf and the plug-in hybrid Mitsubishi Outlander.

So what just changed? Crucial underpinning – the boring but important scaffolding which makes new technology robust and reliable. Specifically, Standards Australia has approved a new standard for bidirectional chargers.

Australian standards are technical standards outlining specifications and guidelines for new technologies. While voluntary, products are expected to meet the relevant standards. A V2G standard will level the playing field and give clarity for owners, grid operators and electric charger manufacturers.

A new standard is a leap forward. But to make V2G a reality will take more action. Car owners have to install bidirectional fast chargers, able to send power both ways. These aren’t cheap, at around A$3,500 a pop. Car companies have to ensure their chargers meet the new standard. And distribution networks have to approve charger models for use on the grid.

Trial projects such as the Realising Electric Vehicle-to-Grid Services in the Australian Capital Territory and the Amber/ARENA trial in New South Wales show we can meet some of the technical requirements. It will take time and money to integrate these changes nationwide.

Why should we be excited about this?

As more car owners go electric, the size of the battery fleet on Australian roads and driveways is growing fast.

Without V2G, these batteries are just used for one thing – to make a car, truck or bus operate. But these batteries could do much more. Australia’s electric fleet is now over 180,000. If the average battery pack size was 50 kWh, that would represent a giant distributed battery of 9 gigawatt hours. The largest grid-scale battery under construction in Australia will have 2.4 gigawatt hours.

For energy authorities, this fleet of batteries presents a huge opportunity. At times of peak demand, they could offer financial incentives for EV owners to discharge to the grid. Used carefully, EV batteries could avert blackouts. A decentralised power source is more resilient to shocks. It could mean avoiding the need to fire up expensive gas plants at times of peak demand.

For EV owners, the financial incentives could be enough to let their cars be used to keep the grid stable. In testing, early V2G users have been able to turn large power bills into power payments. Annual earnings could be as high as $9-$12,000 per vehicle in New South Wales, according to one report.

Many carmakers are moving towards including V2G.

2025 could be the year

Overseas, vehicle to grid technology is gaining traction. California has mandated V2G capabilities in all light EVs sold from 2027 onward.

In Australia, regulatory change and incentives will be needed to encourage broader adoption.

It’s encouraging to see Australian standards for V2G arrive. But while Bowen is pitching V2G as about to happen, there is still some spadework left to do before it’s really here.

Syed Ali receives funding from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water.

– ref. You will soon be able to power your house with your electric car. Here’s how – https://theconversation.com/you-will-soon-be-able-to-power-your-house-with-your-electric-car-heres-how-239404

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sitong Michelle (Michelle) Chen, Senior Lecturer in International Business, Auckland University of Technology

Around the world, the growth of industry and consumption has escalated environmental damage through increased emissions, waste and pollution from landfills.

The current linear economic model, characterised by a “take-make-dispose” approach to limited resources, is increasingly shown to be unsustainable.

New Zealand’s food manufacturing industry is a major contributor to these issues. However, an alternative, more sustainable, approach exists in the circular economic model.

We have explored six large food manufacturing companies in Aotearoa New Zealand committed to circular-economy practices. We wanted to understand if and how they prioritise the four circular elements of reducing, reusing, recycling and recovering.

We identified a variety of drivers and barriers to implementing circularity. This includes consumer knowledge, government regulation, supply-chain issues and financial commitment.

Overall, we found New Zealand food manufacturers are slow to take positive steps in all areas. They lack a working knowledge of circular processes and the old linear model still holds sway.

New Zealand context

We found New Zealand food manufacturers are beginning to embrace the circular economy but there is still a long way to go for them to close the loop. The current focus is mainly on three elements (reducing, reusing and recycling), but they pay less attention to recovering materials.

In practice, reduction involves minimising the use of resources and avoiding unnecessary waste. Here the focus is on reducing the quantity of raw materials without compromising on quality.

Reusing extends the life of products and materials by finding new purposes such as refurbishing or repairing items to prevent them from becoming waste. This is especially the case with packaging materials which can be reused, recycled or composted.

Recycling refers to the process of collecting, sorting and processing materials to manufacture new products. This reduces the demand for new raw materials. For example, fruits past their use-by dates can be turned into pickles and perfumes.

Recovery extracts energy or other useful resources from waste materials that cannot be recycled. For example, withered flowers and spoiled fruits are turned into biomethane for energy production. This is New Zealand’s weakest link in the adoption of the circular economy.

Barriers to circularity

Food manufacturers told us they face multiple barriers imposed by local and offshore factors, including a lack of awareness of circular-economy principles among consumers and industry.

Research participants noted that local consumers are concerned more with price than circularity. People prefer cheaper products despite their negative environmental impact.

All companies we studied expressed this perspective. One participant said:

A major and continuing challenge for us, and our industry, is that of the single-use takeaway cup. Despite our best efforts to encourage and support our customers to sit in and enjoy their coffee, or bring their cups, we still distribute thousands of cups every year. Changing their mindset around it is still difficult.

Offshore, major trading partners in China and Japan prefer plastic packaging for their products. The food manufacturers we studied found these trading partners valued appearance and presentation first, before environmental impacts.

All companies reported being confronted with regulatory barriers. This includes lack of government support such as rebates and subsidies or robust circular-economy policies. There is no comprehensive framework on how businesses make decisions and investments.

This calls for policy revisions to help companies implement robust circular-economy practices.

Drivers for change

The COVID pandemic had a significant economic impact in slowing down the implementation of circular practices due to supply-chain disruptions. This comes on the back of transportation challenges, a lack of low-emission freight options and increases in living costs.

Based on our findings, we offer suggestions to support managers and policymakers to achieve sustainability in the food manufacturing sector.

First, policymakers can play an important role through laws, regulations, fiscal incentives, public funding and a flexible legislative framework that supports circular-economy strategies. Such measures are crucial for reducing uncertainty and encouraging investment in circular practices.

Second, we advise companies to concentrate on education and raising awareness among consumers about the long-term benefits of the circular economy. This is a much more urgent agenda than focusing on regulatory, technological or supply-chain issues. Policy and regulation change will happen in response to changing consumer preferences and patterns.

Third, because educating the public at home and abroad is not an easy fix, companies need to collaborate with each other across all parts of the food manufacturing industry, including retailers and manufacturers.

Mindsets and practices among New Zealand businesses need to shift from a linear model towards receiving training in circular-economy practices and education in sustainability and to be able to make changes for future generations.

Sitong Michelle Chen works for AUT Business School, Department of Marketing and International Business. She receives funding from North Asia CAPE.

– ref. NZ’s food manufacturers are embracing the idea of a circular economy but are slow to implement it – https://theconversation.com/nzs-food-manufacturers-are-embracing-the-idea-of-a-circular-economy-but-are-slow-to-implement-it-241355