Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rémi Quirion, Scientifique en chef du Québec et professeur au Département de psychiatrie de l’Université McGill, McGill University

States should be more aware of how cities and local governments can help them carry out their diplomatic and scientific strategies.

In major global discussions, city-level governments are often the ones who can transform commitments into concrete action. A good example is the actions taken by the City of Montréal to support biodiversity at the recent COP15 conference, as well as Mayor Valérie Plante’s call to other cities around the world to commit to the Montréal Pledge. The aim is for cities to implement 15 tangible actions towards pursuing and accelerating their efforts to preserve ecosystems.

This type of action demonstrates the key role that governors and mayors can play in activating the “from global to local and from local to global” lever.

In the United States, the White House created the Department of State’s Subnational Diplomacy Unit to make sure the voices of local governments would be heard at the international level, and that their views be taken into account in U.S. foreign policy.

In Québec, a number of programmes are available to facilitate diplomatic initiatives of cities, such as the one offered by the ministère des Relations internationales et de la Francophonie. It is a first call for projects to support the cities and regions of Québec in carrying out initiatives geared toward internationalization. Cities are invited to submit proposals with an international scope that will help increase their outreach.

So if we were to invest more in municipal diplomacy here in Québec and Canada, what might that look like?

It’s an idea that came up during discussions between researchers and practitioners at the International Network for Governmental Science Advice (INGSA) conference, held in Kigali, Rwanda last May. As president of INGSA and Chief Scientist of Québec, I am working to make the scientific and diplomatic community aware of the potential local governments have to be agents of change.

Not big enough for diplomacy? Not at all!

The idea of municipalities engaging in diplomacy seems obvious in large metropolises such as New York or Paris, which are also at the center of many diplomatic exchanges. These cities serve as headquarters for organizations including the UN, UNESCO and the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie.

When compared, leaders of smaller cities often feel that they have too few resources to be able to contribute to this field.

Yet, to be heard at the diplomatic level, being numerous and well organized is more important than size.

Cities need to look at diplomacy differently. Obviously, local authorities can’t hope to open embassies or organize diplomatic missions the same way countries do, at the national level. Here, I will talk about two other types of initiatives that are somewhat different.

A municipal hub, similar to how Barcelona’s Science and Technology Diplomacy Hub is structured (SciTech DiploHub), is a great example of a format that medium-sized cities can use to share the risks associated with investments in diplomacy. As a shared space of resources supported by other levels of government (national or international), such a hub enables cities to run joint projects, share international contacts and gain valuable expertise.

International political alliances also have great potential. By associating themselves, cities that are far apart make the choice to work together to develop solutions for their territory, while being able to make a difference at a global scale.

For example, the cities of Amsterdam, Barcelona and New York created the Cities Coalition for Digital Rights, uniting some 60 cities around the goal of becoming better prepared and equipped for their digital transformation.

Another example is the C40 coalition, in which the City of Montréal is very active. The coalition sets common objectives for the fight against climate change. Participating cities can access international funds and take part in a global dialogue, actions they would not be able to achieve on their own.

Too small for science and innovation? No way!

Innovating and investing in data and knowledge comes at great expense and contains risks that many cities are reluctant to take, given the resources at their disposal and the pressure of their day-to-day mandates.

It may seem counter-intuitive to invest in innovative projects, even more so for cities that are geographically remote, but it can turn out to be a very worthwhile choice for the following three reasons:

1. To acquire operational data platforms

For example, the creation of a geospatial platform to identify water and electricity infrastructure would save a great deal of time in organizing public works. Shared platforms for data collection on wastewater are also very useful for preventing and managing health crises, whether looking into drug use or epidemics. Building them with other cities reduces development and operating costs and makes it possible for multiple cities to use the data. It allows cities to compare results more easily and provide other levels of government with valuable information that can be used to support global strategies.

2. Access to more substantial funding

By creating such synergies between innovative teams from different cities, governments at higher levels (provincial, national and international) are assured that their funding is being scaled up. That way they can avoid supporting “wall-to-wall” global initiatives that are detached from local realities.

3. Raise their level of ambition

By coming into contact with radically different practices developed in a variety of contexts, teams at the city level get the opportunity to compare themselves with the best in the world, raising ambitions for the citizens they serve. In Québec, local governments can benefit from advice and support of the CCTT network (Centres collégiaux de transfert de technologies), which is very well established in their communities, while keeping abreast of emerging technologies on a global scale. Sorel-Tracy has just appointed its first chief scientific advisor from this network.

The best time to invest?

It was yesterday! But we’ll settle for today.

Because right now is when cities are making the most strategic choices for the future. Water infrastructure, flood zones, public transport — all the decisions that towns and cities make today will determine the ability of future generations to be less impacted by the consequences of climate change over the next 50 years.

These decisions need to be backed up by ongoing citizen dialogue, which is already very active at the municipal level, and by a capacity for forward thinking: what will our streets, our weather and our daily lives look like in 50 years? Only scientific data and analysis, and a proper understanding of the global interconnections in which cities are involved, will give them a better grasp of their future.

Rémi Quirion ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Cities around the world share many challenges. To address them, they need to develop science diplomacy – https://theconversation.com/cities-around-the-world-share-many-challenges-to-address-them-they-need-to-develop-science-diplomacy-233509

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jade Portingale, PhD Candidate, School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne

Most of the time, our brains are very good at blending together input from all our senses into a seamless, unified conscious experience of “my body”. When this process of integrating different sensory signals goes wrong, according to one theory, it can give a person an inaccurate and distressing sense of their body called “body image disturbance”.

There are many kinds of body image disturbance, including dissatisfaction with our bodies or inaccurate perceptions of them. We don’t know a lot about how many people experience body misperceptions, but we do know body dissatisfaction is very common. A survey of more than 1,600 Australians aged 12–18 carried out last year found almost half experienced dissatisfaction with their own appearance.

Body image disturbance is strongly linked to eating disorders and body dysmorphic disorder (which involves perceived flaws in one’s appearance). Existing treatments for these disorders have high relapse rates.

In our latest paper, my colleagues and I reviewed the evidence that a surprising approach may be able to help address the root cause of these disorders and potentially improve symptoms: “embodiment illusions”, which use virtual reality or other methods to trick the mind into feeling it inhabits a different body or body part.

Malleable body image

Perhaps the best-known embodiment illusion is the “rubber hand illusion”. If you show a person a rubber hand being stroked while simultaneously stroking their hand (which they cannot see), the combined visual and tactile sensations usually make the person feel like they “own” the rubber hand.

Using virtual reality, this illusion can also be extended to other body parts or even an entire body.

In our systematic review of 32 earlier studies, we found compelling evidence that people with higher levels of body image disturbance tend to be more susceptible to such embodiment illusions compared to others.

Their greater malleability in remapping body image is consistent with theories suggesting body image disturbances involve impaired multisensory integration.

For example, reliance on vision over touch might lead a person to place more weight on seeing a thin reflection in the mirror than on feeling their own protruding ribs. This may be combined with expectations (such as “my body should be thinner”) overriding accurate sensory inputs.

Positive effects

We also found most studies showed tricking your brain into experiencing these illusions had some positive effects. Participants improved their perceptual distortions and distressing thoughts and emotions about body size and shape.

The idea is to experience an artificial body as one’s own, especially if that body appears to have a desirable shape or size. This can “update” an individual’s stubborn distorted mental representation about their actual physical appearance.

One study involved women with anorexia nervosa using a healthy-weight virtual reality avatar. Afterward, they overestimated the size of their own (real) bodies less than before the experiment.

Another study reported that healthy women felt thinner and less dissatisfied with their bodies after identifying with a thin virtual body.

New treatments needed

Treating conditions related to body image, such as eating disorders and body dysmorphic disorder, can be highly challenging. Recovery can take a long time.

The first line of treatment for many such disorders is cognitive behavioural therapy, which mainly targets negative thoughts, emotions and behaviours related to the body. However, relapse rates are high.

This is one reason to seek new supplementary treatments that directly address body misperception. This is where embodiment illusions that can shift distorted perceptions may be helpful.

Many questions remain

There are still many things we don’t know about how embodiment illusions may affect people with body misperceptions, such as how long potential treatments should last or how long their effects will persist. We also need better ways to measure body image disturbances. Another limitation of existing research is a bias towards participants from Western cultures.

Future research may also study “enfacement illusions”, which induce a sense of ownership over another face. These may help us understand and improve facial misperception, particularly in people with body dysmorphic disorders.

Messing with a person’s perception of their physical self is inherently risky. Research is also needed into potential adverse effects of these illusions, such as increases in misperception of body size or shape.

Ethical concerns exist, too. Could experiencing a “healthy-weight” body reduce an anorexic person’s motivation for gaining weight, even if they are dangerously underweight?

Despite these questions, the use of immersive illusions to temporarily remap body image shows promise. It may offer an innovative complementary approach for understanding and treating distressing body image distortions, alongside current treatments.

The author would like to thank her supervisors, Associate Professor Isabel Krug at the University of Melbourne and Dr David Butler at the Cairnmillar Institute.

Jade Portingale 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. Virtual reality ‘embodiment illusions’ may help the skewed perceptions behind body image disturbances – https://theconversation.com/virtual-reality-embodiment-illusions-may-help-the-skewed-perceptions-behind-body-image-disturbances-230867

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Griffin, Professor, Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, The University of Queensland

Since May, a number of poultry farms around Australia have faced outbreaks of avian influenza, or bird flu. These outbreaks have been devastating for the poultry farms affected, necessitating large-scale culls, and have caused knock-on effects for the country’s egg supplies.

The poultry farm outbreaks have been linked to bird flu strains beginning with H7 (such as H7N3 and H7N8). But the strain causing most concern at present is arguably a different strain – H5N1.

This strain is spreading rapidly around the world, and can cause more serious illness and death in poultry, birds and mammals.

Experts are warning H5N1 could soon reach Australia. And while bird flu isn’t currently spreading between humans, this could change in the future.

So where are we at with vaccines for bird flu?

More about bird flu

H5N1 first emerged in southern China in 1996.

Strains like H5N1 are further broken down into variants called clades. Since emerging in 2020, clade 2.3.4.4b has spread around the world, giving experts cause for concern. Recently, it has been causing outbreaks not only in wild birds and poultry, but also in dairy cows, notably in the United States.

While H5N1 is yet to be detected in birds or other wildlife in Australia, as it continues to spread in other regions, there are concerns we’re likely to see it here soon. CSIRO experts have this week warned the risk of H5N1 being imported is higher this year compared with previous years.

Fortunately, cases in humans remain rare. Five human cases of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b have been reported in the US since 2022, all of whom had close contact with dairy cows or poultry, and around ten others elsewhere in the world.

There was a single imported human case of H5N1 in Australia in a child who returned from overseas earlier this year, but of a different clade.

One of the biggest challenges with influenza viruses is that they can change fairly easily. There’s a possibility that some of these changes may give the virus the ability to transmit more readily from person to person. This could lead to widespread transmission worldwide, or a pandemic.

We have some vaccines already

Given H5N1 viruses have been around for a while, we actually already have a few vaccines designed to protect against this bird flu strain in the event of sustained transmission in humans. The US approved one from Sanofi Pasteur back in 2007, the European Union approved one from GSK in 2008, and Australia approved one from CSL Limited in the same year.

Older H5N1 vaccines were traditional egg-based vaccines, which work by growing the virus in fertilised chicken eggs and deactivating it, then injecting it into the muscle so our immune system can be trained to respond.

More recently, CSL Seqirus has created a cell-based H5N1 vaccine. This shot is based on technology already used to manufacture their seasonal flu vaccines, where the virus is grown in cultured cells of mammalian origin (rather than in eggs). Developing a vaccine that doesn’t require chicken eggs to make is sensible in the context of bird flu, which can limit the availability of eggs.

While the risk in humans remains low, the World Health Organization has suggested humans don’t need to be vaccinated against bird flu at this stage.

That said, Finland plans to roll the CSL Seqirus shots out imminently to those at highest risk (people routinely exposed to animals who may be infected), making them the first country to vaccinate against H5N1.

While research has suggested existing vaccines produce immune responses that will provide sufficient protection against the currently circulating strains, vaccines based on older versions of H5N1, or even those made more recently, may not be an ideal match for future strains of bird flu.

What about mRNA vaccines?

mRNA vaccine technology is now well established for COVID, while an mRNA vaccine against RSV (respiratory syncytial virus) was recently approved in the US.

mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccines essentially work by giving our immune system instructions to make proteins, usually bits found on the surface of viruses. Our immune system then recognises and responds to these proteins to protect us if we encounter the virus.

This technology also offers promise for bird flu vaccines. Moderna began clinical trials for mRNA vaccines against both H5 and H7 strains in 2023 and recently secured funding to continue late-stage development. Other companies including GSK and Pfizer are also working on mRNA vaccines against H5N1.

One of the benefits of this technology is that if the virus changes significantly from the version circulating at a given time, mRNA vaccines can be adapted to these changes quite quickly.

Other approaches are also being investigated, including “universal” flu vaccines that could protect from all types of flu. But these are unlikely to be available soon.

Being a virus primarily of birds, another strategy is to vaccinate the birds themselves. In some countries where bird flu is consistently found in birds such as Egypt and China, vaccinating poultry in particular has been routine for some time.

What next?

With the ever-increasing global spread of H5N1 and the growing number of species infected, there are concerns about the potential for this strain to cause a pandemic.

If we were to see a bird flu pandemic, fortunately we are perhaps in a better position than ever before to respond. Not only have we learnt a lot in recent years from responses to other infectious diseases, particularly COVID, but technology and capacity to be able to make vaccines rapidly has also come a long way.

Paul Griffin is an Immunisation Coalition Director and Scientific Advisory Board Member. He has received speaker honoraria including from Seqirus, and Sanofi. He has also been a member of Medical Advisory Boards including for AstraZeneca, GSK, MSD, Seqirus, Moderna, and Pfizer

– ref. Bird flu isn’t spreading in humans for now. But there are vaccines in the pipeline if that changes – https://theconversation.com/bird-flu-isnt-spreading-in-humans-for-now-but-there-are-vaccines-in-the-pipeline-if-that-changes-232993

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Marie Quigley, DECRA Research Fellow in molecular ecology, James Cook University

The Great Barrier Reef is world famous – it’s the largest coral reef system in the world and home to tens of thousands of species. No wonder it is World Heritage listed.

But Australia has three lower profile reefs which are also World Heritage listed –  Ningaloo and Shark Bay in Western Australia, and Lord Howe Island, 600 kilometres off the New South Wales coast, the southernmost coral in the world. Ningaloo has 260km of coral reef, while the reefs of Shark Bay have less coral but are home to ancient stromatolites, vast seagrass beds and iconic species such as dugongs.

This month, the World Heritage Committee will meet in New Delhi. On the agenda will be how the world’s natural World Heritage sites are faring. The Australian government will be under increased scrutiny to prove it has upheld its international commitments to protecting these reefs.

Our new research has found all four of these reefs are in greater danger than we thought – even those in subtropical waters, such as Lord Howe Island. Our two Indian Ocean reefs at Shark Bay and Ningaloo actually face more species and function loss than the Great Barrier Reef.

At 1.5°C of warming, we are likely to lose about 20% of the 400-odd coral species which currently live across these four reefs (equating to about 70 extinctions). At 2°C warming, our modelling of species abundance and ecosystem functions predict an almost complete collapse in reef ecosystems – even for the subtropical reefs. This aligns with predictions by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the future of coral reefs.

We believe our work adds to the need to consider whether Australia’s four iconic reefs should be on the list of World Heritage sites in danger.

What does it mean when a reef is World Heritage listed?

Declaring a natural or cultural site as World Heritage is done to encourage the preservation of locations of immense ecological and cultural value. Nations have to nominate sites they think are worthy of protection. Australia has 20 World Heritage sites, of which 12 are natural.

When sites are formally listed, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) requires the country’s government to look after it. If the site is degrading, it can be listed as in danger.

UNESCO has considered listing the Great Barrier Reef as in danger twice, in 2021 and again in June this year. For the reef to keep its World Heritage status, the government must prove its policies are sufficient to keep the reefs in good health.

In the debate over the Great Barrier Reef, two things have been missed – first, any mention of Australia’s other World Heritage reefs, and second, whether the federal government’s current policies to cut greenhouse gases are enough to protect the reefs into the future.

What did we find?

Our new results suggest all four reefs are in trouble. Given current warming trends, they will only deteriorate further in the future if we stay on this course.

While the Barrier Reef has drawn a great deal of attention, it’s actually the ecosystems at Ningaloo, Shark Bay and Lord Howe Island which are projected to warm the most. When standardised to park boundaries, temperatures here are projected to increase by up to 1.3°C by the end of the century. (This temperature estimate is for sea temperatures, not the overall surface temperature which we use as shorthand when we talk about 1.5°C or 2°C of warming).

While that might not sound like much, it will be enough to push many corals to potential extinction. Many coral species already exist within 1-2°C of the maximum temperature they can tolerate.

Our modelling shows Shark Bay and Ningaloo actually face a greater risk of species and function loss than the Barrier Reef. It also suggests the ability of our reefs to bounce back will be overcome when warming tips over 1.5°C globally.

While these models incorporate the baseline heat tolerance of coral species on these reefs, they don’t yet include their potential for genetic adaptation. The question of whether some corals could adapt to this rapid warming is still open. A lot is riding on their ability to do so.

Looming danger

This year, the Great Barrier Reef and Lord Howe Island have suffered intense stress from high sea temperatures – the direct result of burning fossil fuels and producing heat-trapping greenhouse gases. This year is on track to again be the hottest year on record, overtaking the previous record holder of 2023.

Australia is already in the midst of an extinction crisis. Australia has one of the worst track records for extinctions. Since European colonisation, 34-38 mammal species have gone extinct compared to just one from the contiguous United States, which covers a similar area.

You might have read that coral cover – a measure of how much coral there is in an area – hit historic highs on the Great Barrier Reef last year.

Coral cover is a helpful and important metric, but it’s not perfect. For instance, fast-growing heat tolerant coral species might expand as less heat tolerant species die off. Importantly, relying on coral cover alone can mask significant changes in how the reef is functioning.

It’s hard to assess how species in our oceans are doing, given the difficulty of access and the large number of species, including many unknown to science. If warming continues unabated, we will likely start to lose species before we have even documented them.

Our results are based on “moderate” climate models of global surface temperature changes. Australia has committed to cutting emissions by 43% below 2005 levels by 2030. While that sounds good, it’s not enough – this decrease is compatible with hitting 3.2ºC by 2100. To limit warming to 1.5ºC or below by 2050, we would need to commit to much greater cuts in emissions – 90% below 2005 levels by 2030.

Our results clearly suggest Australia’s four World Heritage reefs will be dramatically affected by warming in the near future. They will no longer qualify as being maintained under “conditions of integrity”. It’s hard to see how they can avoid being added to the in danger list.

Kate Quigley receives funding from the Australian Research Council in the form of the Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA) and holds a joint position as Principal Research Scientist at Minderoo Foundation, a philanthropic organisation.

Andrew Baird has received research funding from the Australia Research Council, the Mindaroo Foundation and the Ian Potter Foundation. He is a life member of the Australian Conservation Foundation and The Wilderness Society.

– ref. Beyond the Barrier Reef: Australia’s 3 other World Heritage reefs are also in trouble – https://theconversation.com/beyond-the-barrier-reef-australias-3-other-world-heritage-reefs-are-also-in-trouble-234268

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Haley Tancredi, Lecturer (Inclusive Education), Queensland University of Technology

About four students in every classroom will have a language or attention disorder. While some of these students will have an official diagnosis of developmental language disorder (DLD) or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), others will be “hiding in plain sight”. These students may often be in trouble for acting out, underachieving or not attending school.

In our new study, we interviewed 59 students with DLD and/or ADHD about their experiences of Year 10 English. This is the only subject all Australian students must do from the first year of schooling to Year 12. And it plays a key role in their success at school and beyond it.

Students in our study reported some of their teachers talk too much. Why is this a problem? What can teachers do instead?

What are DLD and ADHD?

About two students in every classroom of 30 will have DLD. This is a lifelong disorder that affects language comprehension and expression. People with DLD find it more difficult to say what they mean and to understand others.

About one or two students per classroom will have ADHD. This can include difficulties with focusing attention, following detailed instructions and self control.

It is also possible for students to have both DLD and ADHD.

While schools are legally required to remove learning barriers for students with disability, students first need to be identified as needing this support. Research shows students with less visible disabilities, such as DLD and ADHD, are more likely to fly under the radar of schools and so do not get the help they need.

Read more:
What is DLD – the most common disorder you have ‘never heard of’?

Our study

As part of a broader project on accessible assessment, in 2022, we recruited more than 200 students from three Queensland public high schools. Through testing, we identified a subgroup of 59 students with likely language and/or attention disorders.

The students were all between 13 and 15. About half identified as female and half as male. Students were taught by 26 different teachers. Almost three quarters of students (71%) in the sample had not previously been identified as having difficulty with either language or attention.

All 59 students participated in individual interviews, which included questions about their classroom experiences.

Do you think some teachers talk too much?

Research shows removing unnecessary complexity from classroom teaching is really important when helping students learn, especially if they already have issues with language and information processing.

More than two thirds of participants (69%) in our study said some of their teachers talk too much. Eight responded with a forceful “YES!” Importantly, students also described the effect of too much teacher talk — including when teachers “go off topic” — on their ability to sustain focus, attention and engagement.

As Gareth* explained:

[The] ones that are just like talking and not doing anything, I’ll just zone out and don’t do anything.

Bella noted:

Yes. Uh, uh, my brain leaves the room.

Another student, Pippy, told us that once behind, it is difficult to re-engage:

I just think, well, like when my teacher’s talking, I, my brain kind of, it gets like really slow, and I have to think back about, ‘Oh, they just said those words, what do those mean?‘ And then I’m like, ‘Okay, I’m catching up’. And then she’s already like gone all the way down like already explained so much more. I’ve like missed that ‘cause I was trying to focus on what she was just explaining before.

What else happens when teachers talk too much?

To learn more about the impact of too much teacher talk, we showed students an iPad and asked them to choose which options on the display applied to them.

The most popular response was students begin thinking of other things. The next most popular responses were their brain shut down and/or they talked to the person next to them. Although no student selected “I get up to mischief” as a standalone choice, four did select “all of the above”.

These responses reflect what happens when working memory – the memory system that provides a kind of “mental jotting pad storing information necessary for everyday activities” – is overloaded. When this occurs, brains really do “leave the room”.

What can teachers do instead?

There is no precise figure when it comes to the amount a teacher should talk, but a good rule of thumb is around one quarter of the lesson. This allows time for active questioning and feedback, and for the completion of activities. It also reduces student passivity and is less exhausting for the teacher.

Just as important as the proportion of teacher talk is how easy it is to understand them.

Students in our study said “excellent” teachers used simple words and would “go through” things several times in different ways. They also said excellent teachers did not go too fast and paused to allow students to process what had been said. They would also regularly check in with students during the lesson to see if they understood what they needed to do.

Though it might be assumed teachers are already using these simple strategies, our findings suggest otherwise. We asked students about 16 evidenced-based teaching practices that are all needed to support language and information processing.

Their responses suggest there is inconsistent or ineffective use of these important practices.

For example, nearly three in five students said teachers rarely or only sometimes listed what students needed to do on the board. Almost one in four said their teacher did not consistently check-in with them using verbal prompts to support attention.

What can we do now?

We know language processing, attention and working memory are particular areas of difficulty for students with DLD and/or ADHD.

But these differences do not mean lower academic achievement is a natural or inevitable outcome.

Instead, given the prevalence of students in these two groups, it means everyday teaching must be accessible to them. And in doing so, it will also make teaching more accessible to everyone in the classroom.

In a previous study in our broader project, we found targeted professional learning can help teachers make their teaching more accessible, including talking less and more simply.

Our future research will look at how we help teachers adopt these strategies and reach teachers in regional and remote schools so all students can benefit.

*names have been changed.

Haley Tancredi receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Callula Killingly receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Linda J. Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Projects Scheme and the Queensland Government Education Horizon scheme.

– ref. ‘My brain leaves the room’: what happens when teachers talk too much? – https://theconversation.com/my-brain-leaves-the-room-what-happens-when-teachers-talk-too-much-234685

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Puneet Vatsa, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand

The rising price of food has been making headlines for the past decade. But prices have not been rising consistently across all food groups – and this has major health implications for New Zealanders.

Last week Stats NZ released food price data showing the biggest drop in prices in six years. The second quarter consumer price index, due out today, will give a broader overview of the inflationary pressures facing New Zealanders, including the cost of eating.

Despite the recent price drops, concerns over food security, food affordability and the nutritional quality of local diets have remained.

Although food price increases have been noticeable over the long term, the change in relative prices — the cost of one food category compared to another — often goes unnoticed. Nevertheless, these relative price changes are crucial as they influence consumer choices, often subconsciously.

Our new research examines Stats NZ data between 2014 and 2023 on the price of 85 food items collected from 560 retail outlets – supermarkets, greengrocers, fish shops, butchers, convenience stores, restaurants, and outlets selling breakfast, lunch, and takeaway foods – in 12 urban areas.

Between July 2014 and March 2023, prices of some sweetened, processed foods and drinks such as boxed chocolate, ice cream, soft drinks and sports energy drinks have risen by around 14%. At the same time, price of some fruits and vegetables have risen by around 45%.

When sweetened processed foods are cheaper relative to fruits and vegetables, people tend to buy more of the former. This can lead to poor dietary habits, increasing the prevalence of obesity and related health issues.

Unique factors cause slower price drops

While food prices have increased globally since 2020, most notably due to the COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical tensions, many countries have seen subsequent food price inflation decreases. As the recent data from Stats NZ show, this is also starting to happen in New Zealand.

However, New Zealand’s price inflation was greater and has remained more persistent than in many other developed countries, suggesting unique factors may be at play.

The structure of the retail food sector, dominated by Foodstuffs and Woolworths, has come into sharper focus as food prices have risen. A lack of competition tends to lead to higher prices.

However, considering how long the duopoly has dominated the supermarket sector, this alone does not necessarily explain the changes in absolute and relative prices revealed in our research.

Due to increased regional specialisation, New Zealand’s supply chain for fresh fruits and vegetables is particularly susceptible to disruptions caused by extreme weather events.

Although specialisation improves production efficiency, it increases vulnerability to localised shocks, such as Cyclone Gabrielle. This is exacerbated by a sparse transport network.

International trade also influences the relative prices of different food types. The composition of New Zealand’s production and exports is significantly different from its imports.

New Zealand does not produce sugar beet or cane, making it entirely dependent on sugar imports, for example. Conversely, most fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in New Zealand are grown domestically.

These factors can influence the production and cost of different foods, leading to diverging prices. Access to different sources of imported foods can reduce price volatility, whereas a regionally concentrated domestic supply can cause sharp fluctuations in the prices of foods.

Food prices are a health issue

The growing affordability gap between processed foods and healthy produce is not just an access issue. It has a significant impact on health.

One in three adults in New Zealand was obese in 2020–2021, with childhood obesity also on the rise. The incidence of diabetes increased from 35.7 per 1,000 people in 2012 to 41.5 per 1,000 people in 2021.

What is more, the number of diabetics is expected to increase by 70%–90% over the next 20 years, and the annual cost of diabetes may rise from NZ$2.1 billion to $3.5 billion over the same period.

Of even more concern is that these burdens do not fall evenly across New Zealand’s population.

Poor diets disproportionately affect Indigenous people and those in the lower economic strata. Pacific peoples and Māori have lower average incomes and higher obesity rates than New Zealanders of European descent.

Low-income families have long found it challenging to afford and adhere to healthy diets due to the rising relative prices of fruits and vegetables.

A multi-pronged strategy is needed

The rising relative affordability of sweetened foods poses a significant threat to the health of New Zealanders. Without intervention, the country may face increasing rates of diet-related chronic diseases, straining an already burdened healthcare system.

A comprehensive approach involving economic, educational and regulatory measures is necessary to reverse these trends and promote better nutrition and health for all New Zealanders.

There needs to be a multi-pronged strategy to tackle the complex challenges facing our food system. This needs to include taxes on sugary foods as well as subsidies on fresh produce, a ban on junk food marketing targeted at children, dealing with food insecurity and investment in free school lunches.

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 cost of eating healthy: NZ fruit and veg prices are going up way faster than processed food – https://theconversation.com/the-cost-of-eating-healthy-nz-fruit-and-veg-prices-are-going-up-way-faster-than-processed-food-233971

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

The Albanese government is expected to appoint independent administrators to clean up the CFMEU.

On Tuesday the defiant union was trying to fend off government action to deal with sweeping allegations of widespread misconduct that have been revealed by Nine media.

CFMEU national secretary Zach Smith declared, “External administration and further interference of the government isn’t necessary”.

“The union and the union movement is more than capable of dealing with allegations in our own ranks, in responding appropriately,” Smith told the ABC.

The government is under pressure to act as soon as possible against the union, as is the Labor Party nationally.

The party’s national executive will meet on Thursday to deal with requests from the Victorian and South Australian premiers and the Tasmanian Labor leader to suspend the CFMEU’s affiliations in those states.

The meeting will also discuss suspending the acceptance of political donations from the union. This has already happened in Victoria.

Smith has put the Victorian branch of the union in administration. He said as part of this “I’m in the process of standing up an investigative process” to test allegations.

“Obviously if there is any wrongdoing found, people will be removed from our ranks.” He would bring in “external eminent legal minds to help manage the investigation process, to conduct the investigation, and to make any recommendations necessary”.

But the government has made it clear the union’s internal action is not enough.

Smith also defended the former secretary of the Victorian and Tasmanian branch of the CFMEU, John Setka, who resigned suddenly on Friday, as Nine papers were set to begin publishing stories containing detailed allegations, as well as damning footage of incidents.

The allegations include thuggery, kickbacks, standover tactics, and the parachuting of senior bikie figures into lucrative union delegate roles on major Victorian construction projects.

Smith said Setka had decided to resign because he thought that was in the best interests of the union and its members.

“I think that speaks to his integrity and his credibility,” Smith said.

“One thing that no one will be able to take away from John is his legacy as an industrial leader – the conditions that he’s won for workers here in Victoria and the strength that he’s built in the Victorian-Tasmanian branch.”

Nine reported on Tuesday that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and then Victorian infrastructure minister (now premier) Jacinta Allan were sent “detailed evidence in 2022 that CFMEU officials were threatening extreme violence and unlawfully black-banning non-union-preferred companies from state and federally funded projects”.

A federal government spokesman said the email to Albanese had been sent “to an inactive email address”.

Cabinet Minister Bill Shorten, a former workplace relations minister, made it clear on Monday strong action was imperative. He said in an ABC interview: “The investigations and some of the footage and the stories which we’ve seen in very recent days show that there is a pathology of engagement by some in the construction sector with criminals and bikies. That has to stop. They have no home in the Australian trade union movement.” Shorten’s old union, the AWU, has often been at loggerheads with the CFMEU.

Albanese said on Monday, “Everything is on the table, including whether the union continues to be able to operate, whether administrators will be placed into the union. […] All of that is completely on the table.”

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 expected to appoint administrators to clean up CFMEU, as union remains defiant – https://theconversation.com/government-expected-to-appoint-administrators-to-clean-up-cfmeu-as-union-remains-defiant-234814

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ava Kalinauskas, Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney

After months of gamesmanship and speculation, JD Vance has emerged as Donald Trump’s 2024 running mate and the heir apparent to the America First movement.

With less than two years in Congress under his belt, the first-term senator from Ohio has very little experience in politics, let alone conducting foreign policy.

Yet Vance represents a clear departure from the Ronald Reagan-era foreign policy views that characterised Trump’s previous vice president, Mike Pence. Pence spent much of his time in office making trips to reassure US allies and partners overseas, delivering speeches aimed at providing strategic clarity to Trump’s often unpredictable actions.

As Trump’s vice presidential pick, Vance’s foreign policy views could prove similarly influential if the former president is re-elected in November. So, what could a Vance vice presidency mean for the rest of the world?

An ‘Asia-First’-style isolationist on Ukraine

Vance is one of many so-called “Asia First” Republican politicians who want to limit US attention on Europe and reorient the country’s resources towards countering China’s rise.

In Congress, he has garnered a reputation as one of the most vociferous opponents of continued US aid to Ukraine, saying the US has “provided a blanket of security to Europe for far too long” and calling for European allies to “step up” their own military contributions to Kiev.

Just after Russia’s invasion in February 2022, in fact, Vance bluntly declared

I gotta be honest with you, I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another.

At the same time, Vance maintains he is not advocating for the US to “abandon Europe”. Rather, he wants to place more focus on what he sees as a more pressing threat to US interests – competition with China – because, he said in a speech last year, “that’s where the real enemy is.”

An economic nationalist on China

Vance describes his position on China as a “straightforwardly economically nationalist argument.” He views include increasing support for US manufacturing as a way of directly countering China’s rise, saying “we should be making more of our stuff” even at the cost of a “couple basis points GDP”.

Vance believes increasing tariffs on Chinese imports will create economic opportunities in Rust Belt states like Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Notably, he has even praised President Joe Biden’s 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, aimed at boosting domestic semiconductor chip manufacturing so the US can better compete with China and other countries, as a “great piece of legislation.”

While the US and its allies have maintained normal trade relations with China ever since its accession to the World Trade Organization in 2000, Vance has co-sponsored legislation that would revoke China’s favoured trade status, a move that would be hugely destabilising for the global economy.

A ‘fan of AUKUS’

Though Vance wants to reorient the US towards the Indo-Pacific region to counter China, he has spoken relatively little about US alliances in Asia.

In February this year, he gave a brief nod to Australia when he described himself as a “fan of AUKUS” during remarks at the Munich Security Conference.

In the broader region, Vance has said he wants to “try to promote” US allies with aligned interests, while encouraging “those who are a little bit more on the fence to think about things from our perspective.”

He has based his support for Taiwan in economic terms, saying the self-governing island that China has vowed to retake by force, if necessary, must be protected because of the risk that an invasion could “decimate our entire economy.”

A shape-shifter on climate change

Like a number of his views, Vance’s position on climate change shifted when he ran for the US Senate in 2022.

In 2020, he spoke of the “climate problem” facing the United States, but when seeking Trump’s endorsement for the Senate, described himself as “sceptical” of human responsibility for climate change.

He also sought to repeal US tax credits for electric vehicles.

An heir to the ‘America First’ agenda

In the past, Vance has specifically singled out foreign policy as a key factor in his support for Trump.

In early 2023 – when many Republicans were supporting Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ presidential aspirations – Vance penned an op-ed endorsing Trump’s presidential run and lauding his first term as “the first real disruption to a failed consensus” in US foreign policy.

In the piece, Vance praised Trump’s “successful foreign policy” as the “most important part” of his legacy, saying he “started no wars” and pushed for the United States to “take more responsibility for its own defense.”

Previous vice presidents have scorned the office for its subsidiary role and limited power compared to the presidency. There is every chance that in a second Trump presidency, the position would be no different.

But Biden himself has shown how vice presidents can carve out their own roles as key advisers, particularly when it comes to foreign policy. And with Trump’s backing, Vance could also be well set up for his own run for the presidency in 2028.

Vance’s shape-shifting views make it difficult to forecast exactly what his role as Trump’s deputy could mean for the Indo-Pacific region. But paying close attention to his foreign policy philosophy as it evolves in the coming months may prove crucial to understanding the contours of a second Trump term – or indeed a future Vance administration.

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. ‘I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine’: what a JD Vance vice presidency could mean for the world – https://theconversation.com/i-dont-really-care-what-happens-to-ukraine-what-a-jd-vance-vice-presidency-could-mean-for-the-world-234815

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michalis Hadjikakou, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Sustainability, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, Engineering & Built Environment, Deakin University

You might think eating more sustainably requires drastic changes, such as shifting to a vegan diet. While a plant-based diet is undeniably good for the Earth, our new research shows modest changes to your eating habits can also have significant environmental benefits.

We assessed how food products on Australian supermarket shelves stack up against key environmental indicators, such as carbon emissions and water use.

We found swapping the most environmentally harmful foods for more sustainable options within the same food group, such as switching from beef burgers to chicken burgers, can significantly reduce carbon emissions – by up to 96% in some instances.

The last thing we want to do is take the pleasure away from eating. Instead, we want to help consumers make realistic dietary changes that also help ensure a sustainable future. So read on to find out which simple food swaps can best achieve this.

Informing sustainable diets

The environmental impact of foods can be estimated using an approach known as a life-cycle assessment.

This involves identifying the “inputs” required along the food supply chain, such as fertiliser, energy, water and land, and tracking them from farm to fork. From this we can calculate a product’s “footprint” – or environmental impact per kilogram of product – and compare it to other foods.

Most studies of environmental footprints focus on the raw ingredients that make up food products (such as beef, wheat or rice) rather than the packaged products people see on shelves (such as beef sausages, pasta or rice crackers). Of the studies that do focus on packaged foods, most only consider a fraction of the products available to consumers.

What’s more, a lot of research considers only the carbon emissions of food products, excluding other important measures such as water use. And some studies use global average environmental footprints, which vary significantly between countries.

Our research set out to overcome these limitations. We aligned environmental footprints with the products people find on supermarket shelves, and covered a huge range of food and beverage products available in Australia. We also included many environmental indicators, to allow a more complete picture of the sustainability of different foods.

What we did

Key to our research was the FoodSwitch database, which compiles food labelling and ingredient data from images of packaged food and beverages. It covers more than 90% of the Australian packaged food market.

We combined the database with a mathematical method that sums the environmental impact of ingredients, to quantify the footprint of the product as a whole.

From this, we estimated the environmental footprint of 63,926 food products available in Australian supermarkets. We then simulated the potential benefits of making “realistic” switches between products – that is, switches within the same food category.

Read more:
We gave 60,000 food products a ‘planetary health’ star rating – see how your favourites stack up

Our findings

The results show how making a small dietary change can have big environmental consequences.

For a shopping basket composed of items from eight food groups, we simulate the benefits of swapping from high-impact towards medium- or low-impact food products.

Our analysis assumes a starting point from the most environmentally harmful products in each food group – for example, sweet biscuits, cheese and beef burger patties.

A shift to the medium-impact foods for all eight items – such as a muffin, yoghurt and sliced meat – can lead to at least a 62% reduction in environmental impact. Shifts towards the most sustainable choice for all items – bread, soy milk or raw poultry – can achieve a minimum 77% reduction.

This analysis ends at the supermarket shelves and does not include additional food processing by the consumer. For example, raw meat will usually be cooked before human consumption, which will expand its environmental footprint to varying degrees, depending on the method used.

See the below info-graphic for more detail. The full results are available in our study.

What next?

Many people are looking for ways to live more sustainably. Insufficient or complex information can fuel confusion and anxiety in consumers, leading to inaction or paralysis. Consumers need more information and support to choose more sustainable foods.

Supermarkets and retailers also have an important role to play – for example, by giving sustainable products prominent shelf placement. Attractive pricing is also crucial – particularly in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis when it can be difficult to prioritise sustainability over cost.

Government interventions, such as information campaigns and taxing high-impact products, can also help.

Food labelling is also important. The European Union is leading the way with measures such as the eco-score, which integrates 14 environmental indicators into a single score from A to E.

Apps such as ecoSwitch can also empower consumers.

The diets of people in developed nations such as Australia exert a high toll on our planet. More sustainable food choices are vital to achieving a sustainable future for humanity. We hope our research helps kick-start positive change.

Michalis Hadjikakou receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) as part of his role as co-investigator on the “Healthy Food, Healthy Planet, Healthy People” Centre of Research Excellence (NHMRC: 2006620).

Özge Geyik previously received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) as part of her role as postdoctoral researcher on the “Healthy Food, Healthy Planet, Healthy People” Centre of Research Excellence (NHMRC: 2006620). She currently works as a Sustainability Scientist at Unilever Safety & Environmental Assurance Centre.

Carla Archibald and Pankti Shah 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. How sustainable is your weekly grocery shop? These small changes can have big benefits – https://theconversation.com/how-sustainable-is-your-weekly-grocery-shop-these-small-changes-can-have-big-benefits-234367

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine M. FitzGerald, PhD Candidate, Queensland University of Technology

As the sound of gunshots interrupted Donald Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, the former US president clutched his right ear before squatting to the ground.

Members of the Secret Service quickly surrounded Trump, who fiercely pumped his fist towards the crowd. It was during this moment an instantly iconic photo was taken as Trump stood, fist raised, in front of the US flag – blood running from his ear to his cheek.

Almost immediately, conspiracy theorists from all parts of the political spectrum began to speculate over the attempted assassination.

I’m a researcher who studies how conspiracy theories are formed online, with a particular focus on those that impact democratic proceedings. Following this incident, my investigation across several platforms reveals how various conspiracy theories have rapidly emerged – and what they might mean for democratic proceedings in the future.

Conspiracy theorists ask: who is responsible?

Just hours after the incident, the FBI released the shooter’s identity: 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. Crooks fired multiple shots from a nearby rooftop outside the rally venue, killing one attendee and critically injuring two others. He himself was also killed at the event. A motive has not yet been determined.

Despite the shooter’s identity being released, one major conspiracy adopted by both the political left and right is that the assassination attempt was staged and/or planned. But who is supposed to have staged it? This is up for debate depending on which online circles you frequent.

Left-wing conspiracy theories seem to point the finger at the Republican party. Their supposed “evidence” is that there was no blood on Trump’s face until he raised his hand to his cheek (although this is difficult to confirm based on videos posted online). Nonetheless, they claim Trump used a squib to release fake blood.

Other “evidence” is that the Secret Service allowed Trump to stand and pose as he was escorted offstage. According to these theories, if there was an active shooter Trump would have been taken away with much more urgency.

Right-leaning supporters of the “staged” theory point to either President Joe Biden, the US Department of Justice, or other powerful actors as being either explicitly or implicitly responsible.

Their “evidence” also involves the Secret Service. Many have said the shooter should have been clearly visible and interrupted by the Secret Service before the attack. Some conspiracy theorists go as far as to say the shooter knew which roof he could conduct the shooting from without being interrupted.

They either point to the Secret Service as being remiss in the security planning of the rally, or actively complicit in the shooting.

A political opportunity

In 2022, a study based in the United States found belief in conspiracy theories can be strongly associated with certain psychological traits and non-political worldviews.

Specifically, the researchers found conspiratorial thinking isn’t consistently associated with a particular political party, but with how extreme a person’s beliefs are. This is seen both for extreme-left and particularly for extreme right-wing political beliefs.

It’s also reflected in what is emerging online following the Trump assassination attempt, wherein social media users of various political leanings are helping spread the conspiracy that the incident was staged.

The reasons for conspiratorial beliefs can be psychological, social or political. They may range from seeking a sense of identity and community, to distrust in the government and other institutions.

For political figures and other influential actors, conspiracy theories are weaponised for personal gain.

With Senator J.D. Vance having been chosen as Trump’s running mate, we can expect to see more fuel added to the flames. Vance is one of the most prominent politicians claiming the Biden administration is responsible (whether directly or indirectly) for the assassination attempt.

This sentiment has been echoed by several others, including Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Congressman Mike Collins.

Meanwhile, X (formerly Twitter) chief Elon Musk has reposted multiple messages from an alt-right political activist asking how the shooter was able to crawl onto the closest roof to a presidential nominee, suggesting the Secret Service was intentionally remiss. One of these posts has garnered some 91 million views so far.

While X has served as a hotbed for conspiracy theories following the event, the comment sections of other platforms and news articles have also become places of debate. Anywhere users can deliberate and share their views, conspiratorial thinking can propagate.

The politicians amplifying the conspiracy theories are contributing to increased tension in the lead-up to a highly contentious election. This includes Vance, who may well end up in the US presidential line of succession if Trump wins the election in November.

What are the consequences?

Beyond highlighting the deeply partisan nature of US politics, what might these conspiracy theories mean in the long run?

Previous findings indicate presenting explicit conspiracy theories to people results in lowered trust in elections. As voters from both sides of the political spectrum are exposed to conspiratorial thinking (and increasingly adversarial discussions) around the assassination attempt, it may become difficult for people to trust the democratic proceedings accompanying the 2024 election.

A poll conducted earlier this year found 25% of Americans believe it was possible the January 6 Capitol attack was organised by the FBI. This is despite an extensive investigation by the US Congress and hundreds of legal cases involving participants in the riot.

Research also suggests distrust in the government and institutions can lead to people changing the way they interact with the political system. Some may be pushed to vote for governmental change or independent candidates in a bipartisan system, while others may withdraw from engaging with democracy altogether.

One might hope the recent escalation in political violence will lead to a more tempered approach to politics in the upcoming months. But if the current state of things is any guide, the outlook for democracy is concerning.

Katherine M. FitzGerald 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. Conspiracy theories on the Trump assassination attempt are spreading like wildfire – on both sides of politics – https://theconversation.com/conspiracy-theories-on-the-trump-assassination-attempt-are-spreading-like-wildfire-on-both-sides-of-politics-234688

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ava Kalinauskas, Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney

After months of gamesmanship and speculation, JD Vance has emerged as Donald Trump’s 2024 running mate and the heir apparent to the America First movement.

With less than two years in Congress under his belt, the first-term senator from Ohio has very little experience in politics, let alone conducting foreign policy.

Yet Vance represents a clear departure from the Ronald Reagan-era foreign policy views that characterised Trump’s previous vice president, Mike Pence. Pence spent much of his time in office making trips to reassure US allies and partners overseas, delivering speeches aimed at providing strategic clarity to Trump’s often unpredictable actions.

As Trump’s vice presidential pick, Vance’s foreign policy views could prove similarly influential if the former president is re-elected in November. So, what could a Vance vice presidency mean for the rest of the world?

An ‘Asia-First’-style isolationist on Ukraine

Vance is one of many so-called “Asia First” Republican politicians who want to limit US attention on Europe and reorient the country’s resources towards countering China’s rise.

In Congress, he has garnered a reputation as one of the most vociferous opponents of continued US aid to Ukraine, saying the US has “provided a blanket of security to Europe for far too long” and calling for European allies to “step up” their own military contributions to Kiev.

Just after Russia’s invasion in February 2022, in fact, Vance bluntly declared

I gotta be honest with you, I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another.

At the same time, Vance maintains he is not advocating for the US to “abandon Europe”. Rather, he wants to place more focus on what he sees as a more pressing threat to US interests – competition with China – because, he said in a speech last year, “that’s where the real enemy is.”

An economic nationalist on China

Vance describes his position on China as a “straightforwardly economically nationalist argument.” He views include increasing support for US manufacturing as a way of directly countering China’s rise, saying “we should be making more of our stuff” even at the cost of a “couple basis points GDP”.

Vance believes increasing tariffs on Chinese imports will create economic opportunities in Rust Belt states like Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Notably, he has even praised President Joe Biden’s 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, aimed at boosting domestic semiconductor chip manufacturing so the US can better compete with China and other countries, as a “great piece of legislation.”

While the US and its allies have maintained normal trade relations with China ever since its accession to the World Trade Organization in 2000, Vance has co-sponsored legislation that would revoke China’s favoured trade status, a move that would be hugely destabilising for the global economy.

A ‘fan of AUKUS’

Though Vance wants to reorient the US towards the Indo-Pacific region to counter China, he has spoken relatively little about US alliances in Asia.

In February this year, he gave a brief nod to Australia when he described himself as a “fan of AUKUS” during remarks at the Munich Security Conference.

In the broader region, Vance has said he wants to “try to promote” US allies with aligned interests, while encouraging “those who are a little bit more on the fence to think about things from our perspective.”

He has based his support for Taiwan in economic terms, saying the self-governing island that China has vowed to retake by force, if necessary, must be protected because of the risk that an invasion could “decimate our entire economy.”

A shape-shifter on climate change

Like a number of his views, Vance’s position on climate change shifted when he ran for the US Senate in 2022.

In 2020, he spoke of the “climate problem” facing the United States, but when seeking Trump’s endorsement for the Senate, described himself as “sceptical” of human responsibility for climate change.

He also sought to repeal US tax credits for electric vehicles.

An heir to the ‘America First’ agenda

In the past, Vance has specifically singled out foreign policy as a key factor in his support for Trump.

In early 2023 – when many Republicans were supporting Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ presidential aspirations – Vance penned an op-ed endorsing Trump’s presidential run and lauding his first term as “the first real disruption to a failed consensus” in US foreign policy.

In the piece, Vance praised Trump’s “successful foreign policy” as the “most important part” of his legacy, saying he “started no wars” and pushed for the United States to “take more responsibility for its own defense.”

Previous vice presidents have scorned the office for its subsidiary role and limited power compared to the presidency. There is every chance that in a second Trump presidency, the position would be no different.

But Biden himself has shown how vice presidents can carve out their own roles as key advisers, particularly when it comes to foreign policy. And with Trump’s backing, Vance could also be well set up for his own run for the presidency in 2028.

Vance’s shape-shifting views make it difficult to forecast exactly what his role as Trump’s deputy could mean for the Indo-Pacific region. But paying close attention to his foreign policy philosophy as it evolves in the coming months may prove crucial to understanding the contours of a second Trump term – or indeed a future Vance administration.

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. More focus on China, less help for Ukraine: what a JD Vance vice presidency (and future presidency) could mean for the world – https://theconversation.com/more-focus-on-china-less-help-for-ukraine-what-a-jd-vance-vice-presidency-and-future-presidency-could-mean-for-the-world-234815

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Smith, Associate Professor in American Politics and Foreign Policy, US Studies Centre, University of Sydney

The shooting of former president Donald Trump and three attendees at his rally was just one of nearly 300 mass shootings in the US so far this year.

Amid all the shocking news from that day, there was one depressingly familiar detail. The shooter used an AR-15 style rifle, the kind of semiautomatic weapon that has featured in dozens of mass shootings since the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre of 2012.

Despite the devastation it has brought, the AR-15 has a fierce grip on American politics. The NRA has called the AR-15 “America’s Rifle”, and in 2023 five Congressional Republicans proposed a bill to declare it America’s “National Gun”.

The AR-15 enjoys a cult status on the American Right, a defiant response to persistent efforts to ban it.

Since a Clinton-era assault weapons ban expired in 2004, the United States has never come close to reinstating federal curbs on semiautomatic rifles. Will this change now that an AR-15 almost claimed the life of Donald Trump, the former Republican president and current presidential nominee? It’s unlikely. But past shootings of American presidents have given rise to some of the most significant gun control reforms in the country’s history.

Assassinations and gun control in the 1960s

The murder of President John F. Kennedy in November 1963 began a painful discussion about the need to curtail the flow of cheap firearms in the United States. Lee Harvey Oswald had used a surplus Italian military rifle, purchased from an ad in a magazine, to shoot the president.

Within days of Kennedy’s death, Connecticut Senator Thomas Dodd was proposing legislation to ban mail order sales of rifles. His initial proposals never made it out of Senate committees, and faced opposition from the NRA.

But President Lyndon Johnson continued to press Congress on the issue, which eventually resulted in the Gun Control Act of 1968. This introduced minimum ages for gun purchases, restricted interstate sales, and prohibited sales to felons, drug addicts and “mentally incompetent” persons.

Tragically, it took two more shooting assassinations to get the legislation passed. The murder of Martin Luther King Jr in April 1968, followed by Robert F. Kennedy as he campaigned for the presidency in June, provided the final push for congressional votes in favour of the legislation.

By this point, the Gun Control Act even had the partial support of NRA Executive Vice President Franklin Orth. He testified before a Congressional Committee in favour of banning mail order sales, saying:

We do not think any sane American, who calls himself an American, can object to placing in this bill the instrument that killed the president.

The attempt on Reagan and the Brady act

The attempted killing of Ronald Reagan in 1981 is remembered today for the political boost it gave Reagan and the bizarre motive of his would-be killer. But it also led to the most enduring gun control reforms of the last 40 years.

Reagan’s press secretary James Brady was shot in the head and paralysed during the attack on Reagan. His wife Sarah Brady became a leading campaigner for gun control, and her organisation threw its weight behind the Brady Bill when it was first introduced to Congress in 1987.

This bill amended the 1968 Gun Control Act to mandate background checks and waiting periods for firearm purchases, both of which could have prevented the Reagan shooting. It failed in 1988 and again in 1991 despite Reagan’s support for it. This was largely due to the NRA, which had now radicalised into an absolutist opponent of gun control with considerable influence in Congress.

The Brady Act finally succeeded with the support of the Clinton Administration in 1993. It has since been credited with reductions in suicide rates of older Americans and overall gun deaths. Reagan, along with former presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford (who survived two assassination attempts himself), also publicly supported Clinton’s Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, which had almost unanimous support in the Senate but expired ten years later.

Why renewed gun control is unlikely in wake of Trump shooting

Since the George W. Bush administration, Republicans have stood firm against almost any form of national gun control. The NRA has lost much of the power it once had, especially over Democrats, but gun rights have become one of the signature battles of America’s culture wars.

It is an important but unpopular issue for Republicans, who have opposed even modest gun control measures that large majorities of Americans support. Trump, mindful of anything that could harm his chances of getting elected, has removed almost any mention of guns or the Second Amendment from this year’s Republican platform.

If anyone could actually weaken the Republican orthodoxy on guns, it would be Trump at this moment, given his colossal standing in the party. But if his previous presidency and current promises are anything to go by, there is little chance of him ever supporting Joe Biden’s call for a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

Previous shootings of presidents have forced Americans to reconsider the role of guns in national life. But for Trump’s supporters, his survival may fit a pro-gun narrative.

The mantra that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” is not a call to end gun violence. It’s a call to embrace gun violence as natural, and to be on the winning side of it.

Americans have thankfully been spared the truly horrific images that would have ensued if a bullet had killed Trump. Instead, Trump has created an iconic picture of survival and triumph, while his attacker was killed in seconds by the Secret Service. As traumatic as this event was for some of those who attended it, it has rapidly become a celebrated victory for many of Trump’s supporters.

For years, parts of the American Right have been describing politics in terms of war. The attempted killing of Trump will have confirmed for many of them that their enemies are truly dangerous, but they are destined to win. Senator Marco Rubio tweeted within minutes of the assassination attempt that “God protected President Trump”.

Who needs gun control when you’ve got that?

David Smith 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. Past shootings of US presidents led to new gun controls. This one probably won’t – https://theconversation.com/past-shootings-of-us-presidents-led-to-new-gun-controls-this-one-probably-wont-234657

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Blunden, Professor and Head of Paediatric Sleep Research, CQUniversity Australia

Dealing with time zone changes and jet lag can eat into the time we have to enjoy our holiday, or make adjusting to life at home all the more difficult. It can be even harder for children – and when children don’t sleep well, parents don’t either.

Around one in four children already have trouble getting to sleep, or getting back to sleep when they wake in the night. This can worsen when travelling internationally.

In a bid to help children’s general sleep problems, some parents have resorted to giving their children lollies, or gummies, containing melatonin. Some parents have also turned to melatonin to help their child sleep in the new time zone or when they return home.

Melatonin is a naturally occurring hormone secreted in our brains. Its main purpose is to maintain our sleep and wake cycles by making us sleepy at night time. But does it work to combat kids’ jet lag? And is it safe?

Adults have used melatonin for a long time

Melatonin is produced by the pineal gland in the brain in response to darkness.

Melatonin sets off a series of physiological processes which help promote sleepiness and the onset of sleep at the end of the day. So it can be really effective at helping adults get to sleep.

The use of melatonin in adults as a sleep aid has more than tripled in the last few years. And adults have long used melatonin to treat jet lag.

Who can access it in Australia?

In Australia, melatonin is categorised as a pharmaceutical product. This means it can only be accessed via prescription and overseen by a medical professional.

Australia’s regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration, advises it can only be prescribed for children with autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or Smith-Magenis syndrome (a genetic developmental disorder that affects many parts of the body). This is because there is evidence that melatonin can improve insomnia symptoms (difficulties getting to sleep or staying asleep) in children with these conditions.

Melatonin is not recommended for use in children without these diagnoses.

We don’t know if it’s safe or effective for other kids or babies

The latest expert advice from the International Paediatric Sleep Association melatonin task force, of which I am a member, recommends melatonin supplements should not be used for children aged under two years and should be restricted to children with the above diagnoses, until further data is available.

This is because we don’t know the effect melatonin has on typically developing children and there is no data for babies and toddlers. The data we have is only in neurodivergent children.

Scientifically, we cannot extrapolate the evidence from children with neurodevelopmental disorders to the broader child population because of the physiological and psychological differences in these two populations.

We have no data to help us understand whether taking melatonin to facilitate sleep in time zone changes is safe or effective.

So how are parents getting it?

Some parents access melatonin online, from overseas markets such as the United States.

In the US, melatonin isn’t categorised as a pharmaceutical product but as a dietary supplement. The US Food and Drug Administration does not regulate dietary supplements in the same way as pharmaceutical products.

As a result, melatonin is readily available over the counter in the US and online without prescription and without the need for medical oversight for people of any age.

You don’t know what you’re getting

Drug regulation agencies don’t rigorously monitor the contents of online products for safety or efficacy, so we cannot be sure whether melatonin gummies sourced overseas are safe or effective.

The contents also vary widely, as shown in studies analysing the contents of commercially available melatonin supplement brands. Melatonin levels ranged from very minimal content to more than four times the amount stated on the label.

Some products even contained serotonin. Serotonin is a neurotransmitter which has a complex relationship with melatonin. It has been implicated in the presentation of aggression and hyperactivity, and is often used in medications for depression and anxiety under strict medical supervision. Unknown consumption of serotonin would be a cause for concern.

Bottom line

While melatonin seems to be an effective drug in adults and children with neurodevelopmental disorders, evidence for the use of melatonin in typically developing children is extremely limited to non-existent.

We don’t know if it’s safe and effective in typically developing babies, toddlers or children – and using online products makes it even more precarious.

Until we have the evidence, it’s safest to rely on behavioural sleep recommendations. This includes making sure a child’s sleep and wake times are consistent and paying attention to light exposure. Avoiding excess screen exposure in the evening or at bedtime, and increasing exposure to light in the mornings, will maximise melatonin secretion at the correct times of the day night cycle.

Making sure young children get exposure to natural light in their holiday destination is a good way for children to adapt to new time zones.

Sarah Blunden 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. My children are jet-lagged. Can I give them melatonin to help them sleep? – https://theconversation.com/my-children-are-jet-lagged-can-i-give-them-melatonin-to-help-them-sleep-232812

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Jensen, Associate professor, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, University of Canberra

In the immediate aftermath of an assassination attempt against Donald Trump during a campaign rally, conspiracies have filled the vacuum left by a lack of information.

At this point, there is little understanding of the shooter’s motives and it would be irresponsible to rush to judgement. There is evidence the shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, had given $15 when he was 17 to group that raises funds for Democratic party causes. When he turned 18 he registered as a Republican.

Reports from classmates said he had outspoken conservative views. According to the FBI, there was no evidence of violent rhetoric on his social media accounts, and they are still trying to work out the shooter’s motive.

This absence of evidence hasn’t stopped partisan figures making irresponsible claims that the shooter was radicalised by President Joe Biden, the Democrats, and the news media. Senator J.D. Vance, a Republican from Ohio, since named Trump’s vice presidential candidate, posted on X:

Also on X, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia, framed the death of a rally attendee as someone “murdered at the hands of Democrat [sic] political violence.” Representative Steve Scalise, a Republican from Louisiana, issued a statement claiming this is another example of “far left lunatics” acting on “violent rhetoric”.

Scholars like Jonathan Turley argue, “We are living through an age of rage. It is not our first, but it may be the most dangerous such period in our history.”

He asserts the Trump assassination attempt was an unsurprising outcome of the political rhetoric today, and says both Democrats and Republicans are culpable. That is a strong claim given the shooter’s motive remains a mystery. But it is worthwhile examining the factors that give rise to political violence and the role of political rhetoric in legitimising violent extremism.

Toxic language is normalised

The foundation of the social contract tradition in Western democracies is that we renounce the right to resolve differences through violent means.

In a democracy, we accept vigorous debate and the exchange of different ideas. That debate occurs between groups with different interests. Historically, political parties emerge through organisation as a means of representing those interests.

Different groups can compromise on their interests. They may get part of what they want, and “win” sometimes while “losing” at other times. But it is much harder to compromise on fundamental elements of one’s identity without losing part of oneself. This sets the stage for a different kind of political competition that is unyielding to compromise – and where violence can become legitimised.

If Turley is right that both Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for creating a situation where compromise is impossible and violence is seen as permissible, then we should expect each campaign to cast issues as uncompromising matters of identity with equally hostile legitmisations of violence.

We can analyse these claims looking at what the campaigns themselves say. Looking at the Meta Advertising library’s archive of Trump and Biden campaign ads since May 1 2024, we can assess the levels of toxicity and appeals to identity in the posts they create and pay to promote. There were 242 sentences in 1,339 Trump ads that mentioned Biden directly. Biden mentioned Trump 2,604 sentences contained in 5,722 ads his campaign ran. Levels of toxicity and hostile identity were calculated using the Perspective API, a machine learning algorithm developed by Google’s Jigsaw Project to detect levels toxic, threatening, and harmful content in online comments. Trump’s ads include slightly higher levels of identity attacks in sentences mentioning Biden, and these sentences are more than three times as toxic.

Biden’s most toxic line about Trump is, “Donald Trump is a convicted criminal who is only out for himself”, which scores a 0.57 on the toxicity scale.

One may quibble about whether Trump is technically only guilty on 34 felony counts until the judge formally enters the conviction at sentencing.

However, the political import remains that Trump was found guilty by a jury of his peers of felonies related to filing fraudulent business records to conceal illegal campaign donations when he was first elected.

Scoring as nearly as toxic is this sentence from Biden:

Donald Trump has a long history of racism and pandering to white supremacists.

This is directly an attack on Trump himself rather than an out-group, although, indirectly, there is an attack on white supremacists. But even people who might be categorised as “white supremacists” normally do not identify as such, and there is no call for violence.

Trump’s most toxic line about Biden is

Joe Biden’s mind is gone, and his Communist Deep State goons are driving America off a cliff.

This statement is literally incoherent.“Communism”, spelled with a capital C, refers to an era of historical evolution in the work of Marx and Engels where the state “withers away” without any system of organised repression over the people. Communism, however unrealistic it may be, precludes the possibility of “Deep State goons” with hidden machinations.

Biden would have also made a “Deep State” driven by a political agenda more difficult to create given he rescinded Trump’s Schedule F reclassification of large parts of the public service from merit-based to political appointee roles at the start of his term.

But here there is a collective identity invoked about an unstated image of America supposedly driven off a cliff.

Political language needs to cool down, immediately

Ambiguous language with little tether to reality is a common tactic of propagandists as its layers of contradiction confound clear refutations. This phrasing implies a threat to an in-group – an element of Trump’s messaging that has figured since the 2016 campaign.

Although there is no direct appeal to violence in these ads, he has made comments that place violence on the table, claiming that there will be a “bloodbath” if he loses the election.

And the head of the Conservative Heritage Foundation, which developed Project 2025 in collaboration with Trump campaign staffers, stated their agenda will be to usher in a “second American Revolution”, which will “remain bloodless if the left allows it to be”.

This does not appear to be a case where both sides are equally responsible for the raising the prospects of political violence. Trump and his supporters couch the election as a referendum on an uncompromisible cultural battle where violence may be required.

Biden’s rhetoric does not turn on an in-group/out-group differentiation and neither he nor his surrogates speak of violence as a legitimate means to achieve a political result. If something good comes of this tragedy which has claimed the life of one person, we can hope it involves all sides taking renewed responsibility for their rhetoric.

Michael Jensen receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, and the Australian Department of Defence.

– ref. Trump shooting is a warning about how toxic language leads to violence – https://theconversation.com/trump-shooting-is-a-warning-about-how-toxic-language-leads-to-violence-234637

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott Goddard, Postdoctoral research fellow, Southern Cross University

The 2024 Paris Olympics are fast approaching and we can imagine the elite athletes maintaining a strict and gruelling training regimen in order to give themselves every chance of standing on the podium with a gold medal.

Unrelenting discipline and structure. Blood, sweat, and tears. That’s what it takes to excel, right?

But what if that’s not the only way?

Thinking outside the box

Earlier this year, world champion Australian swimmer Cameron McEvoy spoke about the benefits of a new training schedule, which included a reduced training load:

I can do the Olympics, worlds, then have 12 months exploring other stuff and come back. And I’ve got tonnes of side quests I want to do […] train for 100m track sprinting and see how low I can go, the world street lifting competition.

McEvoy also suggested that exploring other interests has “extended the longevity of this career” and alleviated the “bad relationship” he has had with the sport – all while improving his performance.

McEvoy is not the only athlete sharing experiences of exploration. A 2021 study that interviewed runners soon after an exceptional performance found exploration played a key role in their highly positive experiences.

One interviewee stated:

By going somewhere different to run, [the route] was something different to look at; it was different when you turn the corner, and you go up a different path. I was less [thinking about] running and more about exploring.

And it’s not just elite athletes who are interested in exploration. Complementing their high-performance sports strategy – “win well” – the Australian Sports Commission recently published an inaugural national sport participation strategy – “play well”.

“Play well” is designed to ensure everyone has a place in sport, with a core focus being “to break down barriers and empower individuals to explore, create and connect through sport”.

So, what does it actually mean to explore in sport? And why might exploration be beneficial for all of us?

What is exploration?

Exploration is defined as “the activity of searching and finding out about something”.

Or, as astrophysist Neil deGrasse Tyson says:

exploration is what you do when you don’t know what you’re doing […] if a scientist already knew what they were doing, they wouldn’t be discovering anything.

At first glance, we might assume exploration is only for those who are embarking on epic journeys to unknown parts of the world or climbing mountains for the first time. In fact, it’s something we can all do on a daily basis.

For example, when we go to a new city and walk down the street to see what shops and cafes they’ve got, that’s exploring. And it’s good for us.

What are the benefits of exploration?

Psychologists believe we’re born with an innate desire to explore the world around us. And opportunities to do so lead to positive outcomes in sport.

For instance, similar to McEvoy’s exploration of other interests, researchers have noted the importance of participating in a variety of different sports rather than focusing on just one sport.

While this recommendation is typically directed toward young athletes, this flexible approach to sport was adopted by Norway – known as “joy of sport for all” – and has been credited with a huge increase in winter Olympic medals.

Researchers also suggest children should engage in less structured versions of sports, which can promote flexibility. As well, sports with informal rules – think backyard cricket – can maximise enjoyment and can lead to long-term participation.

Much of our own research indicates that exploratory experiences are at the heart of our most positive and memorable experiences in sport.

We’ve previously reported that exploration appears to be fundamental to the experience of “flow state”, where you become completely absorbed in what you are doing and you perform the task effortlessly.

Indeed, the founder of flow, Hungarian-American psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, said the types of activities that promote flow “give participants a sense of discovery and exploration – in other words, a feeling of novelty and challenge”.

Lessons from athletes on how to explore

Exploration is certainly not limited to elite athletes but there are useful lessons we can take from them about how to incorporate exploration into our own sport participation.

Like McEvoy, you might consider varying your training routine or trying a new sport. Or like the Norwegians, you might play a modified version of your sport with fewer rules, less emphasis on competition and more focus on fun.

It could be as simple as taking a different route on a run or setting an open-ended goal (like “how far I can run in 25 minutes”?), which can help facilitate exploration and reduce pressure. Or if you’re playing football, you might try out a new position or tactic.

Sometimes, it’s okay to not have a plan. Without a specific plan (like which restaurant to eat in), we need to go exploring to find out the best option (like stumbling across a place you’ve never heard of that has a great menu).

So, as we anticipate the upcoming Olympics and marvel at the athletes’ achievements, let’s remember their success might not only be the result of relentless discipline but also the joy and benefits of exploration.

Whether we are elite athletes or weekend warriors, heading out with the intention to “search and find out about something” can enhance our engagement, performance, and enjoyment in sport.

Scott Goddard is currently employed as a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Southern Cross University, funded by Movember. He has previously received funding from the Australian Institute of Sport.

Christian Swann currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Movember, QBE, and LeapForward, and has previously received funding from the Australian Institute of Sport. He is affiliated with the Manna Institute, which is funded by the Australian Government Department of Education through the Regional Research Collaboration Program.

Stewart Vella has received funding from the Australian Research Council, Medical Research Future Fund, Movember, and the Australian Institute of Sport.

– ref. Olympic swimmers improving by … running? How exploration can help elite athletes and weekend warriors alike – https://theconversation.com/olympic-swimmers-improving-by-running-how-exploration-can-help-elite-athletes-and-weekend-warriors-alike-231278

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin A. Jancovich, PhD Candidate in Behavioural Ecology and Bioacoustics, Casual Academic, UNSW Sydney

Over the past few decades, animal sounds have seen a huge surge in research. Advances in recording equipment and analysis techniques have driven new insights into animal behaviour, population distribution, taxonomy and anatomy.

In a new study published in Ecology and Evolution, we show the limitations of one of the most common methods used to analyse animal sounds. These limitations may have caused disagreements about a whale song in the Indian Ocean, and about animal calls on land, too.

We demonstrate a new method that can overcome this problem. It reveals previously hidden details of animal calls, providing a basis for future advances in animal sound research.

The importance of whale song

More than a quarter of whale species are listed as vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered. Understanding whale behaviour, population distribution and the impact of human-made noise is key to successful conservation efforts.

For creatures that spend nearly all their time hidden in the vast open ocean, these are difficult things to study, but analysis of whale songs can give us vital clues.

However, we can’t just analyse whale songs by listening to them – we need ways to measure them in more detail than the human ear can provide.

For this reason, often a first step in studying an animal sound is to generate a visualisation called a spectrogram. It can give us a better idea of a sound’s character. Specifically, it shows when the energy in the sound occurs (temporal details), and at what frequency (spectral details).

We can learn about the sound’s structure in terms of time, frequency and intensity by carefully inspecting these spectrograms and measuring them with other algorithms, allowing for a deeper analysis. They are also key tools in communicating findings when we publish our work.

Why spectrograms have limitations

The most common method for generating spectrograms is known as the STFT. It’s used in many fields, including mechanical engineering, biomedical engineering and experimental physics.

However, it’s acknowledged to have a fundamental limitation – it can’t accurately visualise all the sound’s temporal and spectral details at the same time. This means every STFT spectrogram sacrifices either some temporal or spectral information.

This problem is more pronounced at lower frequencies. So it’s especially problematic when analysing sounds made by animals like the pygmy blue whale, whose song is so low, it approaches the lower limit of human hearing.

Before my PhD, I worked in acoustics and audio signal processing, where I became all too familiar with the STFT spectrogram and its shortcomings.

But there are different methods for generating spectrograms. It occurred to me the STFTs used in whale song studies might be hiding some details, and there could be other methods more suited to the task.

In our study, my co-author Tracey Rogers and I compared the STFT to newer visualisation methods. We used made-up (synthetic) test signals, as well as recordings of pygmy blue whales, Asian elephants and other animals, such as cassowaries and American crocodiles.

The methods we tested included a new algorithm called the Superlet transform, which we adapted from its original use in brain wave analysis. We found this method produced visualisations of our synthetic test signal with up to 28% fewer errors than the others we tested.

A better way to visualise animal sounds

This result was promising, but the Superlet revealed its full potential when we applied it to animal sounds.

Recently, there’s been some disagreement around the Chagos pygmy blue whale song: whether its first sound is “pulsed” or “tonal”. These two terms refer to having extra frequencies in the sound, but produced in two distinct ways.

STFT spectrograms can’t resolve this debate, because they can show this sound as either pulsed or tonal, depending on how they’re configured. Our Superlet visualisation shows the sound as pulsed and agrees with most studies that describe this song.

When visualising Asian elephant rumbles, the Superlet showed pulsing that was mentioned in the original description of this sound, but has been absent from all later descriptions. It’s also never been shown in a spectrogram.

Our Superlet visualisations of the southern cassowary call and the American crocodile roar both showed previously unreported temporal details that were not shown by the spectrograms in previous studies.

These are only preliminary findings, each based on a single recording. To confirm these observations, more sounds will need to be analysed. Even so, this is fertile ground for future work.

Ease of use may be Superlet’s greatest strength, even beyond improved accuracy. Many researchers using sound to study animals have backgrounds in ecology, biology and veterinary science. They learn audio signal analysis only as a means to an end.

To improve accessibility of the Superlet transform to these researchers, we implemented it in a free, easy to use, open-source software app. We look forward to seeing what new discoveries they might make using this exciting new method.

Benjamin A. Jancovich’s work is funded by the Australian government’s Research Training Program.

– ref. Our new tech helps find hidden details in whale, cassowary and other barely audible animal calls – https://theconversation.com/our-new-tech-helps-find-hidden-details-in-whale-cassowary-and-other-barely-audible-animal-calls-234565

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

A national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers, conducted July 10–13 from a sample of 1,603, had Labor and the Coalition tied at 50–50 by 2022 election preference flows, a one-point gain for the Coalition since June by my calculations.

Resolve does not usually give a two-party estimate, but this is the first time Labor would not have led during this term by 2022 preference flows. Until this year, Resolve was easily the most pro-Labor pollster.

Primary votes were 38% Coalition (up two), 28% Labor (steady), 13% Greens (down one), 6% One Nation (steady), 1% UAP (steady), 11% independents (steady) and 2% others (down two).

Just 33% gave Anthony Albanese a good rating, while 54% rated him poorly, for a net approval of -21, down seven points since June. Albanese’s net approval has slumped 19 points since April. Peter Dutton’s net approval was down two points since June to net zero.

After surging to his first preferred PM lead in any poll in June by 36–35, Dutton held a 35–34 lead.

The Coalition continued to hold a seven-point lead over Labor on keeping the cost of living low, and a 16-point lead on economic management. Asked what was the most important issue, 53% said cost of living, with issues not related to cost of living in the single figures.

Two weeks ago, Labor gained in Newspoll, probably owing to Dutton’s nuclear policy. Since then, this announcement appears to have faded in importance to voters, although it’s likely to be revived at an election campaign.

Cost of living is by far the most important issue to voters. Until and unless cost of living pressures are meaningfully reduced, Labor will struggle.

Fatima Payman and Glenn Druery

In the wake of Western Australian Senator Fatima Payman’s defection from Labor, there was much media attention on Payman’s association with Glenn Druery, the “preference whisperer”.

Group ticket voting, which allowed parties to direct the preferences of all those who voted for them above the line in the Senate, was abolished before the 2016 federal election. This system had given Druery his reputation, as parties with very low levels of support could coalesce to elect someone, often on a minuscule vote share.

With the abolishment of group ticket voting, voters now direct their own preferences, and these preferences don’t help parties with minuscule vote shares. Druery no longer has any power federally. However, Victoria unfortunately still uses group ticket voting for its state upper house elections.

Morgan poll: 50.5–49.5 to Coalition

A national Morgan poll, conducted June 24–30 from a sample of 1,706, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, unchanged from the June 17–23 poll. In the July 1–7 Morgan poll with a sample of 1,723, the Coalition seized a 52–48 lead.

In the July 8–14 Morgan poll with a sample of 1,758, the Coalition’s lead was reduced to 50.5–49.5. Primary votes were 37.5% Coalition (down two since July 1–7), 31% Labor (up 2.5), 12.5% Greens (down one), 5% One Nation (steady), 9% independents (steady) and 5% others (up 0.5).

The headline two-party estimate used respondent preferences, but this poll article said Labor led by 51.5–48.5 using 2022 preference flows, a two-point gain for Labor since the July 1–7 poll.

Essential poll: Coalition regains lead

A national Essential poll, conducted June 26–30 from a sample of 1,141, gave the Coalition a 47–46 lead including undecided, a reversal of Labor’s 48–46 lead in mid-June that was its first lead in this poll since April.

Primary votes were 33% Coalition (up one), 30% Labor (down one), 12% Greens (down one), 7% One Nation (down one), 1% UAP (steady), 10% for all Others (up one) and 7% undecided (up one).

Albanese’s net approval fell five points since early June to -9, a low for him in Essential since he became PM. Dutton’s net approval was steady at -1.

By 43–28, voters were worried about the impact of climate change on the next generation. By 52–48, they opposed Dutton’s nuclear plan.

Asked about desirability of energy sources, 59% said renewable energies were most desirable, 21% nuclear energy and 19% fossil fuels. On costs of energy sources, 38% (up two since April) thought nuclear energy most expensive, 35% (down five) renewable energies and 27% (up three) fossil fuels.

Newspoll aggregate data from April to June

Newspoll’s aggregate data for all its four surveys conducted from April to June from a combined sample of 4,957 was published by The Australian on July 7. The Poll Bludger’s poll tables say voters with no tertiary education were unchanged at a 50–50 tie compared to the March quarter aggregate data.

Labor held a 51–49 lead with TAFE-educated voters, a one-point gain for Labor. Labor also held a 52–48 lead with university-educated voters, but this was a three-point gain for the Coalition.

The Coalition had a one-point gain in four of the five mainland states, and now leads by 51–49 in New South Wales and 54–46 in Queensland. Labor leads by 54–46 in Victoria and 53–47 in South Australia. In WA, Labor gained three points to take a 52–48 lead.

Macnamara seat poll suggests Labor will win owing to Greens drop

A Redbridge poll
of the federal Victorian seat of Macnamara, conducted June 13–20 from a sample of 401, gave Labor a 55–45 two-candidate lead over the Liberals, from primary votes of Liberals 36%, Labor 30%, the Greens 21% and all Others 13%.

The Poll Bludger said that at the 2022 federal election, Labor defeated the Liberals by 62.2–37.8 adjusted for the recent Victorian redistribution. Primary votes were 31.7% Labor, 29.7% Greens and 29.0% Liberals. The Greens just missed out on making the final two in 2022 at Labor’s expense and winning on Labor preferences.

WA seat poll suggests state Labor will win easily

The WA election will be held in March 2025. The Poll Bludger reported Friday that a privately conducted seat poll of Hillarys, first reported in The West Australian, gave Labor a 61–39 lead. This poll was conducted by Utting Research June 3–14 from a sample of just 350 for the Home Builders Action Group.

This poll had a swing of 8% to the Liberals in Hillarys since the 2021 WA election, but at that election Labor won the WA statewide two-party vote by 70–30. If Labor is still ahead by over 60–40, they will win the next WA election easily.

While the state Labor government led by Roger Cook had a 52–37 approval rating, the Albanese federal government had a 53–36 disapproval rating.

Far-right National Rally underperforms to finish third at French election

I covered the July 7 French parliamentary election runoffs for The Poll Bludger. The left-wing alliance of four parties (NFP) won 182 of the 577 total seats, President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Ensemble 168, the far-right National Rally 143 and the conservative Republicans 45. With 289 seats needed for a majority, no party is able to form a majority government. Pre-election polls had given National Rally the most seats.

The July 4 UK election was the most disproportionate in modern history, with Labour winning 63% of seats on 34% of votes, while the far-right Reform won just 0.8% of seats on 14% of votes. Electoral developments in the Netherlands, Iran and the Solomon Islands were also covered.

Adrian Beaumont 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. Labor and Albanese’s slide continues in Resolve poll, as major parties tied – https://theconversation.com/labor-and-albaneses-slide-continues-in-resolve-poll-as-major-parties-tied-233638

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Thorpe, Professor in Sociology of Sport and Gender, University of Waikato

Think of the Olympic Games and for many of us it conjures images of the traditional marquee events: track and field, swimming, weightlifting, gymnastics. But the games are changing – and the Paris Olympics will take it to a new level.

As well as bringing back youth-oriented sports such as surfing, skateboarding, sport-climbing and BMX freestyle, these games will see breaking (or breakdancing) and kiteboarding introduced.

These programme changes have been on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) agenda for many years, part of an effort to reverse a decades-long decline in younger audience numbers, particularly in the key US consumer market.

But the new look is also part of a larger strategy designed to improve inclusivity and gender balance. In fact, Paris claims to be the first gender-balanced Olympics, with the new sports key to reaching that milestone.

None of this has been smooth, with the inclusion of new events a highly political process. On the one hand, traditionalists have resisted change. On the other, the countercultural origins of some of the new sports have seen them wary of being incorporated into the world’s largest and most powerful sporting establishment.

New events, new venues

Of the two newest entrants, breaking will probably surprise the most spectators. What began as an urban dance style within US hip hop culture in the 1970s has gone mainstream, successfully trialled at the 2018 Youth Olympic Games in Buenos Aires.

Breakdancing was always competitive, of course. In its Olympic format, teams of 16 (called B-boys and B-girls) will have one-on-one contests involving a range of spectacular acrobatic movements.

Athletes must improvise, adapting their style and routines to fit the beat of the DJ’s chosen tracks. The role of the DJ and MC during these “battles” will give the new sport a very different feel to other Olympic events.

Read more:
Alt goes mainstream: how surfing, skateboarding, BMX and sport climbing became Olympic events

Kiteboarding almost made it into the Olympic sailing programme at the 2016 Games in Rio Di Janeiro, in place of windsurfing. The International Sailing Federation eventually overturned that decision, but the dynamic event finally makes its debut. In Paris, kiteboarders will be using the latest foiling technologies, making it a showcase attraction.

These games will also see the IOC’s “urban park” concept finally realised. Originally planned for the Tokyo Olympics, COVID disrupted the vision of an X Games-style atmosphere of music, fun and athlete-fan interaction.

Rather than building expensive new venues, the host nation will use existing infrastructure combined with temporary facilities. Skateboarding, sport climbing, breaking, 3×3 basketball and BMX freestyle will all be hosted in a temporary park built in the iconic Place de la Concorde.

All these innovations are an expression of the IOC’s Agenda 2020 and Agenda 2020+5. These major policy reforms are focused on urban cultures, youth and sustainability.

Going mainstream

Olympic climbing will also evolve in Paris. Introduced at the Tokyo Games, it initially combined three quite different climbing styles – speed, bouldering and leading (where climbers use ropes to ascend).

Many climbers were unhappy with this merger within a single medal event, and Paris will see it broken into two: a combined bouldering and leading event, and a speed event.

At Tokyo, skateboarding had the greatest media visibility of the new sports. In particular, global audiences and media were captivated by the joy and camaraderie of the women’s competition.

The average age on the women’s skateboarding medal podium was 14, and the young competitors were hailed as evidence of a truly inclusive Olympic spirit. This success might have also shifted perceptions of skateboarding being fringe or even antisocial, to being a legitimate and highly-skilled sport.

It has also opened new opportunities for women skaters in a previously male-dominated culture. There have been anecdotal reports of an increased willingness by parents to let their children learn skateboarding, with local councils building more facilities and reviewing rules around skating being a “nuisance” in public spaces.

Waves of change

Perhaps the most radical aspect of the Paris Olympics is the location of its surfing competition in Tahiti, 16,000 kilometres from the host city.

Using the legendary reef break at Teahupo’o will almost certainly overcome the wave quality problems at the Tokyo games. But the decision has also proved controversial, with local residents concerned about the event’s potential impact on the fragile ocean ecosystem and surrounding areas.

In particular, a new aluminium judging tower, involving drilling into the delicate coral reef, has prompted months of local and international protest.

In a sense, the surfing controversy is emblematic of the IOC’s overall struggle to modernise the games, and respond to a rapidly evolving sporting landscape, while not alienating traditional audiences.

The IOC has invested heavily in these new sports and events, and we will likely see more on the programme in Los Angeles in 2028 and Brisbane in 2032. There is also a push for their inclusion in the Paralympics.

Whether those elusive younger viewers are lured back, however, remains to be seen. Our research suggests the full impact of inclusion – on both the Olympics and the sports themselves – can take years to become evident. In the meantime, settle in and enjoy the show.

Holly Thorpe has received funding from the IOC Advanced Olympic Research Grant Programme.

Belinda Wheaton has received funding from the IOC Advanced Olympic Research Grant Programme.

– ref. Breakdancing, DJs and Tahitian surf: Paris 2024 is going for gold in Olympic innovation – https://theconversation.com/breakdancing-djs-and-tahitian-surf-paris-2024-is-going-for-gold-in-olympic-innovation-233200

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Breadon, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, Grattan Institute

Too many older Australians are missing out on recommended vaccinations for COVID, flu, shingles and pneumococcal that can protect them from serious illness, hospitalisation and even death.

A new Grattan Institute report shows vaccination rates vary widely from GP to GP, highlighting an important place to look for opportunities to boost vaccination.

Many people get vaccinated at pharmacies, and those vaccinations are counted in our analysis. But we looked at GPs because they have a unique role overseeing someone’s health care, and an important role promoting vaccination.

We found that for some GPs, nine in ten of their older patients were vaccinated for flu. For others, the rate was only four in ten. The differences for shingles and COVID were even bigger. For pneumococcal disease, there was a 13-fold difference in GPs’ patient vaccination rates.

While some variation is inevitable, these differences are large, and they result in too many people missing out on recommended vaccines.

Some GPs treat more complex patients

A lot of these differences reflect the fact that GPs see different types of patients.

Our research shows older people who aren’t proficient in English are up to 15% less likely to be vaccinated, even after other factors are taken into account. And the problem seems to be getting worse.

COVID vaccination rates for people 75 years and older fell to just 36% in May 2024. But rates were even lower – a mere 11% – for people who don’t speak English proficiently, and 15% for those who speak a language other than English at home.

Given these results, it’s no surprise that GPs with fewer patients who are vaccinated also have more patients who struggle with English. For GPs with the lowest vaccination rates, one-quarter of their patients aren’t proficient in English. For GPs with the highest vaccination rates, it is only 1%.

GPs with fewer vaccinated patients also saw more people who live in rural areas, are poorer, didn’t go to university, and don’t have regular access to a GP, all of which reduce the likelihood of getting vaccinated.

Many of these barriers to vaccination are difficult for GPs to overcome. They point to structural problems in our health system, and indeed our society, that go well beyond vaccination.

But GPs are also a key part of the puzzle. A strong recommendation from a GP can make a big difference to whether a patient gets vaccinated. Nearly all older Australians visit a GP every year. And some GPs have room for improvement.

But GPs seeing similar patients can have very different vaccination rates

We compared GPs whose patients had a similar likelihood of being vaccinated, based on a range of factors including their health, wealth and cultural background.

Among the GPs whose patients were least likely to get a flu vaccination, some saw less than 40% of their patients vaccinated, while for others in that group, the rate was over 70%.

Among GPs with patients who face few barriers to vaccination, the share of their patients who were vaccinated also varied widely.

Even within neighbourhoods, GP patient vaccination rates vary a lot. For example, in Bankstown in Sydney, there was a seven-fold difference in COVID vaccination rates and an 18-fold difference for pneumococcal vaccination.

Not everything about clinics and patients can be measured in data, and there will be good reasons for some of these differences.

But the results do suggest that some GPs are beating the odds to overcome patient barriers to getting vaccinated, while other GPs could be doing more. That should trigger focused efforts to raise vaccination rates where they are low.

So what should governments do?

A comprehensive national reform agenda is needed to increase adult vaccination. That includes clearer guidance, national advertising campaigns, SMS reminders, and tailored local programs that reach out to communities with very low levels of vaccination.

But based on the big differences in GPs’ patient vaccination rates, Australia also needs a three-pronged plan to help GPs lift older Australians’ vaccination rates.

First, the way general practice is funded needs to be overhauled, providing more money for the GPs whose patients face higher barriers to vaccination. Today, clinics with patients who are poorer, sicker and who struggle with English tend to get less funding. They should get more, so they can spend more time with patients to explain and promote vaccination.

Second, GPs need to be given data, so that they can easily see how their vaccination rates compare to GPs with similar patients.

And third, Primary Health Networks – which are responsible for improving primary care in their area – should give clinics with low vaccination rates the help they need. That might include running vaccination sessions, sharing information about best practices that work in similar clinics with higher vaccination rates, or offering translation support.

And because pharmacies also play an important role in promoting and providing vaccines, governments should give them data too, showing how their rates compare to other pharmacies in their area, and support to boost vaccination uptake.

These measures would go a long way to better protect some of the most vulnerable in our society. Governments have better data than ever before on who is missing out on vaccinations – and other types of health care.

They shouldn’t miss the opportunity to target support so that no matter where you live, what your background is, or which GP or pharmacy you go to, you will have the best chance of being protected against disease.

Grattan Institute has been supported in its work by governments, corporates, and philanthropic gifts. A full list of supporting organisations is published at www.grattan.edu.au.

Anika Stobart 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. Are you up to date with your COVID, flu and other shots? It might depend on who your GP is – https://theconversation.com/are-you-up-to-date-with-your-covid-flu-and-other-shots-it-might-depend-on-who-your-gp-is-234175

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Arman Pili, Research affiliate, Monash University

Australia is renowned for its native flora and fauna, but did you know the continent is also home to about 3,000 “alien” species of animals, plants, fungi and microbes?

Alien species are those brought by humans to areas they do not naturally occur in. These intruders are Australia’s leading cause of biodiversity loss and species extinction. They also cost the Australian economy some A$24.5 billion a year.

Invasive alien species become much harder and more expensive to manage as they establish and spread through the landscape. So preventing their arrival is vital.

But which species will arrive next? Our study published today helps identify the animals Australia should be looking out for.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure

To help manage the invasive species threat, national authorities compile official warning lists that identify species not yet within a country’s borders, but which may become a big problem if they do arrive.

The most important criteria for adding a species to the list is whether they have already invaded other parts of the world.

Authorities also consider if a species could feasibly be brought into the country by humans either deliberately, such as on the case of exotic pets, or accidentally, for example if they hitchhike on fresh produce, luggage or vehicles.

Authorities also consider if a species can survive and reproduce in the country (which precludes, say, a polar bear being added to the warning list in a tropical area).

These warning lists can be effective. For example, the United Kingdom’s list was published in 2013; within two years, seven of their top-listed alien species had arrived in the country, including the notoriously invasive quagga mussel.

However, the lists are not foolproof. Most crucially, the emphasis on whether a species has invaded other parts of the world will not identify species that have not yet become invasive anywhere, but might in future.

In fact, a study in 2020 predicted the number of new alien species globally will increase by 36% by 2050.

Our research set out to address this blind spot in warning list systems.

Who’s arriving next?

The tool we developed assesses a species’ invasion risk based on whether humans are likely to accidentally bring the species to a certain country, and if the species will become invasive beyond their natural range.

First, we collected data on attributes of species worldwide, such as their size, number of offspring, lifestyle, diet, preferred habitats, natural range, how often they are encountered, and their tolerance to humans.

Second, we programmed our tool to analyse patterns in the attributes of species that have become invasive in different parts of the world. This means the tool identifies species that haven’t yet invaded new areas globally, but share attributes with species that have become invasive.

Those attributes include:

• a tendency to climb as opposed to staying on the ground, which means they are more likely to hitchhike into a country on produce and in luggage and vehicles

• being commonly encountered in a wide range of habitats, especially where humans live.

We then tested our tool on about 16,000 (or 76%) of all known amphibians and reptiles worldwide, with no invasion history. Of these, we identified 160 species that might pose an invasion risk to Australia and other countries.

What Australia should watch out for

The species our tool identified as a possible invasion concern to Australia, and which border officials should be monitoring for, included:

• Common European viper (Vivipera berus), a venomous snake widespread in Europe and northern Asia. It grows to a maximum length of about 85 centimetres. Other venomous snake species are native to Australia, but no viper species are currently known to exist here. Viper venom affects blood clotting and destroys tissues.

• Graceful chameleon (Chamaeleo gracilis), a lizard common in sub-Saharan Africa. While the species is commonly exploited by the pet trade, our tool indicates it can also be accidentally brought to Australia by humans. Chameleons can change their colour to either camouflage themselves and evade predators, or to intimidate them.

• American toad (Anaxyrus americanus), from eastern North America. They have a wart-like gland behind each eye. The toad is poisonous like the cane toad, which is already a problem in northern Australia. However, the American toad can live in temperate climates and could threaten southern Australia’s wildlife.

Next steps

Around the time we finished developing our tool last year, one of the predicted invaders – the Caspian Bent-toed Gecko (Tenuidactylus caspius) – began invading the Eastern European nation of Georgia.

This demonstrates our tool’s potential to identify future invaders and improve current warning systems.

But further work is needed before including the species we identified on national warning lists. For example, research is needed to determine where each species can survive and reproduce.

And so far, we have applied our tool only to amphibians and reptiles, particularly those that can be accidentally transported by humans. In future, we hope our tool will be applied to other animal groups and plants to identify invaders looming on our horizons.

Arman Pili received scholarships and funding from the Monash University Faculty of Science.

David Chapple receives funding from the Australian Research Council, and the NESP Resilient Landscapes Hub.

– ref. ‘Alien invasion’: researchers identify which exotic animals may soon hitchhike into Australia – https://theconversation.com/alien-invasion-researchers-identify-which-exotic-animals-may-soon-hitchhike-into-australia-232317

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Renee Desmarchelier, Associate Professor (Critical Pedagogies), University of Southern Queensland

It is increasingly common for Australian children to live in a different house from one of their parents. About 28% of children under 14 have separated parents.

While most children are born into a two-parent family, the proportion of children living in a one-parent or step-family increases each year with a child’s age.

This means information about children’s schooling often needs to go to more than one household. However, this information is not always communicated clearly or reliably between schools and parents, and between separated parents themselves.

What is it like for separated parents who share responsibility for their child’s education?

Our survey shows separated parents struggle to get clear information, as well as the support and understanding they need.

Our research

In 2020, we surveyed 140 separated parents about their experiences dealing with their child’s school.

The majority of parents identified as mothers, while just over 20% of participants were fathers. Parents had either sole or equal care of their children, primary care (that is, more than 50% of the time) or minority care (less than 50%).

Participants were recruited from across Australia and from a wide range of schools, including public and private schools at both the primary and secondary level.

Our findings

Overall results regarding separated parents’ experiences with their children’s schools revealed most parents were unhappy with their school interactions:

• 57% rated their experiences with teachers as negative

• 60% rated their experiences with school leadership (such as principals or deputy principals) as negative

• 63% rated their experiences with school administrative or office staff as negative and 14% rated them as “very poor”.

Why are separated parents struggling?

Unless there is a court order that says otherwise, both parents are entitled to access information about their child at school, regardless of who the child is living with.

But parents in our survey reported frustrations with getting both routine information and important messages and updates from the school.

This included newsletters, permission notes and homework information, as well as medical updates (for example, if the child was injured at school or sent home sick). One father reflected that it is “extremely difficult” to access report cards and parent–teacher interviews because

all of these processes are designed for traditional families and [the school] can’t handle two separate emails for report cards and two separate days for interviews.

For those parents with equal care, a child’s movement between houses on a regular basis made communication between schools and parents particularly problematic. As one mother explained, the school showed a lack of empathy for her situation and

a lack of understanding about how to deal with separated parents. Communicating or sending out information to one parent only, and ignoring the other parent.

When there is not equal care, parents told us that school staff “tend to favour the person the child lives with regardless of any situation”. One mother who had minority care of her children — a group that felt particularly alienated and judged in their school interactions — said the schools “don’t want to talk to me about much.”

Separated families can be complex

Parents stressed schools often fail to acknowledge or accommodate the complexities of family life after a separation. This can include scenarios where one partner is being financially or emotionally abused, or where parents simply do not get along.

As one mother with shared care said “the expectation that both parents be in the same space isn’t realistic”.

In fact, some parents believed interactions with the school amplified family conflict and even made them feel unsafe. One parent said schools are “unequipped for dealing with high conflict parents”.

The school just didn’t have systems in place nor training of staff to […] make sure both parents are informed of things […]

Gender plays a role

Stereotypical ideas about gender and parental roles was a frequent theme in our findings.

For example, mothers with majority care reported more positive experiences with their children’s school than mothers with shared or minority care.

Fathers were more likely to report they felt the school favoured the other parent. One father told us the school preferred to defer to the mother’s authority, regardless of his status as the primary caregiver.

When I have called with a query, the teacher returned the call to my ex-partner instead. Deliberately seeking out my ex instead of me to discuss matters.

Another father with sole custody explained he was unable to nominate himself as the “main parent” because the school decided “this had to be a mother”.

Even mothers who were generally satisfied with their school interactions reported difficulties with gendered expectations, such as the idea mothers had more time and greater responsibility to help with their child’s learning.

There is a judgement that I am not interested in my children’s schooling if I don’t volunteer in the classroom. This expectation is not the same for my ex-husband as he ‘has to work’.

What should happen next?

The needs of separated parents, as a significant percentage of the school community, are not well understood or well accommodated.

Our research shows schools should set up clear and consistent communication protocols that are not based on entrenched assumptions of the nuclear family.

The onus to ensure effective and equitable communication should not sit squarely with parents.

All school staff should be involved in targeted training to improve their understanding of family complexities and the needs and challenges of separated parents. This is especially important when parental conflict is exacerbated by the sharing (or withholding) of school-related information.

These findings are of significant concern for Australian educators and policymakers given the very real impact on parents and the unknown impact on the education of so many Australian children.

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 teacher returned the call to my ex’: how separated parents struggle to get information from their child’s school – https://theconversation.com/the-teacher-returned-the-call-to-my-ex-how-separated-parents-struggle-to-get-information-from-their-childs-school-234366

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Francisco Jose Testa, Lecturer in Earth Sciences (Mineralogy, Petrology & Geochemistry), University of Tasmania

Apart from the Sun, its planets and their moons, our Solar System has vast amounts of space rocks – fragments left over from the formation of the inner planets.

A large concentration of asteroids forms a vast ring around our Sun, orbiting it between Mars and Jupiter. Fittingly, it’s called the main asteroid belt. Comets are icy bodies of dust and rocks that originated even farther away – in the Kuiper Belt beyond Neptune and the Oort Cloud of debris surrounding the Solar System.

Extraterrestrial rocks come in many sizes. Generally speaking, asteroids are space rocks larger than one metre, while the smaller pieces (from two millimetres up to one metre in size) are known as meteoroids.

Regardless of where they come from, once these foreign rocks make it to Earth’s surface, we call them meteorites. But they are much more than just simple rocks from far, far away.

They have allowed us to estimate the age of our planet, and changed the course of evolution more than once. Here are six major ways meteorites and comets have contributed to Earth’s history or our knowledge of it.

1. The age of our planet

About 4.5 billion years ago, a Mars-sized planet collided with the proto-Earth, changing the composition of our planet and forming our Moon.

During its first tens of millions of years, Earth was predominantly molten. It was too hot to form solid minerals and rocks, so the exact age of our planet remains unknown. But we do know it’s between the age measured from meteorites and the age of the oldest rocks we have been able to find and date.

The oldest minerals that have been reliably dated on Earth are tiny zircon grains found in Western Australia. The oldest one is 4.4 billion years old. However, scientists have also dated specks of calcium and aluminium found in meteorites, which yielded an older age of 4.56 billion years – the age of our Solar System.

So, thanks in part to the oldest age provided by a meteorite, our best estimate is that Earth formed around 4.54 billion years ago.

2. The building blocks of life

The most plausible theory for the beginning of life on Earth is based on simple organic compounds that formed in space and were brought to Earth by meteorites and other celestial bodies.

During the Late Heavy Bombardment, a period between 4.1 and 3.8 billion years ago when more impact events hammered our planet, Earth’s surface was partially solid.

Amino acids, hydrocarbons and other carbon-based molecules arrived at our planet in carbonaceous chondrites (primitive meteorites, remnants from the early Solar System) and comets.

Once the early Earth was enriched with these organic molecules, chemical evolution followed. Eventually, life emerged on our planet. The earliest evidence is potential microbial life from 3.8 billion years ago, not long after the Late Heavy Bombardment.

Regardless of how life started, all theories agree on the need for a primitive ocean – or pools of water – that allowed early life on Earth to develop.

3. How we got our oceans

Meteorites and comets also played a major role in the formation of Earth’s oceans and atmosphere. Large quantities of water were delivered to our planet during the Late Heavy Bombardment.

In addition, water was released from Earth’s interior through volcanic activity during the Hadean Eon, the first eon in our planet’s history.

Water vapour, along with other gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, ammonia, nitrogen and sulphur, formed the proto-atmosphere. Rain began to fall once the temperature dropped below the boiling point of water, forming our primordial ocean.

Yes – the water we drink today is at least partly of extraterrestrial origin.

4. Changing the course of evolution

The extinction of dinosaurs happened about 66 million years ago. It’s linked to the second-largest known meteorite impact on Earth, the deeply buried Chicxulub crater in Mexico.

In contrast, the Late Devonian extinction about 380 to 360 million years ago cannot be explained by a single impact. Several factors have been proposed as potential causes, including multiple impacts, climate change, depletion of oxygen (anoxia) in the oceans and volcanic activity.

Repeated times during Earth’s history, impact events have influenced the survival and evolution of life on our planet.

5. Sampling Earth’s deep mantle and core

Scientists use a combination of methods to understand Earth’s internal structure: crust, mantle, core and their subdivisions. Seismology is the most important of them, which studies the propagation of seismic waves generated by earthquakes or artificial sources through Earth’s interior.

We have access to rock samples from the crust and upper mantle, but we will never be able to sample the deep mantle or solid core. Even if we had the technology, it would be astronomically expensive, and going down to such depths involves extreme pressures and temperatures.

Since direct sampling is impossible, scientists rely on indirect methods.

Pallasites and metallic meteorites are rocks from differentiated asteroids – ones that also have a mantle and core. Such space rocks are the closest we will ever come to sampling the deepest portions of our own planet. They help us understand its composition.

Pallasites are rare, and contain a silicate mineral called olivine embedded in nickel-iron alloys. It’s thought pallasites form in the boundary between the core and mantle-like regions of differentiated asteroids.

Metallic or iron meteorites are mainly composed of the nickel-iron alloys kamacite and taenite. They are the core fragments of differentiated asteroids, giving us clues to our own planet’s core.

6. Meteorite impacts gave us huge gold and nickel deposits

The Witwatersrand rocks in South Africa host the world’s largest known gold reserves. This would not be the case without the Vredefort impact crater – the largest known impact structure on Earth – formed about 2.02 billon years ago.

The impact saved these gold deposits from erosion by covering the entire area with ejected material, concealing the ore-bearing layers beneath. If an ore deposit erodes, the material disperses and it wouldn’t make for profitable extraction.

Witwatersrand is the largest gold-producing district in the world. Which means the ancient meteorite impact has made an indirect, lasting impact on our society through the availability of this precious metal.

But that’s not the only such event. The third-largest known impact crater on Earth is the Sudbury Basin in Canada, formed 1.85 billion years ago. It hosts giant nickel deposits because the impact disrupted Earth’s crust, partially melting it and allowing magma from the mantle to rise.

This led to the accumulation of nickel, copper, palladium, platinum and other metals, producing one of the richest mining districts on the planet.

The author would like to acknowledge helpful feedback on this article from Prof Noel C. White, University of Tasmania.

Francisco Jose Testa 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. Not just space rocks: 6 things we’ve learned about Earth from meteorites and comets – https://theconversation.com/not-just-space-rocks-6-things-weve-learned-about-earth-from-meteorites-and-comets-229288

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

Listening to the politicians and union leaders, one could be forgiven for thinking Nine’s Nick McKenzie and his journalist colleagues were the only ones aware of the nefarious activities in the CFMEU.

Amid the revelations from Nine’s investigation, Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke told the ABC on Sunday “all options” for action were on the table, and he had asked for departmental advice.

By Monday morning the union’s national secretary Zach Smith had put the Victorian branch into administration.

Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan whipped off a request for Labor’s national executive to suspend the CFMEU’s construction division from the Victorian Labor Party. She also asked Victorian Labor “to immediately pause political donations from the CFMEU”.

Anthony Albanese declared “zero tolerance” for the union’s bad behaviour. ACTU secretary Sally McManus said there was “no place whatsoever” for criminal activities in unions: the ACTU executive will meet on Wednesday to discuss matters.

The allegations made in the Nine reports include thuggery, standover tactics, the parachuting of senior bikie figures into lucrative union delegate roles on major Victorian construction projects, kickbacks, and much else.

The series is a remarkable expose. But it is hard to credit that senior players, including the minister, his department, the national office of the union, and federal authorities were not able to find out what was happening without the assistance of McKenzie and co.

Surely, some of them would have had their ears to the ground. If they didn’t, it can only be put down to incompetence or that they didn’t seriously seek to hear (despite all those visits to construction sites in hi-vis).

After he became opposition leader, Anthony Albanese drove the union’s strong man, John Setka, out of the Labor Party, following his disparaging the work of Rosie Batty, a campaigner against domestic violence. But the union movement could not dislodge him. McManus urged him to quit his union post for the good of the movement, to no effect.

In 2020 the union’s national secretary Michael O’Connor (one of the union’s good guys and brother of federal minister Brendan O’Connor) quit his post after prolonged pressure from Setka’s construction division. His apparent sin was not defending Setka following his conviction for harassing his wife.

It was only last Friday, facing the Nine expose, that Setka (who had been due to leave his position later this year) suddenly resigned as Victorian and Tasmanian secretary of the union.

Labor in government has twice bowed to what the CFMEU – and the wider union movement – wanted: the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, the so-called cop-on-the-beat.

The Gillard government got rid of the ABCC. The Coalition restored it. Tony Burke scrapped it again. Burke was so anxious to act that he defanged the body ahead of having the legislation passed.

Burke said on Sunday the allegations reported in the Nine expose (to that point) related to when the ABCC was in operation.

“It completely failed, for the simple reason that the whole concept of it was wrong from the beginning, which was about pushing people into their corners,” Burke said.

“That’s what it was about, and that meant that you would always in those situations empower the most militant players. That’s what happens when you push people into their corners.”

This sounded like a stretch. But accepting the ABCC was ineffective, the latest revelations suggest it should have been beefed up, not scrapped.

The government recently rushed through parliament legislation to allow the manufacturing part of the CFMFU to split off.

Nine reported this followed a long campaign by CFMEU’s assistant national secretary Leo Skourdoumbis. For his trouble Skourdoumbis received what Nine described as “a menacing nighttime visit” by Setka to the family home”, where he dumped a suitcase with the words “LEO THE DOG” scrawled on it. The incident was captured by a neighbour’s CCTV.

A few years ago the Morrison government legislated to allow the mining and energy division to leave the union.

Its members were anxious to take the exit path. A resolution said: “The ruthless use of raw numbers against the smaller divisions; the disrespect and disregard shown to the views of mining and energy workers; and the public undermining of our former national secretary [Michael O’Connor] to settle a personal score, is simply intolerable.

“It is clear that there is no longer a place of equality and dignity for the mining and energy division within the amalgamated union.”

What the union and the government – that was expected to discuss the situation at Monday’s cabinet meeting – do now must be judged in terms of actions, not fighting or reassuring words.

Burke might be right in noting deregistration could be counterproductive, just reducing the regulation of the union rather than enhancing it.

The union, pledging to change its ways, will want to be left, to the greatest extent possible, to reform itself. Zach Smith is one of the up-and-comers of the union movement, with a lot to prove.

But after all that’s gone before, the union can’t be trusted to clean out its Augean stables. Burke must recognise this – he said on Monday the union’s response so far was “progress, but falls short”.

The government needs to use its powers to impose independent administrators or some other process.

Labor also should show its seriousness by putting a moratorium on political donations from the union (whose construction division donated $1 million to the federal party for the last election). When asked about this on Monday, the prime minister dodged the questions. He said such matters were for the party organisation.

Labor’s national executive will meet this week, to discuss the Allan request and, no doubt, the question of donations. We’ll see whether “everything” is really on the table, as the government says.

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. View from The Hill: If it’s serious about CFMEU, Labor should decline its money – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-if-its-serious-about-cfmeu-labor-should-decline-its-money-234670

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rosemary Gibson, Lecturer in Contract Law, The University of Queensland

This article is part of The Conversation’s “Business Basics” series where we ask experts to discuss key concepts in business, economics and finance.

In the Bluey episode “The Sign”, the Heeler family enters a contract to sell their family home to a pair of English Sheepdogs, or as Bluey calls them, “the dogs with no eyes”.

But towards the end of the episode, the Sheepdogs spy another house that they prefer. Unlike Bluey’s house, the new place has a pool.

They telephone Bandit and tell him that they have changed their mind. Happily for Bluey’s family – and let’s face it, most of Australia – Bandit decides not to press ahead with the sale and the Heelers end up staying put in their family home.

But aside from the fact that the contracting parties are all cartoon dogs – how realistic is this scenario? Is it possible to end a contract to purchase or sell a house simply because you’ve changed your mind?

The reality is that once a contract of sale is signed, there are only limited circumstances in which buyers and sellers can bring the contract to an end.

What do you sign when buying or selling a house?

In Australia, each state and territory has its own standard form contract for the sale of land that buyers and sellers must sign.

The terms of these contracts mirror relevant state or territory laws, meaning they differ throughout Australia. It is important for parties to obtain advice from a property lawyer with experience in a particular jurisdiction’s contract.

Can you change your mind after signing?

Once a contract has been signed, a buyer may only end it for a “change of mind” during the “cooling off period”. The cooling off period is a short period of time – usually between two and five business days – after the contract is signed.

During this time, the buyer can end the contract, “no questions asked”. But there are usually financial consequences for terminating during the cooling off period.

For example, in New South Wales, Queensland and the ACT, a buyer who ends the contract during the cooling off period must pay the seller 0.25% of the purchase price. For a house purchase of A$1 million, this termination penalty would be $2,500.

But not all states and territories guarantee a cooling off period for buyers. And in such a hot property market, an individual seller may be unlikely to agree to include such a term in a contract.

What if something goes wrong down the track?

When negotiating the contract terms, the parties may agree that the sale is subject to certain conditions. Typically, these conditions are in the purchaser’s favour. If one of the conditions is not satisfied in time, then the contract can be brought to an end.

It is up to the parties to negotiate which conditions (if any) are included in the contract, and the time by which the conditions must be satisfied. The most common conditions of sale are:

• the buyer obtains finance by a certain date (a finance clause)
• the buyer obtains satisfactory building and pest inspection reports by a certain date (a building and pest clause).

The buyer may also want the sale to be subject to the buyer first selling an existing property.

Once all of the conditions of sale are satisfied, the contract is said to be “unconditional”. From this time, there are no express circumstances in which either party may bring the contract to an end.

When the Sheepdogs telephoned Bandit, the Heelers had already moved all their furniture out of the house. Clearly, the sale had already gone unconditional. There was no express basis on which the Sheepdogs could have terminated the contract.

Could the Heelers have sued for breach of contact?

A party who ends a contract without justification is liable to pay compensation to the other party.

A house purchaser who wrongly terminates a contract would almost certainly lose their deposit. They may also be liable for additional losses the seller suffers as a result of the breach, including any deficiency in price on a resale of the property.

But a buyer and seller may bring a contract to an end by “mutual agreement”, which seems to be what happened in Bluey. The Sheepdogs sought to end the contract and – to the relief of all Australians – the Heelers agreed.

This is, however, unlikely to occur “in real life”, especially in today’s highly competitive property market.

At the very least, the seller would be entitled to retain the purchaser’s deposit. There would also be the issue of who bears the costs incurred in advertising and agency fees.

It seems Bandit followed his heart rather than the strict terms of the contract — and Australia is the better for it.

Rosemary Gibson 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. Can you change your mind after you buy a house? – https://theconversation.com/can-you-change-your-mind-after-you-buy-a-house-234659

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Daniel, Associate Lecturer in Communications, Western Sydney University

This year marks the 25th anniversary of The Blair Witch Project, a film that popularised the found-footage horror sub-genre and captivated a generation of horror fans.

Made on a shoestring budget of less than US$60,000 by writer/director team Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez, the film went on to gross US$248 million internationally, becoming one of the most successful films of all time by return on investment.

It also inspired a generation of indie filmmakers to overcome the limitations of low-budget filmmaking by leaning into the explicit presence of a camera within the story, such as with the Paranormal Activity series (2007–15), Creep (2014) and Hell House LLC (2015). In more recent tributes to the genre, such as the 2023 film Missing, older-style cameras are replaced with phone and laptop cameras.

Between reality and fiction

The Blair Witch Project famously opens with the following title card:

In October of 1994, three student filmmakers disappeared in the woods near Burkittsville, Maryland while shooting a documentary called ‘The Blair Witch Project’. A year later their footage was found.

This introduction – and the promotion of the film as a record of true events – was part of a successful viral marketing strategy that leveraged the burgeoning internet culture of the time.

This strategy included a website which presented further details about the disturbing legend of the Blair Witch and the police investigation into the disappearance of students Heather, Mike and Josh.

Combined with the buzz from a successful Sundance debut in January 1999, the mythology surrounding the film intrigued audiences. And some viewers considered the possibility what they were watching was a genuine set of recordings – and not just fiction.

This conceit of blurring the line between fiction and reality had already been established in cult horror movies such as Ruggero Deodato’s 1980 film Cannibal Holocaust. But it was The Blair Witch Project that catapulted found-footage horror into the broader public consciousness.

The rise of reality TV in the 2000s meant viewers were increasingly being presented with documentary-style images which were claimed to be authentic (despite their constructed nature). In my book on found-footage horror, I argue the growing presence of screens and cameras in everyday life also contributed to the sub-genre’s popularity.

Found-footage scholar Alexandra Heller-Nicholas describes the experience of watching found-footage horror as an invitation to “indulge in an active horror fantasy”. Part of the appeal, she says, emerges from “something we rationally know not to be true (the supernatural)” being temporarily accepted as true because of our trust in the documentary-style aesthetic.

But of course, this temporary acceptance is underpinned by the knowledge the events are not real.

The future of Blair Witch

Since the early 2000s, there has been a marked decrease in the power of such “active horror fantasy” at the cinema. This is no doubt related to the public’s increasing scepticism of the visual image.

Speaking to The New York Times, The Blair Witch Project creators Myrick and Sanchez acknowledge that part of the success of the film was that it was a product of a unique window of time (before the media identified it as fiction). In 2016, a sequel to the two original Blair Witch films was met with a middling critical and audience response, seemingly confirming their beliefs.

This year, film studios Lionsgate and Blumhouse touted plans for a new sequel to The Blair Witch Project, although the original filmmaking team and cast were reportedly not approached for input. Upon hearing the news, the cast shared an open letter calling for retroactive compensation and meaningful consultation on the new film.

On a recent podcast, Sanchez shared his hopes for both a prequel set in the 1700s and a potential TV series that picks up where the original film ended.

New generations of film makers

While the presence of found-footage horror at the cinema may have declined in recent decades, the internet and streaming have provided a location for those inspired by The Blair Witch Project to continue to draw on the film’s aesthetics and storytelling devices.

Running from 2009 to 2014, the web series Marble Hornets adapted the Slenderman mythology as a found-footage exploration of a mysterious entity haunting the lives and cameras of a group of college students.

More recently, YouTuber Kane Parsons created a viral sensation by adapting a creepypasta known as The Backrooms into a series of YouTube short films. The viral success of these led to Parson’s recruitment to adapt the story into a feature film for studio A24.

The inventive 2022 series Archive 81 also became a critical success on Netflix, but was unfortunately cancelled after one season.

Horror as a genre will always find a way to infiltrate the media we consume. While it may seem unlikely any modern found-footage horror could captivate an audience the way The Blair Witch Project did, it’s only a matter of time before the next generation of storytellers create a terrifying new monster to haunt us.

Adam Daniel 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 Blair Witch Project at 25: how one film changed the horror genre as we know it – https://theconversation.com/the-blair-witch-project-at-25-how-one-film-changed-the-horror-genre-as-we-know-it-233104

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanne Crawford, Worksafe New Zealand Chair in Health and Safety, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

The government’s recently announced review of New Zealand’s health and safety system puts the spotlight back on the 2015 Health and Safety at Work Act – and why it has failed to keep New Zealanders safe on the job.

According to Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden, the current rules are not fit for purpose. She has argued legal requirements that make sense in some areas don’t always make sense in others.

But the fact remains, work-related deaths and injuries have not reduced significantly in the past five years, despite the 2015 rule changes. Approximately 70 people die from work-related accidents each year – higher per capita than in Australia and the United Kingdom.

The review will look at whether current health and safety requirements are too strict or ambiguous to comply with, the overlap of workplace safety legislation with other regulations, and workplace risk management.

Nearly ten years after the law came into force, then, it’s a good time to examine which parts of current heath and safety legislation work – and what doesn’t. This may mean a revision of all, or parts, of the existing law.

But it’s essential any review does not simply seek to justify the weakening of rules in a sector where deregulation often worsens outcomes.

Worse than the UK and Australia

Despite an established safety framework in New Zealand, work can still be dangerous.

As well as the 70 people who die at work each year, an estimated 750 to 900 die from work-related diseases such as cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. According to a recent report from WorkSafe New Zealand, 20 people died from work-related suicides in 2020.

There are also approximately 5,000 to 6,000 hospitalisations each year from work-related health events. And between 2022 and 2023, 35,805 injuries resulted in a week or more away from work.

Data from earlier this year show an average of 2.3 deaths per 100,000 working people in New Zealand a year. Australia had 1.6 deaths per 100,000 people and the United Kingdom had 0.8. over the same period.

Too much guess work

Where other developed countries differ from New Zealand lies in their strong enforcement backed up by well-written guidance, access to professional advice and applied research.

New Zealand’s legislation outlines what is required of businesses to identify hazards and manage the risks. But the ten-year health and safety strategy released in 2018 by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment contains no quantifiable outcomes or milestones regulators and industries can use to measure improvement.

Regulators and businesses are simply left to guess whether the health and safety changes have been successful or not. This makes it difficult to anticipate or mitigate problems.

Indeed, a 2022 independent review of workplace regulator WorkSafe found the organisation was unclear about its role. According to the review, WorkSafe could not say if its activities were cost-effective or reducing workplace harm.

A new strategy

This year, WorkSafe announced a new strategy focusing on acute, chronic and catastrophic harm. In particular, the regulator will be monitoring and intervening in high-risk sectors such as forestry, transport, manufacturing and construction.

But this prioritisation of hazardous industries does not mean health and safety can stop in other areas. It is still required by the Health and Safety at Work Act.

To be effective, any new strategy needs to clearly set the standard and expectations for different industries – not just high-risk ones. This is particularly the case for small businesses, which need different support and access to training and advice.

The country also needs to develop a complete set of regulations and approved codes of practice with industry that guide employers about the health and safety of their workers and customers.

Profit-driven businesses cannot be expected to invest in training for staff to ensure on-site health and safety unless required to by law.

Creating accountability

If the government wants to tangibly improve health and safety in the workplace, the ten-year health and safety strategy needs updating to explicitly guide everyone about how to make measurable improvements.

WorkSafe must also be empowered to hold directors and businesses accountable, and businesses must ensure they are getting competent advice and putting it into practice. Workers’ concerns need to be taken seriously and they must have the ability (and protection) to stop work that is dangerous.

The International Labour Organisation’s declaration on the fundamental principles and rights at work includes the statement that “health and safety at work is a human right”. New Zealand is a signatory to this.

Ensuring that right requires more than orange cones and red tape. Clear legal requirements and monitoring, as well as listening to workers, are what will make the real difference to the safety of all New Zealanders.

Joanne Crawford receives funding from the Health Research Council. She is an honorary member of the New Zealand Institute of Safety Management and chairs the Tertiary Education Group within the Health and Safety Association of New Zealand.

Chris Peace was elected a Life Member of the New Zealand Institute of Safety Management in 2024 and received the Safeguard Lifetime Achievement award in 2023.

Danaë Anderson 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. An overdose of orange cones? What the review of NZ’s workplace safety rules must get right – https://theconversation.com/an-overdose-of-orange-cones-what-the-review-of-nzs-workplace-safety-rules-must-get-right-234151