Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharine H. Greenaway, Associate Professor, The University of Melbourne

In 218 BC, the Carthaginian general Hannibal crossed the Alps against the advice of his men, who claimed it was impossible. “Aut inveniam viam, aut faciam,” Hannibal is said to have replied: “I shall either find a way, or make one.”

Though apocryphal, Hannibal’s bold statement captures a trait much sought in the tech industry today: “high agency”. This means being able to positively influence yourself or the world around you.

Psychologists use a range of other terms to refer to this kind of trait — including perceived control, mastery, and efficacy. All of them boil down to being able to achieve the things you want, when you want.

Recognising agency

In the business world, the term high agency is used in much the same way as “disruptor”, “game-changer” and “self-starter” were before it. As you might expect from those comparisons, high agency is a catch-all phrase for people who see and take opportunities where others see roadblocks.

More than this, high agency describes a person who creates their own opportunities where there appear to be none.

High agency is beneficial in more than the professional sphere, however.

Research shows that feeling able to achieve important goals is a building block for motivation in most domains of life, including education, health and political action. This is because people who feel “in control” set higher goals, are more committed those goals, and exert greater effort to achieve those goals than people who feel “out of control”.

Agency differs by demographic, including factors such as age. Some research suggests people feel more in control of their life circumstances and outcomes in middle age than in old age.

Socioeconomic factors such as education, income and work history also play a role. Put simply, people who are “better off” feel more agentic.

Mental health seems to be both an outcome and a predictor of high agency. People who are less depressed feel more in control of their lives, and those who feel more in control are less depressed.

Rethinking agency

The concept of “high agency” is an amalgamation of, or an umbrella term for, a range of traits that psychologists have studied for decades. Related concepts include the prized “growth mindset” (the belief that one’s talents are developable rather than innate), “proactivity” (acting in advance of, rather than reacting to, situations), and the somewhat controversial “grit” (perseverance in the pursuit of long-term goals). Note, however, that some argue grit is just a rebranded version of the personality trait “conscientiousness”.

High agency, as the tech world sees it, appears to borrow from all these concepts, wrapped up in one convenient package. Agentic people are those who see possibility where others see barriers, take action rather than wait to be told what to do, and aren’t afraid to go after what they want.

These traits are also stereotypically associated with particular people in society: members of advantaged majority groups, such as men, those with high socioeconomic status, and white people.

In many ways, high-agency behaviour is an act of privilege. It involves trusting that others will react well to your efforts to try a new approach or disrupt the status quo.

The reality is that the way other people respond will depend at least in part on factors outside our control. This may be particularly true for less privileged people, who tend to see less opportunity to exert choice and influence the world due to the very real structural barriers they face. This means acting “high agency” may be a risk for some people: actions that see one person praised as a “game changer” could easily see another labelled a “troublemaker”.

Taken to an extreme, high agency could read as “alpha” – the kind of person who takes charge and is a natural leader. Alpha is a gendered term, most commonly applied with a suffix such as male, bro or dude.

The already male-dominated tech industry should be wary of baking gendered traits into personnel selection procedures. If high agency is understood to mean a certain type of person rather than just a type of personality, it could be a problem for equity, diversity and inclusion initiatives.

Realising agency

Given the rising value of high agency in professional settings – not to mention its personal emotional and motivational benefits – you might wonder how people can become more agentic.

Many proponents of high agency emphasise its value for looking at the world in a different way. So too it might be valuable to look at high agency in a different way: not what makes an individual agentic, but what are the conditions that allow agency to thrive.

Research shows that certain types of environments set people up for success. Environments that allow people to thrive are those that meet three basic psychological needs.

The first is the need for autonomy: the ability to freely choose what we do and when we do it. The second is the need for competence: the feeling of being capable of performing desired actions. Finally, there is the need for relatedness: the feeling of being connected to others.

These needs can be fostered by the work environment. (Google famously adopts similar motivational workplace practices.) People can also adapt themselves by “job crafting” to help create the conditions conducive to success.

While high agency may seem like an innate personality trait, emerging research suggests the people around us may be a powerful source of personal agency. People who are better able to influence their own outcomes are often those who can turn to, or recruit, others to help them achieve those outcomes.

Paradoxically, this means that “high agency” might not (just) be a quality of you personally, but a quality of the people around you.

Katharine H. Greenaway 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. ‘High agency’: what the science says about the latest tech buzzword – https://theconversation.com/high-agency-what-the-science-says-about-the-latest-tech-buzzword-250767

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Genauer, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Flinders University

Since commencing his second term as United States president, Donald Trump has distanced the US from Ukraine and warmed relations with Russia.

This presents a predicament for European nations.

A changing landscape

Europe relies on the US for military and technology capability.

The US is responsible for more than a third of the total funds spent on defence worldwide.

It is also a critical member of the NATO security alliance and has more than 80,000 troops on the European continent.

Since January 20, the Trump administration has coupled economic isolationism with a surprisingly interventionist foreign policy agenda.

This is driven by a realist, interests-based approach to political leadership.

Trump’s actions align with a worldview that emphasises material advantage over values and ideas – the interests of great and regional powers are considered to be the only ones that matter.

The heated exchange between Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on February 28 underscored the crumbling architecture and protocols of the international rules-based order in place since the second world war.

It appears the Trump administration may expect unilateral concessions from Ukraine to Russia for peace. This would likely include ceding significant territory to Russia.

Read more:
In siding with Russia over Ukraine, Trump is not putting America first. He is hastening its decline

A rock and a hard place

Ukraine borders four EU and NATO-member countries: Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. This poses a serious security risk.

Europe’s foremost security challenge is to deter Russia from further offensive action on the continent.

European countries have a direct interest in stopping the war, because a continuing conflict presents a costly threat, draining resources in military and humanitarian aid.

According to the Kiel institute for the World Economy, since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, European countries have collectively committed more than $US138 billion ($A222 billion) in military and non-military aid.

European countries want to see an end to the war that leaves Ukraine a safe and sovereign nation state. For European countries, it is crucial that any political settlement effectively deters Russia from further incursions into Ukrainian or Eastern European territory.

Without deterrence measures in place, there is no guaranteed prevention of wider state-to-state conflict on the European continent in future.

On the one hand, Europe needs the US military and economic might. On the other hand, Europe has pressing security concerns that drive a divergence from the US in its position on Ukraine.

How far will Trump go with Russia?

A key question on European leaders’ minds is: will the NATO alliance hold if there is an incursion into NATO-member territory?

If the borders of Poland or a Baltic state are violated, NATO’s article 5 will be triggered. This article requires the collective defense by all NATO allies of any ally under attack.

This could mean the US is obliged to join a direct confrontation with Russia.

Would Trump actually commit US military support to a fight with Russia? Or would the US abandon their NATO treaty obligations?

Trump’s rhetoric and actions so far suggest European countries should prepare for the latter possibility.

Read more:
How Trump’s spat with Zelensky threatens the security of the world – including the US

Strategic autonomy and deterrence

Given this dilemma, Europe needs to focus on strategic autonomy and deterrence.

Strategic autonomy includes not only defence, but also economics, environment, energy and values.

In terms of defence, strategic autonomy means Europe taking more responsibility for its own security. Former European Defence Agency chief Jorge Domecq notes this includes having the ability to “develop, operate, modify and maintain the full spectrum of defence capabilities”.

Effective deterrence of further Russian aggression on the continent requires providing substantive security guarantees to Ukraine. This may include a multilateral security structure for European countries (without the US) that could guarantee Ukraine’s security.

The idea of a European Army has also reemerged. This would go beyond defence cooperation to full military and strategic integration. Such an entity could underpin a European peacekeeping force in Ukraine.

At a summit in London on March 2, EU countries and the UK proposed a one-month truce that could be followed by European troops on the ground in Ukraine to maintain the peace.

What does Ukraine want from Europe?

A Gallup survey in late 2024 suggests the percentage of Ukrainians who want a negotiated end to the war has increased from about 20% in early 2022 to more than 50% in late 2024.

Over the same period, those who favour fighting for a military solution has declined from more than 70% to just under 40%.

The same survey revealed most Ukrainians prefer a key role for the EU in negotiations (70%) and the UK (63%), with less than half preferring a significant role from Trump.

Interestingly, more than 40% supported a central role for Turkey in negotiations.

China: a country to watch

China’s approach to Russia and the war could have an impact on Europe’s security and political stability.

China is mostly concerned with domestic economic growth and regime stability, and it has not directly involved itself in the war in Ukraine.

However, China is a close friend of Russia and a security ally of North Korea, which is currently fighting in the Kursk province of Russia against Ukrainian forces.

In 2023, China put forward its own “peace plan” proposal for Ukraine.

A rapprochement between the US and Russia may be viewed unfavourably by China which could see this as a threat to its own regional geopolitical influence.

China maintains significant influence over Russian President Vladimir Putin due to economic and security ties.

If China senses a fundamental shift in the international order, it may become more assertive in attempting to influence Russia and the trajectory of the war in Ukraine.

For Europe, distancing from the US may mean getting closer to China.

However, this comes with its own risks.

Jessica Genauer 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 strategies and risks European powers must consider when it comes to tackling Trump – https://theconversation.com/the-strategies-and-risks-european-powers-must-consider-when-it-comes-to-tackling-trump-251253

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ty Ferguson, Research Fellow, University of South Australia

Tossing and turning on sweltering summer nights? You’re not alone.

As temperatures rise due to climate change, our sleep is becoming shorter and more disrupted.

But it’s not just the heat keeping us awake – climate change creates multiple challenges to our nightly slumber, which may be affecting our health.

What happens when we don’t get enough sleep?

Sleep isn’t just rest – it’s vital for our health.

Adults need at least seven hours per night to maintain cognitive function, memory and emotional balance. Poor sleep immediately impacts mood and attention, while chronic sleep issues increase risk of diabetes, obesity, depression, heart disease and even premature death.

So, how is climate change impacting our sleep?

1. Overnight temperatures are rising

Our circadian rhythm – that internal biological clock – requires our internal body temperature to drop at night for quality sleep. The ideal room temperature for sleep is 15°C to 19°C.

Rising outdoor temperatures make this body temperature increasingly difficult to maintain, especially for those without air conditioning. Paradoxically, widespread air conditioning use further contributes to climate change by using fossil-energy, which creates emissions.**

Research shows the impact on our sleep is already measurable. Our 2023 study of 375 Australian adults found people lost 12 minutes per night on the hottest nights compared with the coldest (31°C vs 0.4°C overnight temperatures across the year).

Globally, scientists predict we could lose 50–58 hours of sleep annually per person by the end of the century if warming continues unchecked. This is one way climate change will make geographic inequalities worse.

2. Climate change is worsening air pollution

Hot and dry conditions typically tend to make air pollution worse. As climate change increases the number of hot days and frequency of heatwaves, the rate of wildfires will increase. This adds another source of air pollution, increasing emissions of harmful greenhouse gases and airborne particles.

Air pollution is linked with poorer health, increased risk of chronic illness and early death.

Air pollution also impacts our sleep through breathing issues, inflammation and potentially disrupting our nervous system’s ability to regulate sleep.

And in winter, households burn wood for residential heating, adding another source of climate-impacting emissions. Air pollution from wood fires worsens respiratory conditions such as asthma, bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, further compromising sleep.

3. Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and severe

Whether it’s wildfires, heatwaves, flooding or cyclones, extreme weather is becoming more common and more intense.

With these extreme events comes widespread upheaval in affected communities. From mass population displacement to loss of shelter, security and essential resources, sleep is likely way down the list of priorities when dealing with natural disasters.

However, sleep disturbances are common after these extreme events. A review of global research on wildfire survivors found two-thirds experienced insomnia and more than a third reported nightmares. These effects persisted up to 10 months after the disaster.

4. Climate anxiety is on the rise

Even if you haven’t directly experienced an extreme weather event, the constant stream of climate catastrophes in our media can trigger what psychologists call “climate anxiety” – an existential dread that is keeping people awake.

Research confirms these climate concerns are linked with sleep disturbances including difficulty falling asleep, insomnia and wakefulness. They occur across the age spectrum, affecting both younger and older adults.

If climate-related concerns or ongoing poor sleep are significantly impacting your life consider consulting a doctor or psychologist.

Tips for getting a good night sleep during hot nights

Fortunately, there are a few simple things you can do to improve your chances of getting a good night’s sleep. They cost nothing or very little and require just a small bit of pre-bedtime planning.

Here are some tips for getting a good night sleep despite the temperature:

For your environment:

· sleep in the coolest room in the house (this may not be the bedroom)

· keep curtains closed during the day to limit heating from sunlight

· put on a fan – air flow can lower your perception of the temperature (by helping sweat evaporate faster) without actually cooling your room

· select light, breathable bedding (natural fibres work best)

· if outside temperatures drop at night, open the windows to encourage air circulation.

For your body:

· take a cool shower before bed to help lower body temperature

· timing your exercise is important: aim to exercise early in the day

· wear light natural-fibre clothing

· keep a damp towel or spray bottle by your bed to dampen your skin

· stay hydrated but avoid heavy meals before sleeping.

As we adapt to a changing climate, getting a good night’s sleep should be a top priority for our health.

With some practical adjustments to our environments and habits, we can adapt to these changes while advocating for the broader climate solutions that will ultimately help us all rest easier.

Ty Ferguson receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund and the National Health and Medical Research Council

Carol Maher receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the National Heart Foundation, the SA Department for Education, Preventive Health SA, the Channel 7 Children’s Research Foundation, the South Australian Office for Sport, Recreation and Racing, Healthway, Hunter New England Local Health District, and the Central Adelaide Local Health Network.

– ref. Why can’t I sleep? 4 ways climate change could be keeping you up at night and what you can do about it – https://theconversation.com/why-cant-i-sleep-4-ways-climate-change-could-be-keeping-you-up-at-night-and-what-you-can-do-about-it-250253

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Whiting, Vice-Chancellor’s Senior Research Fellow, RMIT University

The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, the union for voice actors and creatives, recently circulated a video of voice actor Thomas G. Burt describing the impact of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) on his livelihood.

Voice actors have been hit hard by GenAI, particularly those working in the video game sector. Many are contract workers without ongoing employment, and for some game companies already feeling the squeeze, supplementing voice-acting work with GenAI is just too tempting.

Audio work – whether music, sound design or voice acting – already lacks strong protections. Recent research from my colleagues and I on the use of GenAI and automation in producing music for Australian video games reveals a messy picture.

Facing the crunch

A need for greater productivity, increased turnarounds, and budget restraints in the Australian games sector is incentivising the accelerated uptake of automation.

The games sector is already susceptible to “crunch”, or unpaid overtime, to reach a deadline. This crunch demands faster workflows, increasing automation and the adoption of GenAI throughout the sector.

The Australian games industry is also experiencing a period of significant contraction, with many workers facing layoffs. This has constrained resources and increased the prevalence of crunch, which may increase reliance on automation at the expense of re-skilling the workforce.

One participant told us:

the fear that I have going forward for a lot of creative forms is I feel like this is going to be the fast fashion of art and of text.

Mixed emotions and fair compensation

Workers in the Australian games industry have mixed feelings about the impact of GenAI, ranging from hopeful to scared.

Audio workers are generally more pessimistic than non-audio games professionals. Many see GenAI as extractive and potentially exploitative. When asked how they see the future of the sector, one participant responded:

I would say negative, and the general feeling being probably fear and anxiety, specifically around job security.

Others noted it will increase productivity and efficiency:

[when] synthesisers started being made, people were like, ‘oh, it’s going to replace musicians. It’s going to take jobs away’. And maybe it did, but like, it also opened up this whole other world of possibilities for people to be creative.

Regardless, most participants expressed concerns about whether a GenAI model was ethically trained and whether licensing can be properly remunerated, concerns echoed by the union.

Those we spoke with believed the authors of any material used to train AI data-sets should be fairly compensated and/or credited.

An “opt-in” licensing model has been proposed by unions as a compromise. This states a creators’ data should only be used for training GenAI under an opt-in basis, and the use of content to train generative AI models should be subject to consent and compensation.

Taboos, confusion and loss of community

Some audio professionals interested in working with GenAI do not feel like they can speak openly about the subject, as it is seen as taboo:

There’s like this feeling of dread and despair, just completely swirling around our entire creative field of people. And it doesn’t need to be like that. We just need to have the right discussions, and we can’t have the right discussions if everyone’s hair is on fire.

The technology is clearly divisive, despite perceived benefits.

Several participants expressed concerns the prevalence of GenAI may reduce collaboration across the sector. They feared this could result in an erosion of professional community, as well as potential loss of institutional knowledge and specific creative skills:

I really like working with people […] And handing that over to a machine, like, I can’t be friends with the machine […] I want to work with someone who’s going to come in and completely shake up the way, you know, our project works.

The Australian games sector is reliant on a highly networked but often precarious set of workers, who move between projects based on need and demand for certain skills.

The ability to replace such skills with automation may lead to siloing and a deterioration of greater professional collaboration.

But there are benefits to be had

Many workers in the games audio sector see automation as helpful in terms
of administration, ideation, workshopping, programming and as an educational tool:

In terms of automation, I see it as, like, utilities. For example, being a developer, I write scripts. So, if I’m doing something and it’s gonna take me a long time, I’ll automate it by writing a script.

These systems also have helpful applications for neurodivergent professionals and workers who may struggle with time management or other attention-related issues.

Over half of participants said AI and automation allows more time for creativity, as workers can automate the more tedious elements of their workflow:

I suffer like anyone else from writer’s block […] If you can give me a piece of software that is trained off me, that I could say, ‘I need something that’s in my house style, make me something’, and a piece of software could spit back at me a piece of music that sounds like me that I could go, ‘oh, that’s exactly it’, I would do it. That would save me an incalculable amount of time.

Many professionals who would prefer not to use AI said they would consider using it in the face of time or budget constraints. Others stated GenAI allows teams and individuals to deliver more work than they would without it:

Especially with deadlines always being as short as they are, I think a lot of automation can help to focus on the more creative and decision-based aspects.

Many workers within the digital audio space are already working hard to create ethical alternatives to AI theft.

Although GenAI may be here to stay, a balance between the efficiencies provided should not come at the cost of creative professions.

Sam Whiting receives funding from RMIT University and the Winston Churchill Trust. Dr Whiting received funding from APRA/AMCOS and Creative Australia for the project discussed in this piece.

– ref. ‘I can’t be friends with the machine’: what audio artists working in games think of AI – https://theconversation.com/i-cant-be-friends-with-the-machine-what-audio-artists-working-in-games-think-of-ai-248869

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Shaw, Professor of Politics, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

Extending the length of the parliamentary term is one of those recurring issues in New Zealand politics, emerging from the constitutional shadows every 30 years or so and quickly retreating from the bright light of scrutiny.

The pending introduction of the Term of Parliament (Enabling 4-year Term) Legislation Amendment Bill – a coalition initiative of the ACT Party but which enjoys qualified cross-party support – sees the question once again enjoying a moment in the sun.

Because of the constitutional protection of the parliamentary term, and if the bill becomes law, an extension would require a public referendum with the 2026 general election (or the support of 75% of all MPs, a route the government will not take).

The standard maximum term of parliament would remain three years. But a prime minister would have the option at the start of a new parliamentary term of advising the governor-general it would be extended to four years.

This could only happen if the allocation of places on select committees reflected the distribution of non-executive MPs across all parliamentary parties. Theoretically, this would be a check on executive power.

But while the coming debate will be framed as one about parliament, the real issue is whether voters wish to extend the length of time governments spend in office. This is a crucial distinction.

Lack of checks and balances

New Zealand voters do not directly elect the executive branch. Rather, the government is formed by the party or parties able to command a majority of MPs following each election.

In short, we elect parliaments, which then provide governments. The length of one is connected to that of the other – meaning elections are one of the few ways New Zealanders can hold their governments to account.

Perhaps for this reason, voters have consistently supported a three-year term, despite historical attempts by earlier governments to extend it. Two previous referendums, in 1967 and 1990, maintained the status quo.

This does make New Zealand something of an outlier internationally. Of 190 lower houses and unicameral national legislatures around the world, only nine have terms of three years or less. The vast majority have terms of four or five years.

But New Zealand also lacks the checks and balances found in many of those other countries: a codified constitution, a Supreme Court responsible for policing it, and an upper legislative chamber.

Consequently, the frequency with which governments are held accountable to the people really does matter.

An ‘executive paradise’

This absence of the sorts of constitutional guardrails common elsewhere is what led former prime minister and constitutional lawyer Geoffrey Palmer to call New Zealand an “executive paradise”.

The introduction of a four-year parliamentary term would do little to alter that, despite the argument it would improve the quality of parliamentary law and the standard of public policy-making.

A three-year cycle, it is often claimed, forces governments to spend their first year in office removing as many traces of the previous administration as possible, the second consolidating its own policy agenda, and the third campaigning for the next election.

A four-year term, the logic goes, would give ministers more time to learn the intricacies of their portfolios and develop policy expertise. It would allow for longer parliamentary deliberation on complex legislation, and ensure parliament properly scrutinises government policies, budgets and performance.

All things being equal, a longer parliamentary term could improve governance and create a more stable, durable policy mix. But, of course, all things are rarely equal.

Missing provisions

In and of itself, a longer parliamentary term is unlikely to produce the benefits its proponents promise. Improved policy-making requires resources as well as more time, including policy and procedural expertise, judgement and institutional wisdom.

These things reside in the professional bureaucracy. Without also addressing the systemic crisis in the public service, an extra year won’t improve matters.

It would be especially important to ensure a longer term went hand in hand with more effective parliamentary scrutiny of government activity, both its forecasts and actual results.

As a 2019 report from the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies suggested, investment in MPs’ policy expertise, systematic work plans for select committees and changes to parliament’s Standing Orders are also needed to improve the legislative process.

But these do not feature in the draft legislation. And without them, an extended parliamentary term would simply tip the balance even further towards the executive branch and away from the legislature.

Democratic accountability

There are other important issues the draft legislation doesn’t address, including the implications of making a four-year term discretionary, and what might prevent a government from ignoring irksome select committee recommendations (as can and does presently occur).

Worryingly, too, advice from the Ministry of Justice to the justice minister points out that parts of the proposed legislation are “constitutionally and practically problematic”.

The inevitable uncertainty at the start of every new parliament would “undermine democratic accountability” and “risks undermining the legitimacy of parliament and its exercise of public decision-making powers”.

The advice also says the legislation is “out of step with other long-standing legal and constitutional principles, including that it appears to encroach on the House of Representatives’ right to control its own operations”. In our constitutional tradition it is not for the executive to determine how parliament functions. A king’s head once rolled over this issue.

The proposed legislation starkly illustrates the tensions that can emerge when constitutional arrangements blur the boundaries between the executive and legislative branches, enabling the former to dictate terms to the latter.

Without other changes – an increase in the size of the House relative to the executive, say, or restrictions on the power of the prime minister to call early elections – the variable parliamentary term promised by the bill will inject more uncertainty into public life, not less.

And it will not improve the quality of our laws. It will simply extend the length of time government ministers get to spend in paradise.

Richard Shaw 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. NZ governments enjoy an ‘executive paradise’ – a longer parliamentary term won’t change that – https://theconversation.com/nz-governments-enjoy-an-executive-paradise-a-longer-parliamentary-term-wont-change-that-251139

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Euan Ritchie, Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University

What do the Australian lungfish, ghost bat, sandhill dunnart and southern and central greater gliders have in common? They’re all threatened species that need a formal “recovery plan” – but do not have one.

Today, environmental group the Wilderness Society launched a case in the Federal Court against Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek, arguing she and successive environment ministers have failed to meet their legal obligations to create threatened species recovery plans.

Other species forming the basis of the case are Baudin’s cockatoo, the Australian grayling, Carnaby’s black cockatoo, red goshawk, forest red-tailed black cockatoo and the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle.

Many other species and ecological communities also don’t have recovery plans. If successful, the case would set a precedent compelling future environment ministers to meet their legal obligations and improve Australia’s dire conservation record. This is a significant moment for conservation in Australia – testing how accountable environment ministers are in preventing species extinctions.

Why do recovery plans matter?

Threatened species recovery plans lay out very clearly why species or ecological communities are in trouble and the actions necessary to save them. Once a plan is in place, it can directly benefit the species by tackling threats and safeguarding habitat.

Proposals such as a new farm, suburb or mining project can be assessed by the environment minister and rejected if they are inconsistent with recovery plans and place threatened species at increased risk of extinction. Recovery plans have helped dozens of species come back from the brink.

Under Australia’s national environmental laws, the environment minister must decide whether a recovery plan is required for a species or ecological community listed as threatened.

If a plan is ordered, it must typically be created within three years. But a 2022 Auditor-General’s report found just 2% of plans met this timeframe.

Recovery is possible, but plans are vital

Successive governments have failed to keep up with creating and implementing recovery plans in a timely manner. The perennial and chronic lack of funding for conservation means there’s little capacity to do the vital but time-consuming work of planning and recovery.

As a result, the federal government has increasingly shifted to offering conservation advices in place of recovery plans. Conservation advices can be produced and updated faster than recovery plans. This is useful if, say, a new threat emerges and needs a rapid response.

But there’s a key legal difference. When the environment minister is considering a project such as land clearing for new farmland or a mine, they need only consider any conservation advice in place. When a recovery plan is in place, the minister is legally obliged not to approve actions which are contrary to its objectives and would make the plight of a species or ecological community worse.

A conservation advice can be thought of more like a fact sheet without the same legal weight or accountability that recovery plans have.

In March 2022, the Morrison government scrapped recovery plans for 176 threatened species and habitats, despite thousands of submissions arguing against this.

After the Albanese government took power in May 2022, it pledged to end “wilful neglect” of the environment and to introduce stronger environmental laws. Sadly, this commitment has not been honoured.

Why do we need recovery plans?

Australia’s species protection record is unenviable. Since European colonisation, more than 100 species have been driven to extinction and more than 2,000 species and ecological communities are listed at risk of suffering the same fate.

For a species to be considered threatened, its population has to have shrunk. The severity of the decline and hence its extinction risk will determine how it’s categorised, from vulnerable through to critically endangered. Recovery plans lay out the research required to actually recover these species, meaning helping their populations to grow out of the danger zone.

A key role for these plans is to coordinate planning and action between relevant interest groups and agencies. This is especially important for species found across state and territory borders, such as the southern greater glider and the migratory swift parrot. The greater glider should have had a recovery plan in place since 2016, but does not.

Are individual plans still worthwhile?

Faced with so many species in need of protection and limited funding, prominent figures including former Environment Minister Peter Garrett have argued we should focus our efforts on protecting ecosystems rather than single species to make the best use of scarce funds.

But there is a deeper issue. Australia is one of the wealthiest nations in the world. It has the capacity to greatly increase conservation spending without impoverishing humans, and should do so for the benefit of the economy, culture and our health and wellbeing.

That’s not to say ecosystem protection isn’t worthwhile. After all, ecosystems are made up of species and their interactions with each other and their environment. You cannot have healthy species without healthy ecosystems and vice versa.

But if we focus only on protecting large expanses of wetland, forest and grasslands, we risk overlooking a key issue. Two species in the same ecosystem can be very differently affected by a specific threat (predation by foxes, for instance). Some species can even have conflicting management needs. For some species, invasive species are the biggest threat, while climate change and intensified fire regimes threaten others the most.

Extinction is a choice

As Australia’s natural world continues to deteriorate, climate change deepens and worsening wildlife woes abound, these issues will no doubt be front of mind for many in the upcoming federal election.

It can be easy to see these trends as inevitable. But they are not – the collapse of nature is a choice. We have what we need for success, including traditional, ecological and conservation knowledge. What’s sorely needed is political will.

There were once fewer than 50 northern hairy-nosed wombats alive. Today, that number exceeds 400. When supported, conservation can succeed.

Almost all Australians want their government to do more to save our species. Let us hope whoever forms the next government takes up that challenge – even if it takes court cases to prompt action.

Euan Ritchie receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Department of Energy, Environment, and Climate Action. Euan is a Councillor within the Biodiversity Council, a member of the Ecological Society of Australia and the Australian Mammal Society, and President of the Australian Mammal Society.

– ref. Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek has been taken to court over 11 threatened species. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/environment-minister-tanya-plibersek-has-been-taken-to-court-over-11-threatened-species-heres-why-219231

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Toby Murray, Professor of Cybersecurity, School of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne

In July last year, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, directed tech companies to develop codes of practice to keep children safe from online porn and harmful content. Now, after seven months, the industry has submitted draft codes to eSafety for approval.

eSafety is currently assessing the draft codes.

Assuming Grant approves the new codes, what can we expect the future to look like for children and teens online? And how effective will the proposed codes be at protecting children?

A coordinated approach

The codes submitted for approval were developed by a group of industry associations.

They cover social media platforms such as Facebook and Snapchat. But they also cover internet service providers, search engines such as Google, online messaging services such as WhatsApp, online gaming platforms, as well as the manufacturers of the computers, mobile phones and software we use to access online services.

The codes will also cover online app stores such as those operated by Apple and Google. However, app store codes aren’t expected to be released until late March.

As well as covering a range of companies, the codes also cover a range of harms. They aim to protect kids not only from online pornography but also content that promotes self-harm, eating disorders, suicide and violence.

Given the difficulty of protecting kids from this kind of content, this coordinated approach is absolutely essential.

If the draft codes are approved, companies will have six months to implement the proposed safety measures. They will face fines of up to A$50 million for non-compliance.

What’s in store?

The draft codes are broken up across different parts of the tech ecosystem. The requirements they place on individual tech platforms depend on the danger harmful content on each platform poses to children.

Large social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) are likely to be categorised among the most dangerous. That’s because it’s possible for users to access extremely harmful content such as child sexual abuse or terrorist material on these platforms. Plus, these platforms serve millions of people and also allow users to create public profiles, maintain “friend” lists, and share content widely.

According to the draft codes, these platforms will need to implement the most stringent safety measures. These include using age-assurance measures to prevent children under the minimum age allowed to access the service from doing so, having an appropriately resourced trust and safety team, and using automated systems to detect and remove child abuse and pro-terror material.

On the other hand, less risky platforms won’t be subject to any requirements under the draft codes. These include online platforms that allow only limited communication within a specific group of people and without social media features such as friends lists and public profiles. Platforms for communication within a primary school such as Compass would be among the least risky.

Online search engines such as Google and Bing – which provide access to adult and self-harm content, but are legitimately used by children – will be required to implement appropriate measures to prevent children accessing that content.

This may include enabling safe-search features and establishing child-user accounts. These accounts would include features that automatically blur harmful content and filter such content from search results and recommendation algorithms

The codes also cover emerging harmful technology, such as deepfake porn apps powered by generative artificial intelligence. Like traditional porn sites, these will be required to implement age-assurance technology to prevent children using these services.

What about age assurance?

The codes specifically define what age-assurance measures are considered “appropriate”.

Importantly, just because an age-checking system can be bypassed doesn’t disqualify it. Instead, age assurance measures must include “reasonable steps” to ensure someone is of age, while balancing privacy concerns.

Requiring users to self-declare their age is not appropriate. So expect to see porn sites do away with click-through dialogs asking visitors to declare they are really adults.

Instead, sites will have a range of options for assuring their users’ ages, including photo ID, estimating age based on facial images or video, having a parent attest to a child’s age, leveraging credit card checks, or AI-based methods for age inference.

Different measures are likely to be used by different companies and systems.

For example, Apple has already announced a range of new child safety measures that appear to align with many parts of the draft codes. These include making it easier for parents to set up child safety features on kids’ iPads and iPhones, using a parent’s payment information to ensure they can safely attest to their child’s age, as well as app store integration of child safety features to enable app developers to make their apps safer for children.

On the other hand, adult sites and apps are likely to adopt age-assurance mechanisms that users perceive to be more private. For paying subscribers, they are likely to leverage the credit information already stored to assure the users’ age.

Non-subscribers may instead be required to submit to a facial scan or other AI-based methods to estimate their age.

Publicly available data on state-of-the-art systems for age estimation from facial images suggests the best systems have an average error of 3.7 years.

Whether eSafety will agree such technology is “appropriate” remains to be seen. However, if it is adopted, there is a real risk many teens will remain able to access online porn and harmful deepfake apps despite these new codes.

Toby Murray receives funding from Google. He is director of the Defence Science Institute, which receives funding from Victorian and Tasmanian state governments, and from the Commonwealth Department of Defence.

– ref. Tech companies’ proposed new safety codes won’t protect all kids online – https://theconversation.com/tech-companies-proposed-new-safety-codes-wont-protect-all-kids-online-251266

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Conley Tyler, Honorary Fellow, Asia Institute, The University of Melbourne

Hard on the heels of Donald Trump’s dismantling of USAID, the United Kingdom has ripped more than A$12 billion (£6 billion) from its foreign assistance budget.

The double hit from two of the globe’s biggest contributors to international development has been branded a betrayal of poorer countries that will cost lives.

What does this mean for Australia as we head towards the federal election?

Australia is different

Australia’s aid context is strikingly different.

International development is deeply integrated in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and can’t easily be pulled apart. There is no separate aid agency to target.

Recent experience also reminds us why it is unwise to cut overseas assistance. When the Abbott government made major cuts to development spending, other actors including China quickly filled the vacuum throughout the Pacific.

Most importantly, more than 20 of Australia’s regional neighbours are developing countries. This means an adequate overseas aid budget is non-negotiable if we want to exert influence throughout the region.

At a minimum, both the Labor Party and the Coalition should commit to maintaining current levels of development assistance.

If you want to see how every dollar of Australia’s overseas aid is being spent, you can visit the transparency portal on the DFAT website. The portal outlines each investment, which includes peace building in Sri Lanka, countering people trafficking in Vietnam, preventing foot and mouth disease in Indonesia, and disaster preparedness across the Pacific.

This is cost-effective spending: dealing with the aftermath of a crisis is massively more expensive than the relatively small outlays needed to prevent them from happening in the first place. By way of contrast, the budget for defence is $48 billion each year compared to less than $5 billion for preventive spending on development.

New opportunities

Initial reaction to the severe foreign aid cuts focused on how China and Russia could benefit from the void left by Washington and London. But it is now being recognised that their shortsightedness may provide a golden geopolitical opportunity for Australia.

It is an opportunity that could be seized upon by whoever wins the election.

Think back to the Boxing Day tsunami, when John Howard’s response transformed the relationship with Indonesia and led to the formation of the Quad grouping.

When the US withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement in 2017, Japan stepped up and showed the leadership needed to conclude negotiations. With Australia’s support, the deal went ahead and is now one of the largest free-trade agreements in the world. Major achievements can still be made even without the involvement of the US.

We are now faced with a similar moment. While Australia cannot compete with the scale of US and UK international development, there is much it can do across the region and throughout the broader global system.

What Australia can do

If Australia was to think big, it would announce that it will elevate funding for overseas aid from its current level of 0.68% of the federal budget to 1% over the next two to three years.

This would generate positive worldwide coverage and differentiate Australia for a relatively small investment. John Howard, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard were all able to keep the international development budget at more than 1%, so it’s not impossible.

There is a perception that a much larger slice of the budget pie currently goes to development assistance. The average Australian believes we spend 14% of the budget helping out our neighbours. In reality the outlay is less than 70 cents per $100.

Even a smaller increase for emergency funding could be very meaningful. The impact of the US 90-day pause on foreign assistance has been immediate, with charities and contractors left with no income and forced to let staff go and shutter offices. There is a real risk some international aid charities won’t survive the freeze. Emergency funding is needed to stave off collapse and stop the loss of specialist skills.

At the global level, Australia could help to maintain the essential humanitarian work of organisations like the World Food Programme, UNAIDS, UNHCR and the World Health Organisation, which may face existential funding crises.

Australia’s national interest

Australia’s security, stability and prosperity depend on both the region and cultivating wider relationships.

We could use this moment to partner with critical countries in the Pacific and South East Asia to preserve the programs most at risk. Australia could also build deeper relationships with other donors like Japan, South Korea, India, Indonesia, Canada, and EU members and institutions.

There are many competing priorities in the budget process, so foreign aid is never an easy sell. But there will be international praise for Australian leadership, including from the US and the UK, if Australian aid helps maintain Western presence in key geopolitical arenas. It would be a diplomatic win and very much in Australia’s interest.

Now is the time for Australia to announce the steps it will take to preserve and even increase development aid as one of the key tools of statecraft to create a world that Australians want to live in.

Melissa Conley Tyler is Executive Director at the Asia-Pacific Development, Diplomacy & Defence Dialogue (AP4D), an initiative funded by the foreign affairs and defence portfolios and hosted by the Australian Council for International Development..

– ref. The US and UK have decimated their aid spending. Australia has a unique opportunity to help fill the vacuum – https://theconversation.com/the-us-and-uk-have-decimated-their-aid-spending-australia-has-a-unique-opportunity-to-help-fill-the-vacuum-251156

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stewart Riddle, Professor, School of Education, University of Southern Queensland

The federal government and NSW government have announced a new funding deal for the state’s public schools.

This will see the Commonwealth contribution jump from 20% to 25% of the schooling resource standard (on which school funding is based) by 2034. The NSW government will contribute the rest.

This follows more than a year of negotiations between federal Labor and the states and territories to lock in a new agreement, after the previous one expired at the end of 2024. Queensland is now the only state or territory without an agreement.

Th NSW deal will result in an additional A$4.8 billion in federal funding to NSW public schools over ten years. But the extra funding comes with conditions.

As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says,

This is not a blank cheque; [it] ties funding to reforms that will help students catch up, keep up and finish school.

Why has this taken so long?

The first state to sign on was Western Australia in January last year, but many other states have taken longer to agree.

Some, like NSW pushed for a 5% funding increase, when the Albanese government was initially only offering a 2.5% boost.

The federal government finally agreed to a 5% increase for South Australia and Victoria in January, in a sign the school “funding wars” were about to see some peace.

Read more:
Schools agreement provides NSW $4.8 billion extra for public schools over a decade

What’s in the new agreement?

The new funding is part of the Better and and Fairer Schools Agreement. Under this agreement, states and territories must agree to specific education reforms to qualify for the federal funding. These include:

• Year 1 phonics and early years numeracy checks

• an emphasis on “explicit teaching” (where teachers show students what to do and how to do it)

• providing intensive support for students

• support for student and teacher wellbeing

• improving teacher recruitment and retention.

The specific actions required by each state and territory are outlined in their bilateral agreements with the federal government.

The new money will take time to arrive

The federal and NSW governments have billed their deal as a means to “fully and fairly fund New South Wales public schools”. Or, as Education Minister Jason Clare noted, “this is big”.

But while the extra funding is welcome news for NSW public schools, the results of the agreed reforms will not be felt for some time. Underfunded schools will continue to be underfunded for years to come.

This is because the extra funding will gradually kick in from 2026 to 2034. So many students who currently attend underfunded public schools will not see the benefits of the increased funding during their time at school.

Keep in mind, talk of “fully funding” schools dates back to David Gonski’s 2011 report, which called for equitable funding for Australia’s education system.

Read more:
How a Cold War satellite and Robert Menzies changed the way Australian schools are funded

What about the reforms?

The federal government is placing considerable emphasis on its bid to lift wellbeing, teaching and learning standards as part of the new agreement. But the last agreement with states made little difference to schools.

The National School Reform Agreement (which expired at the end of 2024) aimed to improved academic outcomes, especially for children from disadvantaged backgrounds and improve school attendance. But there were few positive gains around its goals.

In 2022, a scathing Productivity Commission’s review of the agreement found:

The [reform agreement’s] initiatives have done little, so far, to improve student outcomes.

The new bilateral agreements contain more specific targets for each state and territory. However, this does not mean promises will be kept. Our 2024 research has shown how various education ministers make national schooling reform promises, which are then lost as the political cycle moves on.

once agreements are endorsed and ratified, the ongoing commitment to the enactment of agreed education reforms can be ‘forgotten’.

Our research has also shown how school reform also becomes stuck in the process of moving between national, state and school levels. That is, the policy intention (or reform agreement) rarely plays out the way it is intended in schools.

What now?

Does this mean the new agreement will also fail to produce “better and fairer” outcomes for some of Australia’s most marginalised and disenfranchised students?

We need to be careful that real schooling reform – of which fair and full funding to every Australian schools is an important element – is not lost to the short-term political games of the election cycle.

While the Coalition has been critical of the time taken to reach an agreement, it says it will honour the funding commitments if elected.

So assuming Queensland signs onto the new agreement before the federal election, perhaps the promise of the original Gonski reforms will finally be realised, even if it is two decades later.

Stewart Riddle receives funding from the Australian Research Council (LP210100098).

– ref. NSW has finally struck a school funding deal. What does this mean for schools and students? – https://theconversation.com/nsw-has-finally-struck-a-school-funding-deal-what-does-this-mean-for-schools-and-students-251271

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole White, Associate Professor of Statistics, Queensland University of Technology

Whether it’s for a work meeting or a class assignment, presenting data to others is a common task on our to-do list.

We use data to make decisions on our health, finances and the world we live in, yet finding the best ways to communicate data without boring your audience can be daunting.

However, there are some tried and true techniques to getting your message across effectively.

First, you need to boost your data literacy – which includes learning about the different kind of charts and how to use them.

What is data literacy?

Data literacy is the ability to “plot” and present complex data in a way that’s easy to digest. There is even a branch of statistics focusing on the best way to present data.

It’s one of the most desired skills in the workplace, yet a 2020 survey found only one in five employees across nine different countries (including Australia) believe they are data literate.

With seemingly countless options available, choosing the right chart is challenging, and the wrong choice can influence how data is interpreted.

Passing on the humble pie

Pie charts are often the first pick when it comes to presenting data with different categories, such as age group or blood type. These categories are represented as slices, with the size of each slice proportional to the amount of data.

Doughnut charts, a close relative of the pie chart, work the same way but are shown with a hole in the middle.

As delicious as they sound, these charts should be consumed in moderation.

Pie charts present data in a circular pattern, making it difficult to make comparisons when there are many groups, or when groups are similar in size. They can also misrepresent data entirely, especially when data add up to over 100%.

Here are some alternatives to pie charts that sound just as tasty, but are easier to digest.

Bar charts

Bar charts summarise data across different categories, but present them next to each other. This makes it easier to compare several categories at once.

Here is an example from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showing the different generations from the last census.

Waffle charts

Waffle charts are a good option for data organised by categories.

They present data in a grid, with each unit representing a fixed number. This is useful for presenting both large and small percentages that are difficult to compare side-by-side.

We can clearly see most people eat meat from the figure.

However, a bar chart would make comparing less common diets difficult. With a waffle chart, we can see 4% of people surveyed are vegan, while 2% are pescetarian.

Histograms

Data often represent different measurements, such as height and weight, or time taken to write an article.

Histograms also present data with bars but, unlike bar charts, are used for data collected as numbers, or numerical data.

This chart type is used to show how a set of numbers are spread out, and can be useful in seeing which numbers occur more often than others.

It’s tempting to simplify data by fitting them into categories, but this can sometimes hide interesting facts.

The example below shows the body mass index (BMI) of a group of people as a bar chart.

It’s easy to lose information when trying to simplify BMI into categories, especially among people who may be obese.

Each category in the bar chart could easily be misunderstood as representing BMI as similar ranges. However, if we look at the histogram, BMI for obese people can be as high as 70.

A doctor using this data would need to take into account that someone with a BMI of 60 may need a different treatment method compared to someone with a BMI of 30.

Line charts and scatterplots

Other chart types for numerical data, such as line charts and scatterplots, allow us to explore how different measurements are related to one another.

Line charts are used to visualise trends over time, such as stock prices and weekly flu cases.

In contrast, scatterplots show how two different measurements collected on the same subject are related.

While scatterplots summarise trends, they sometimes show unusual results that would go unnoticed if measurements were charted separately.

For example, the figure below compares life expectancy and health expenditure in different countries.

If we’re only looking at health expenditure, people from the United States would appear healthier as the US spends the most money on health care per person.

Presenting this information along with life expectancy tells a different story.

Keep it simple and avoid ‘chart junk’

It is always tempting to add more information.

“Chart junk” refers to extra information such as excess labels, 3D effects or even different types of data in the same chart.

This makes them more difficult to read and can distort the data, and is usually a sign your data is too complicated. You’re better off using multiple charts to tell the full story.

As Coco Chanel once said, “simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance”.

Keep these words in mind and choose a chart that keeps it simple without compromising style, content and detail.

Nicole White is a member of the Statistical Society of Australia.

– ref. Sick of pie charts for your uni, school or work projects? Here are 5 other options – https://theconversation.com/sick-of-pie-charts-for-your-uni-school-or-work-projects-here-are-5-other-options-250499

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tom Hartley, Lecturer in Health and Physical Education, University of Tasmania

With the AFL and NRL seasons kicking off, fantasy footy players have been deep in draft mode, carefully building their best teams.

Fantasy sports have transformed the way fans engage with many sports, sparking interest beyond simply watching matches or supporting a favourite team.

What are fantasy sports?

In simple terms, fantasy sports involve participants acting as team coaches/managers, selecting real-life players to form a fantasy team within the constraints of the game’s rules.

These teams compete based on the actual performance of the selected players in real matches. Points are awarded on various performance metrics, depending on the sport.

Many fantasy leagues also incorporate a stock market-like element. When a real-life player exceeds expectations, their fantasy value increases, while underperformance leads to a decrease in value.

This allows coaches to trade players in and out strategically, aiming to build the most valuable and high-scoring team during a season.

Success in fantasy sports often depends on statistical analysis, player scouting, and smart decision-making when it comes to trades and team selection.

The origins of fantasy sports

The first mainstream fantasy game can be attributed to Rotisserie League Baseball in 1980 by Daniel Okrent and friends.

This league required participants to track their own players’ progress using a scoring system based on statistics obtained in newspapers after a game.

With the rapid progression of technology, fantasy sports have evolved significantly, with most major sporting codes worldwide now offering multiple fantasy platforms, formats and prizes.

In Australia, the number of people playing fantasy sports has doubled since 2021, with nearly 2.5 million players engaged in one league or another.

This growth presents opportunities for content creation, expanded revenue streams, and potentially increased engagement with sports betting.

Fan engagement

The way fans engage with sports has evolved with the rise of fantasy sports, social media, and real time data tracking, leading to “second screen consumption”.

This involves fans using multiple digital platforms such as fantasy sports apps, social media and tracking of live statistics while simultaneously watching live broadcasts.

This shift has redefined the traditional sports fandom experience.

Fantasy coaches watch more games each week, with a dual identity that extends beyond traditional loyalty to the team they support.

While sports fans have historically supported a single team, fantasy sports reshape fan identity by encouraging engagement with both their favourite team and their fantasy team. Fans often watch games they normally wouldn’t be interested in specifically to watch the fantasy-relevant players involved.

Community engagement is a key motivator for participation, often surpassing interest in the real-life sports.

In Australia, a study by News Corporation Australia, which owns SuperCoach, found bragging rights, social connection and learning more about sport drive participation.

While prizes matter, the main reason people join is to connect with others.

In 2021, Australian fantasy players were largely concentrated in the larger sporting codes such as the AFL and NRL, but by 2023 it had broadened into the Big Bash League (BBL) and National Basketball League (NBL).

There are many Australians playing fantasy leagues in global sports too, from the English Premier League (soccer) to the United States’ National Football League (NFL) and National Basketball Association (NBA). Some 14% of the Australian fantasy audience plays in global leagues.

Media involvement

With some sporting seasons becoming longer and the connection to fantasy sports extending beyond live games, fans are kept invested throughout the off-season as they analyse trades, follow pre-season developments and prepare for the next competition.

Read more:
How the AFL and NRL have crept into cricket’s traditional summer timeslot

This almost year-round involvement offers extended media coverage and consumption of new content in a variety of formats.

Fantasy sport complements traditional media by offering alternative coverage, such as podcasts and short-form content that extends beyond game day, keeping fans connected throughout the week as they adjust their lineups and strategies.

Fantasy sports are also boosting viewership for new formats like AFLW by increasing fan engagement.

Rich pickings

Fantasy sport has been big business for a long time but the global fantasy sports market is challenging to quantify.

In 2013, Forbes estimated the NFL fantasy football market alone to be worth $US70 billion ($A111 billion), significantly surpassing the NFL’s 2021 revenue of $US11 billion ($A17 billion), highlighting its major role in the global sporting market.

Big revenues mainly come from sponsorship and advertising on fantasy platforms.

Major brands invest hundreds of millions of dollars in targeted advertising campaigns to capitalise on this engaged audience.

Money is also made by charging fees to enter some contests and to access premium analytics content, in-app purchases, and related entertainment products like websites and podcasts.

Links to sports betting

Many of the advertisers on fantasy platforms are gambling businesses.

Fantasy organisations have tried to highlight the differences between fantasy sports and sports betting, which has been linked to poor mental health, family violence and even suicide.

Their key argument is that betting is a game of chance whereas fantasy sports are games of skill.

Despite these differences, concerns have been raised about the links between fantasy sports and sports betting.

An Australian fantasy betting app was recently fined more than $A500,000 for illegally offering inducements to gamble in dozens of ads on its platform.

Whether or not fantasy sports are likely to encourage gambling is a grey area – studies in this space are mixed.

Some studies have found people who participate in fantasy sports are more likely to gamble and experience gambling-related problems.

However, others describe fantasy sports as a more positive alternative to gambling and that participants are motivated by the social benefits, rather than being motivated by a chance to win money.

As fantasy sports continue to evolve and attract new players, their ability to deepen fan engagement, foster community connections, and enhance the sports watching experience ensures they will remain a dynamic and influential part of the sporting world.

I have worked with members of the AFL Fantasy Traders before in schools.

Vaughan Cruickshank 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. Why are so many people obsessed with fantasy sports? – https://theconversation.com/why-are-so-many-people-obsessed-with-fantasy-sports-249010

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tailane Scapin, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Deakin University

In many countries, buying food at supermarkets, convenience stores and online has become the norm. But what’s the convenience of modern food shopping doing to our health?

Our study, published today with colleagues from UNICEF, looked at how people in 97 countries shopped for groceries over 15 years.

Globally, we found a huge increase in the number of supermarkets and convenience stores (which we’ll shorten to chain grocery stores in this article). We also found people are spending more money in these stores and on their online platforms.

But this has come at a cost to our health. People in countries with the most chain grocery stores per person buy more unhealthy food and are more likely to be obese.

Here’s why we’re so concerned about this public health disaster.

The rise of chain grocery stores

Our study analysed food industry data from a business database to understand how the food retail sector has changed worldwide over time. We looked at the kinds of stores, how much people spend there, and how much unhealthy processed food is sold. We linked these trends with changes in obesity rates using data from a large global initiative.

We found the density of chain grocery stores (number of stores per 10,000 people) has increased globally by 23.6% over 15 years (from 2009 to 2023).

We found far more of these stores per person in high-income countries, as you may expect. However, it’s in low- and middle-income countries where numbers are increasing the fastest.

Rapid urbanisation, rising incomes and customer demand mean large retail companies see these countries as new potential markets.

For example, the density of chain grocery stores increased by about 21% a year in Myanmar, about 18% a year in Vietnam and about 12% a year in Cambodia.

We’re shopping online too

The data in our study also covers the rise of online food shopping. For instance, the worldwide spend on online grocery shopping was 325% more in 2023 compared with 2014.

Out of the 27 countries we looked at for online food shopping, people in the United Arab Emirates and the United States were the top spenders. In 2023, the average person in the United Arab Emirates spent about US$617 that year, 570% more than in 2014. In the US, the average person spent US$387 in 2023. That’s about 125% more than in 2014.

It seems many of us took to online shopping during the early days of the COVID pandemic, a habit that appears to have stuck.

More chain stores, more junk food, more obesity

The rise of chain grocery stores, including their online platforms, is also changing what we eat.

Over the 15 years of our study, there has been a 10.9% increase in the sales of unhealthy processed food from those chain grocery stores.

In South Asia, the increase has been particularly rapid. People in Pakistan have been buying 5% more unhealthy processed foods from chain grocery stores every year for the past 15 years. In India, it’s 4% more and in Bangladesh 3% more.

Over 15 years, our study also showed the percentage of people with obesity across all countries rose from 18.2% to 23.7%. It was the countries with the biggest increases in chain grocery stores where we saw the sharpest increases in obesity.

Laos is a good example. The number of chain grocery stores per person in the country has been increasing by 15% each year since 2009, while the percentage of people with obesity has doubled from 2009 to 2023.

In almost all countries, obesity is on the rise. In Australia, overweight and obesity have recently officially overtaken tobacco as the biggest burden on our health.

Why do we think supermarkets are to blame?

Supermarkets and hypermarkets sell healthy foods, such as fruit and vegetables. Yet, there are good reasons to think our retail environment might be to blame for the rise in obesity.

Highly processed foods

Chain grocery stores typically sell an enormous array of highly processed packaged foods high in sugar, fat and salt that can harm our health. One study of the food and drinks available in supermarkets from 12 countries showed the majority are classified as unhealthy. Given our findings of rapid increases in chain grocery in low- and middle-income countries, it was alarming in this study that the least healthy products were typically seen in supermarkets from countries like India, China and Chile.

Heavy promotion

Chain grocery stores often aggressively promote unhealthy foods. This includes through price discounting; advertising in circulars, on TV and social media; and by being placed in prominent displays at checkouts and the ends of aisles. Studies have shown this to be true in Belgium, Ireland and another 12 countries.

Online, we see unhealthy foods promoted more often (with discounts and displayed more prominently) than healthy options. For instance, on average at least one-third of products prominently displayed on Australian supermarket websites are unhealthy.

More buying power

Compared to small independent grocers, large chain grocery stores globally have a far larger influence on decisions around product assortment and price. Because of this, they can control supply chains, often in partnership with national and multi-national food manufacturers of ultra processed, unhealthy packaged foods.

What can we do about it?

There are many social, political, cultural and economic factors that contribute to the rise in obesity globally. Many of these relate to the price, availability and promotion of food in retail settings and the way the retail industry is structured.

Because of this, we think it’s time for governments and retailers to step up and start making changes to where and how we shop for food.

Some countries are already beginning to act. In the United Kingdom for example, government legislation now prevents placing unhealthy foods in prominent places such as the checkout counter and at the ends of aisles close to checkouts. From October this year, further restrictions on the price promotion of unhealthy foods (such as “buy one, get one free”) will also come into force in the UK.

There is also plenty that retailers can do. In Norway, for example, one major grocery chain launched a comprehensive healthy eating campaign several years ago, including by increasing the size and prominence of healthy food displays and offering discounts on fruits and vegetables. This led to a 42% increase in vegetable sales and a 25% rise in fruit sales from 2012 until 2020.

But most grocery chains are still not doing enough to prioritise their customers’ health and nutrition. In the US, we see this in particular for supermarkets catering to people on low-incomes. And in the UK, although there has been some promising progress by some supermarket retailers, all those assessed have considerable scope for improvement.

Now more than ever, it is time to create healthier retail food environments that support nutritious diets and help reverse the rising rates of obesity.

Tailane Scapin receives funding from UNICEF.

Adrian Cameron receives funding from the National Heart Foundation of Australia, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and UNICEF. He is affiliated with INFORMAS (International Network for Food and Obesity / Non-communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support) and is the Director of the RE-FRESH: Next Generation NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Food Retail Environments for Health.

– ref. We looked at what supermarkets in 97 countries are doing to our waistlines. Here’s what we found – https://theconversation.com/we-looked-at-what-supermarkets-in-97-countries-are-doing-to-our-waistlines-heres-what-we-found-246412

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leonora Risse, Associate Professor in Economics, University of Canberra

Women’s annual earnings are closing in on men’s, with the gender pay gap in Australia’s private sector shrinking from 14.5% to 13.6% in the past year.

It’s a steady improvement, down from a 15.4% gap two years ago.

While women are working and earning more than ever before, they are now empowered with even more information to take into salary negotiations and to decide which companies to work for.

This information is especially valuable in a tight labour market, with the unemployment rate at just 4.1%, as companies fight for top talent.

This is the second year the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) has published company gender pay gaps, responding to concerns that progress on gender equality had been stalling.

Pay gap transparency tackles the problem of “asymmetric information” where employers know where each worker sits on the pay scale, but employees don’t.

Data from 7,800 private companies

Women’s typical full-time annual salaries sat at A$72,638 in 2023–24, compared to men’s $84,048.

Though narrowing, that’s still a gap of $11,410 a year, or around $220 a week.

The gap is much larger once bonuses, overtime and superannuation are included: $18,835 or a total remuneration gap of 18.3%.

All private companies in Australia with at least 100 employees must report their data to the federal agency. This covers 5.3 million employees across 7,800 companies, a big expansion from last year’s 5,000 companies as more companies improve their data reporting.

Employees can look at the agency’s website to find the gender pay gap of their private sector employer – or one they are thinking of joining.

This year’s calculations of company gender pay gaps also incorporate the salaries of top executives.

When CEOs and heads of business are factored in, the difference in men’s and women’s average total remuneration swells to $28,435, or 21.8%.

This all adds up to men out-earning women by an average of $547 per week.

A closer look at company-level gender pay gaps

Across all companies, the average gender gap in total remuneration is 13.0%. But the magnitude varies widely across different companies.

Around 2,200 companies (around one-quarter) have a gap exceeding 20%. Of these, around 250 companies have a gap stretching beyond 40%.

At the other end, around one-quarter of companies have a gap that is either zero or negative, meaning in favour of women.

The agency considers a gender pay gap within the range of negative 5% to positive 5% to be a reasonable measure to aim for.

Of the largest organisations (with 5,000 or more employees), airlines are among the worst performers. Virgin has an average gender gap in total remuneration of 41.7% while Qantas reports a gap of 39.2%.

Among the banks, Commonwealth Bank and Westpac both report an average gender pay gap of 22.4%. Suncorp’s gap sits at 19.3%, NAB’s is at 19.0%, and ANZ has a gap of 18.8%.

Progress is happening

The purpose of publishing company pay gap data is to propel progress on gender equality in Australian workplaces.

It follows legislated reforms designed to motivate employers to pay closer attention to their gender pay gap and take more action.

Comparisons to last year’s data suggest this is happening. The agency reports that just over half of all employers (56%) reduced their gender pay gap. And 68% conducted an analysis of their gender pay gap, which is an important first step in making progress.

Greater transparency makes employers more accountable for improving working conditions.

It is also a way to recognise the companies that are improving over time and learn from their success.

Correct interpretation is critical

The gender pay gap, measured as the difference between men’s and women’s earnings, is not the same as equal pay for equal or comparable work. For over 50 years, it has been against the law in Australia to pay men and women differently for doing work of equal value.

Employer-level gaps in earnings reflects a combination of factors, including gender patterns in the different types of occupations that men and women tend to be in within a company. But these gender patterns in job types do not explain the whole picture.

Biases and barriers persist, including unconscious favouritism, gender imbalances in care-giving responsibilities and the perpetuation of gender stereotypes.

This is also not a gap that can be explained by women working fewer hours than men. The calculations include part-time employees, whose pay is converted into an annualised full-time equivalent.

Each employer has the chance to provide deeper analysis and explanation of their gender pay gap, and the actions they are taking, in their official employer statements which are also available on the agnecy’s website.

This information will empower not just current employees but also prospective employees, customers, business partners and the wider community in their choices of which companies to work for, do business with, and endorse – and which ones not to.

Read more:
Now you’re able to look up individual companies’ gender pay gaps

Leonora Risse receives research funding from the Trawalla Foundation and the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia. She has previously undertaken commissioned research for the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. She is a member of the Economic Society of Australia and the Women in Economics Network. She serves as an Expert Panel Member on gender pay equity for the Fair Work Commission.

– ref. Women’s annual salaries are narrowing the gap. But men still out-earn women by an average $547 a week – https://theconversation.com/womens-annual-salaries-are-narrowing-the-gap-but-men-still-out-earn-women-by-an-average-547-a-week-251034

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Raffaele F Ciriello, Senior Lecturer in Business Information Systems, University of Sydney

Have you ever been called a Luddite? We have – usually as an insult, rooted in a popular misconception that Luddites are anti-progress fanatics.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The original 19th century Luddites weren’t against technology. Rather, they resisted its oppressive use.

Their rebellion was violently suppressed. But their core critique lives on: technology should benefit all of humanity, not a privileged few.

Today, as Silicon Valley billionaires and United States president Donald Trump turbocharge corporate control of public digital infrastructure, this critique rings truer than ever.

In response, we are a seeing a growing surge of attempts to wrest back control of technology for democratic ends. This is a kind of “digital Luddism” which echoes past struggles against high-tech injustice.

The original Luddites

The Luddites were 19th century English textile workers who destroyed machinery threatening their craft and livelihoods. Historians call their tactics “collective bargaining by riot”. They were fighting against technologies that centralised power and stripped workers of dignity.

Luddite resistance was part of broader struggles for labour rights and socioeconomic justice.

For example, in 18th century France, silk weavers similarly revolted against mechanisation that devalued their craft.

Earlier, England’s Diggers and Levellers resisted the privatisation of communal lands. This foreshadowed today’s battles over corporate control of digital infrastructure.

The Luddites faced severe punishment, including imprisonment and even execution. Despite this, their legacy endures. Today, dismissing critics of Big Tech as “Luddites” repeats the mistake of conflating resistance to exploitation with fear of progress.

In the most extreme scenario, unchecked corporate power allied with monstrous government polices can lead to atrocities. In Nazi Germany, for example, Dehomag, a former subsidiary of computer giant IBM, provided data systems to the Nazis to track victims. Chemical company IG Farben also supplied Zyklon B gas for extermination camps. Many other companies profited from forced labour and funded the regime. This shows how complicity can make oppression more efficient.

Today, digital technologies are deepening inequality, eroding democracy, undermining privacy, and concentrating power.

Digital technologies are also fuelling surveillance capitalism, the displacement of human workers by AI algorithms and the growth of monopolistic platforms.

Platforms and AI systems governed by “broligarchs” such as Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg are also shaping politics, culture, and beliefs globally.

Digital Luddism, also known as neo-Luddism, tackles these issues through three strategies: resistance, removal and replacement.

Resistance: blocking harmful systems

Technology is not inevitable — it’s a choice. Sustained collective action can counter corporate dominance and align tech with democratic values.

In 2018, more than 3,000 Google workers protested the company’s military AI contract, forcing it to adopt ethical guidelines. However, in February this year, Google expanded defence deals, showing how resistance must be sustained.

Three years later, Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen exposed the harmful algorithms at the heart of the social media platform.

Then, in 2024, Amazon and Google staff also staged walkouts over a US$1.2 billion AI contract linked to Israeli military operations.

Creative industries are also fighting back. For example, in 2023 screenwriters and actors in Hollywood protested against AI replacing their roles. Similarly, Australia’s “right to disconnect” law reflects Luddite principles of reclaiming autonomy.

Non-profit organisations such as the Algorithmic Justice League and the Electronic Frontier Foundation empower digital rights advocates to take back control over digital spaces by exposing AI bias and through legal litigation.

Digital Luddism doesn’t reject innovation. It demands technology serve stakeholders, not shareholders.

Removal: dismantling entrenched power

Some systems are beyond reform, requiring direct intervention. Removal involves political action and legal regulation. It also involves public pressure to break monopolies or impose penalties on unethical corporations.

For example, the TraffickingHub petition has garnered more than two million signatories to hold adult website PornHub accountable for unethical or unlawful content. This has led financial institutions, such as Visa and Mastercard, to cut ties to the website. For more than 20 years, hacker collective Anonymous has carried out cyber-attacks on authoritarian regimes, extremists and corporations.

Digital Luddites can also lend a hand to the long arm of the law.

The European Union’s 2023 Digital Markets Act broke Apple’s app store monopoly. This sparked a surge in small EU developers.

Big Tech has also repeatedly faced huge fines and antitrust lawsuits. However, breaking up or nationalising these corporations remains rhetoric for now.

Replacement: building ethical alternatives

Proprietary corporate systems have long been challenged by free, open-source alternatives.

But digital Luddism isn’t just about using different tools. It’s about systemic change towards sustainable, transparent and user-controlled infrastructure.

After Elon Musk’s Twitter takeover, decentralised alternatives that let users control content flourished. For example, Bluesky grew from 1 million to more than 27 million users in one year.

The Australian government is also responding to a broader public demand for platform independence. For example, it has introduced policies aimed at enhancing people’s data rights. Its Digital Transformation Agency is also advocating for improved open data standards.

Open-source AI projects such as China’s DeepSeek and HuggingFace’s Deep Research now rival corporate models, proving open tech is a force to reckon with.

The original Luddites smashed machines. But the global nature of today’s digital infrastructure makes physical sabotage impractical. That’s why digital Luddism isn’t about smashing screens. Instead, it’s about smashing oppressive systems.

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. Digital Luddites are rising. They want to democratise tech, not destroy it – https://theconversation.com/digital-luddites-are-rising-they-want-to-democratise-tech-not-destroy-it-251155

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Miroslav Filipovic, Professor, Western Sydney University

Radio astronomers see what the naked eye can’t. As we study the sky with telescopes that record radio signals rather than light, we end up seeing a lot of circles.

The newest generation of radio telescopes – including the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) and MeerKAT, a telescope in South Africa – is revealing incredibly faint cosmic objects, never before seen.

In astronomy, surface brightness is a measure that tells us how easily visible an object is. The extraordinary sensitivity of MeerKAT and ASKAP is now revealing a new “low surface brightness universe” to radio astronomers. It’s comprised of radio sources so faint they have never been seen before, each with their own unique physical properties.

Many of the ASKAP results presented here were obtained with one of its major observing programs called EMU (Evolutionary Map of the Universe). EMU is mapping the entire southern sky with an unprecedented sensitivity and will deliver the most detailed map of the southern hemisphere sky to date – a spectacular new radio atlas that will be used for decades to come.

EMU’s all-hemisphere coverage paired with ASKAP’s exceptional sensitivity, especially within the Milky Way, is what’s yielded so many recent discoveries.

Here’s what they’re teaching us.

Unstable stars

The ghostly ring Kýklos (from the Greek κύκλος, circle or ring) and the object WR16 both show the environment of rare and unusual celestial objects known as Wolf-Rayet stars.

When big stars are close to running out of fuel, they become unstable as they enter one of the last stages of the stellar life cycle, becoming a Wolf-Rayet star. They begin surging and pulsing, shedding their outer layers which can form bright nebulous structures around the star.

In these objects, a previous outflow of material has cleared the space around the star, allowing the current outburst to expand symmetrically in all directions. This sphere of stellar detritus shows itself as a circle.

Exploded stars

Stingray 1, Perun, Ancora and Unicycle are supernova remnants. When a big star finally runs out of fuel, it can no longer hold back the crush of gravity. The matter falling inwards causes one final explosion, and the remains of these violent star deaths are known as supernovas.

Their expanding shockwaves sweep up material into an expanding sphere, forming beautiful circular features.

The supernova remnant will be deformed by its environment over time. If one side of the explosion slams into an interstellar cloud, we’ll see a squashed shape. So, a near-perfect circle in a messy universe is a special find.

Teleios – named from the Greek Τελεɩοσ (“perfect”) for its near-perfectly circular shape – is shown below. This unique object has never been seen in any wavelength, including visible light, demonstrating ASKAP’s incredible ability to discover new objects.

The shape indicates Teleios has remained relatively untouched by its environment. This presents us with an opportunity to make inferences about the initial supernova explosion, providing rare insight into one of the most energetic events in the universe.

At the other extreme, we can take an object and discover something entirely new about it. The Diprotodon supernova remnant is shown below.

This remnant is one of the largest objects in the sky, appearing approximately six times larger than the Moon. Hence the name: the animal Diprotodon, one of Australia’s most famous megafauna, a giant wombat that lived about 25,000 years ago.

ASKAP’s sensitivity has uncovered the object’s full extent. This discovery led to further analysis, uncovering more of the history and the physics behind this object. The messy internal structure can be seen as different parts of the expanding shell slam into a busy interstellar environment.

A cosmic mirror

Lagotis is another object that can show how new telescope data can reclassify previously discovered objects. The reflection nebula VdB-80 has been seen before, within the plane of our Milky Way galaxy. The light we see was emitted by nearby stars, and then reflected off a nearby cloud of gas and dust.

However, with newly available ASKAP EMU data, we were able to discover an associated cloud of ionised hydrogen (known as an HII region, pronounced “aitch two”), where stellar energy has caused the gaseous matter to lose its electrons.

This HII region is seen to coexist with the reflection nebula, sharing the same stellar centre, and is created from the star pushing into a molecular cloud. This movement is akin to burrowing, so the object earned the name Lagotis after Macrotis lagotis, the Australian greater bilby.

Outside the galaxy

ASKAP and MeerKAT are also illuminating objects from outside our Milky Way galaxy – for example, “radio ring” galaxies. When we use visible light to look at the stars in this galaxy, we see a rather plain disk.

But in radio light, we see a ring. Why is there a hole in the middle? Perhaps the combined force of many exploding supernovas has pushed all the radio-emitting clouds out of the centre. We’re not sure – we’re looking for more examples to test our ideas.

Finally, LMC-ORC is an Odd Radio Circle (ORC), a prominent new class of objects with unfamiliar origins. Only being visible in radio light, they are perhaps the most mysterious of all.

The next generation

MeerKAT and ASKAP are revealing incredible insights into the low surface brightness universe. However, they are precursors for the Square Kilometre Array, an international collaborative endeavour that will increase the abilities of radio astronomers and reveal even more unique features of the universe.

The low-surface brightness universe presents many mysteries. These discoveries push our understanding further. Currently, the EMU survey using ASKAP is only 25% complete.

As more of this survey becomes available, we will discover many more unique and exciting objects, both new to astrophysics and extensions on previously known objects.

Acknowledgements: Aaron Bradley and Zachary Smeaton, Masters Research Students at Western Sydney University, made valuable contributions to this article.

Nicholas Tothill receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Andrew Hopkins, Luke Barnes, and Miroslav Filipovic 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. ‘Ghosts of the radio universe’: astronomers have discovered a slew of faint circular objects – https://theconversation.com/ghosts-of-the-radio-universe-astronomers-have-discovered-a-slew-of-faint-circular-objects-249141

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yee-Fui Ng, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Monash University

The question of how best to eliminate corruption has exercised the minds of philosophers as much as the practical drafters of legislation from Ancient Greek and Roman times.

Within the political sphere, the notion of “corruption” has fluctuated between broad and narrow conceptions.

The broad conception relates to the decay of institutions or of the stature of the individuals who comprise them. On the other hand, the narrow conception focuses on the abuse of public office for private gain.

There is also “grey corruption” – which involves questionable behaviour involving a breach of integrity standards that does not necessarily amount to criminal conduct.

This could include where a person has undue influence over a politician, such as by essentially buying that power through making large donations or hiring expensive lobbyists, particularly where it causes public officials to behave in corrupt ways.

However the notion is defined, it is clear the fight against corruption is one of the basic tasks of a liberal democracy, perhaps even of an effectively functioning civil society.

Corruption control is a pressing issue worldwide: the United Nations estimated the economic cost of corruption at 5% of global domestic product or $3.6 trillion annually.

Australia has had a number of major corruption scandals throughout its history. Corruption was rife in the colonial era, where wealthy landholders sought to influence parliamentarians with monetary bribes.

This has been followed by several major corruption scandals, such as the Fitzgerald inquiry, which revealed widespread police corruption involving illegal gambling and prostitution.

What are anti-corruption commissions?

Anti-corruption commissions are arguably the most significant tool developed in liberal democracies to fight corruption in recent times.

The first anti-corruption commission in Australia, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), was established in New South Wales in 1988 by then premier Nick Greiner.

Infamously, a few years later, Greiner became the first premier to resign due to an ICAC investigation.

Over the next few decades, all states and territories have set up their own anti-corruption or integrity commissions.

In 2023, the Commonwealth followed suit with the introduction of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), a promise made by Anthony Albanese in the lead-up to the 2022 election after considerable pressure from the public and from within parliament.

As a result, Australia now has a comprehensive network of broad-based public sector anti-corruption agencies covering all levels of government – a significant development nationally and internationally.

Anti-corruption commissions are tasked with investigating serious and systemic corrupt conduct in government. This includes not just members of the House and Senate, but their staff and public servants.

In performing their functions, these commissions have strong coercive powers, equivalent to the powers of a royal commission. This includes the power to compel documents and witnesses.

Some anti-corruption commissions such as the NACC and NSW’s ICAC have the power to conduct public hearings if they believe it’s in the public interest. This increases transparency in government. But concerns have been expressed about reputational damage for those subject to investigations.

Anti-corruption commissions also have corruption prevention functions. They are tasked with educating the public about the detrimental effects of corruption on public administration.

Reports of anti-corruption commissions are often attended by significant media publicity, leading to public awareness of corruption in government.

Why are anti-corruption commissions needed?

It has become well accepted that effective anti-corruption institutions play an important role as institutions supporting constitutional democracy.

The state anti-corruption bodies have brought to light many indiscretions by politicians that would have otherwise remained hidden.

Without these commissions, corruption in the public sector can take root without us knowing about it. An anti-corruption agency is a powerful deterrent against improper behaviour.

Yet anti-corruption commissions tend to be unpopular within governments because they scrutinise government action. This means the a commission may expose improper conduct or corruption within their ranks.

It is common for governments hostile to anti-corruption commissions to attack them, including by reducing their powers or funding.

This is despite their integral role in our democracy. Alongside other oversight bodies such as the ombudsman (who investigates maladministration within government) and auditor-general (who performs audits of government expenditure), anti-corruption commissions form part of an intricate, interlocking integrity framework that monitors executive action.

Who watches the watchdogs?

A big question is about how we ensure anti-corruption commissions do not overstep their bounds. Given their broad coercive powers, how do we hold them to account?

From their inception, concerns have been expressed about the potential for anti-corruption bodies to infringe on civil liberties, and the possibility they may exceed or abuse their powers.

In Australia, anti-corruption commissions are subject to a strong system of accountability through parliaments and the courts. They report to dedicated parliamentary committees who scrutinise their actions and decisions. Complaints against anti-corruption commissions can be made to a dedicated inspectorate – an independent statutory officer who oversees their actions.

Anti-corruption commissions are also subject to judicial review by the courts to ensure they don’t exceed their legal boundaries. Court scrutiny occurs when a person investigated by an anti-corruption commission takes their grievance to court.

To be effective, anti-corruption commissions require strong powers and institutional independence. But this needs to be balanced with accountability and the protection of individual rights.

What is pork barrelling and what are some recent examples?

Pork barrelling involves governments channelling public funds to seats they hold or seats they would like to win from an opponent, as a way of winning voters’ favour. This means the money is used for political purposes, rather than proper allocation according to merit.

We have been inundated with pork barrelling scandals in recent years. This includes the car park rorts scandal, where 77% of the commuter car park sites selected were in electorates held by the then Coalition government, rather than in areas of real need with congestion issues.

This followed close on the heels of the “sports rorts” scandal. Minister Bridget McKenzie resigned from cabinet following allegations she had intervened in the sport grants program to benefit the Coalition government while in a position of conflict of interest.

My research has shown that pork barrelling is an intractable problem across multiple governments over many decades. It takes different forms based on electoral systems.

Australia has a single member electorate parliamentary system, which makes it more susceptible to pork barrelling than multi-member electorates such as Norway or Spain. The belief is that politicians who “bring home the bacon” for their constituents are electorally rewarded for doing so.

This means there are incentives for the central cabinet to strategically apportion benefits to marginal electorates to increase prospects of electoral success. There is also an incentive to bias the apportionment of funds towards the party in power.

In short, rorts scandals keep happening because governments believe that channelling money to marginal and government electorates will win them elections.

Potentially the NACC could investigate rorts scandals, but only where it amounts to serious or systemic corrupt conduct.

How do we fix the grants system?

At the federal level, we have sophisticated financial management legislation that provides a framework for grant rules. The Commonwealth grant rules provide a detailed set of guidelines that ministers and government officials must follow on grant application and selection processes.

However, there are significant loopholes in the rules. For example, the “car park rorts” scandal is not covered by these rules because it involves money being channelled through the states.

Also, there are no sanctions for breaching the rules. So ministers and government officials can break the rules without any repercussions.

To fix the system, we need to reform the rules about grants allocation and close the loopholes. We also need to impose punishment for breaching the rules.

It is imperative our grants administration system be reformed to ensure that taxpayer funds are protected from governmental abuse. If the ministerial discretion available in grants processes is improperly used, this can give rise to political favouritism and corruption.

How corrupt is Australia compared to other countries?

There is a public perception that a small elite is reaping large benefits in Australian society in terms of political influence and its flow-on dividends.

In Australia, the “game of mates” is flourishing. There’s now a revolving door in politics with many politicians, advisers and senior government officials leaving the public sector to become well-paid lobbyists.

Add to that the appointments of political “mates” to commissions, tribunals and cushy ambassadorships and the blatant misuse of parliamentary entitlements such as helicopter trips on taxpayer funds.

Political parties are also accepting millions of dollars in donations from lobbyists and others interested in influencing policy outcomes.

All of this adds to the perception that the system is rigged – and not in favour of the person on the street.

Australia has fallen steadily in Transparency International’s global corruption index, from 8th place in 2012 to 14th in 2024. But even so, Australia is the 14th-least corrupt country in the world, which is still a respectable ranking.

More alarming is the fact that one in 30 Australian public servants said in a survey last year they had seen a colleague acting in a corrupt manner.

The types of corruption witnessed included cronyism or nepotism (favourable treatment of friends or family members without proper regard to merit). Fraud, forgery, embezzlement and conflicts of interest were also reported.

In the 1980s, there were incidences of large-scale corruption that rocked the country, culminating in the Fitzgerald Inquiry in Queensland and the WA Inc Royal Commission in Western Australia. These scandals led to the resignations and imprisonments of various former ministers and officials.

Although we have not sunk to such depths since then, state anti-corruption commissions, such as the NSW ICAC, have uncovered various instances of corruption in recent years. The NSW ICAC’s inquiries have led to the resignations of several politicians, as well as the conviction of former Labor MP Eric Obeid.

Another classic case of corruption exposed by the ICAC led to the downfall of former Newcastle lord mayor, Jeff McCloy. McCloy famously bragged that politicians treated him like a “walking ATM” and admitted to giving two MPs envelopes of cash amounting to $10,000.

In Victoria, the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission’s (IBAC) revealed that a lobbyist funnelled suitcases of cash totalling more than $100,000 from a property developer to a councillor, under the guise of sham transactions.

These explosive scandals involving corrupt conduct by public officials have eroded public trust in politicians. But the exposure of these scandals by anti-corruption commissions have an important deterrent and educative effect on public officials and the broader public.

Our faith in government has been eroded by a lack of transparency and the perception that those in power are enjoying unfair benefits. The active investigations by robust institutions such as anti-corruption commissions will act as checks and balances on governmental power – and are key to a vibrant democracy.

This is an edited extract from How Australian Democracy Works, a new book from leading authors at The Conversation on all aspects of our political system and its history, out March 4.

Yee-Fui Ng 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. Democracy’s bad eggs: corruption, pork-barrelling and abuses of power – https://theconversation.com/democracys-bad-eggs-corruption-pork-barrelling-and-abuses-of-power-229888

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Ghezelbash, Professor and Director, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney

Misinformation is a significant threat to our society. It undermines public discussion, erodes social cohesion, leads to bad policy and weakens democracy.

Misinformation on refugee and migrant issues is particularly pervasive – especially in the lead up to elections, as bad-faith actors try to promote fear, distrust and simplistic solutions.

And sometimes, misinformation is specifically targeted at migrant communities themselves, sowing division in an effort to influence elections.

So, what’s the best way to counter misinformation about refugees and migrants? And given the risk that publicly addressing lies and rumours can sometimes end up spreading them, when is misinformation best ignored?

A new report by the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law and the Behavioural Insights Team (a behavioural science research company) uses science to answer these questions.

Behavioural science explains why and how misinformation works. Understanding some of that science can empower all of us to stop its spread.

Misinformation increases during elections

The recent US presidential race provides a stark example of how misinformation on refugees and migrants soars during elections.

During one presidential debate, Donald Trump falsely claimed migrants in Ohio were “eating the pets”. Though entirely untrue, this baseless claim spread rapidly across social media.

Australia is not immune to such deception. While refugees and migrants make significant positive economic, social and cultural contributions to their host societies, politicians across the spectrum have falsely blamed them for issues ranging from rising house prices to crime.

This is not new. Back in the 2001 election campaign, government ministers made false claims that people seeking asylum had thrown their children overboard from a boat. These are widely regarded as having contributed to turning around the fortunes of the Howard government, which was then trailing in the polls.

Instead of addressing challenges with real solutions, these strategies scapegoat refugees and migrants, and ignore their immense positive contributions.

Misinformation leads to a more divided and polarised society. So, how does it spread?

6 ways misinformation spreads

Online platforms create the perfect breeding ground for misinformation to spread.

The rise of AI-generated misinformation – such as highly convincing deepfake images and videos – only exacerbates the problem.

Combating misinformation begins with understanding the psychological factors that drive its spread and influence.

Our new report identifies six key behavioural science principles that explain how misinformation takes hold:

1. Hot states: Heightened emotions, such as fear, outrage or anxiety, make people more reactive and less critical of misleading claims.

2. The messenger effect: People judge a message’s truth based on who shares it, often trusting friends and family over experts.

3. The mere-exposure effect: Seeing misinformation multiple times makes it seem more true, making people more likely to share it.

4. Confirmation bias: People are more likely to believe false information that aligns with their values and reject facts that challenge them.

5. Cognitive load: When overwhelmed by information, people are less likely to question what they see, making them more vulnerable to falsehoods.

6. Continued influence effect: Misinformation has a lasting effect on our attitudes and decisions, even after it has been corrected.

Building on these principles and an extensive review of research literature, we developed an evidence-based framework for countering misinformation about refugees and migrants.

It provides a step-by-step guide on what to do when faced with falsehoods, starting with recognising whether the misinformation is anticipated or already circulating.

When misinformation is anticipated

When you expect a particular false claim, but it’s not yet out there, then prebunk. Alert people to manipulation tactics before they become widespread.

This helps people recognise and resist misinformation before it takes hold.

When misinformation is already circulating

If false claims are already out there, first ask three questions before acting:

1. is the claim prominent (visible and gaining traction)?
2. is it persuasive (able to change people’s minds)?
3. is it proximate (relevant to your audience and cause)?

If the answer to any of these questions is no, then reframe the agenda. Instead of amplifying falsehoods, shift your resources to sharing stories that reinforce accurate information and resonate with your audience’s values.

If misinformation is indeed prominent, persuasive and proximate, debunk it.

Use the fact, myth, fallacy, fact – or “fact sandwich” – method. Make the correction clear, credible and effective by stating the truth, then presenting the myth, explaining its flaws, and reinforcing the correct fact.

Here’s an example that leads with a fact, warns about the myth, explains the fallacy and then ends with a fact:

When Australia’s borders were closed during COVID, migration was at its lowest in a century — yet house prices still went up. The idea that cutting migration will magically solve the housing crisis doesn’t hold up against the evidence.

But some political actors are blaming migrants, as if they’re the main reason housing has become unaffordable.

In fact, this oversimplifies the problem. The housing crisis has been a long time in the making, and it’s now this severe because of past policy choices piling up.

There are many drivers of Australia’s housing crisis, including a lack of housing, rising construction costs, and tax breaks that distort the market. Migration is only a small piece of the puzzle.

How to engage audiences

The report also details seven strategies that drive reach and impact. These include publicly communicating in a way that’s:

• consistent
• repeated
• coordinated with other groups with similar goals
• appeals to your audience’s values and emotions, and
• uses humour.

One part of a broader approach

These strategies can be used by anyone seeking to push back against misinformation in our public debate, not just about refugees and migrants.

However, communication approaches are only one lever.

To turn the tide on misinformation, society needs systemic solutions. These include media literacy education and regulatory reform of online platforms.

As we approach Australia’s next federal election, addressing misinformation about refugees and migrants is more crucial than ever to protect refugees and migrants from harm, strengthen our democratic processes, and foster a more inclusive society.

Daniel Ghezelbash receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the NSW government and the Robert Bosch Foundation. He is a board member of Refugee Advice and Casework Services, Wallumatta Legal, and the Access to Justice and Technology Network. He is also a Special Counsel at the National Justice Project.

Saul Wodak is affiliated with the Behavioural Insights Team.

– ref. Misinformation on refugees and migrants is rife during elections. We found 6 ways it spreads – and how to stop it – https://theconversation.com/misinformation-on-refugees-and-migrants-is-rife-during-elections-we-found-6-ways-it-spreads-and-how-to-stop-it-251035

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendon O’Connor, Professor in U.S. Politics and U.S. Foreign Relations, United States Studies Centre,, University of Sydney

Since returning to the US presidency, Donald Trump has outdone himself, gaining global media headlines and attention with outrageous statements and dramatic decisions.

The most consequential decision so far has been the freezing of many US aid and development programs. The freeze had an immediate impact. Even with some waivers now in place, it is likely that starving people in Ethiopia will not get the famine relief desperately needed; food is rotting in African harbours as constitutional battles over executive power are waged in Washington.

In Africa alone, the US has also been funding lifesaving malaria prevention efforts and HIV/AIDS drug programs. Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency has cruelly disrupted those.

There are numerous examples of other reckless policy decisions. In terms of long term consequences, arguably the worst decision Trump has made is pulling the United States out of the Paris Agreement on climate change. He also wound back a slew of Biden administration policies while erasing the term “climate change” from various government websites.

Trump has attempted to bully Mexico and Canada with threats of a 25% tax on all imports from those two trading partners. He has also imposed a 10% tariff on all Chinese imports coming into the US.

Then there are Trump’s statements on Ukraine, Gaza and Panama. Last weekend, his treatment of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House meeting caused widespread dismay around the world, as Trump doubled down on his promotion of Putin’s talking points and Russian government interests.

So what’s Trump’s game plan?

With Trump, it is tempting to claim he is a chaos merchant with no plan or method to his madness. According to this view, when he is challenged or criticised, he will escalate the threats and increase the insults.

Therefore, conventional wisdom has it that the best way to deal with Trump is to flatter and humour him, then wait for his attention to be distracted by another prize. This understanding of Trump has been developed by international relations scholar Daniel Drezner into the “toddler-in-chief” thesis.

Psychological understandings of Trump are useful to a point, but it is worth remembering presidencies are run by vast administrations of people, departments and agencies, and not just one person. Moreover, an institution as large as the US Defense Department – with its two million employees and military bases in at least 80 countries around the world – has a near permanent mindset of its own. This, in turn, tends to make presidents as seemingly different as Obama and Trump custodians of many similar military policies and postures.

The way I have initially examined Trump in my own research is to see him as a hardline conservative nationalist who believes projecting US power with tough talk and reminding other nations of American military might is the best approach to world politics.

Previous Republican presidents, most notably George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, adopted this so-called “cowboy” approach. It’s a posture that rejects the idea that the US is the leader of a liberal international order (a leadership role promoted by their Democratic party opponents).

My starting point for analysis sees continuities between Reagan, Bush and Trump, and highlights their arrogance and ignorance when it comes to dealing with the rest of the world.

Similar, but different

However, there are some things about Trump that are clearly different and distinct. Before his second term, the most unusual aspect of Trump’s foreign policy approach was the volume and range of his scattergun rhetoric towards other leaders and nations. For example, he threatened North Korea with “fire and fury and, frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before”, but later told a rally of supporters that, “We fell in love. No, really. He wrote me beautiful letters.”

As for academic perspectives that might help us better understand what kind of politician Trump is and what his next moves might be, the obvious label is “crudely transactional”. His attitude to most minor and middle powers seems to be “what have you done for me lately?” or “why does America owe your nation anything?”.

When it comes to Russia, and potentially China, there has been speculation Trump is adopting a geopolitical approach with parallels to the “great game” of the 19th century. The “great game” is another way of saying imperialism, and this is a largely underused way of describing American foreign policy in general and the second Trump administration in particular.

Then there is the question of whether the (other) “f-word” is a useful way to understand Trump and Trumpism: are his rhetoric and his domestic and international policies fascist? They are definitely ultra-nationalist and racist, which are two key components of fascism; Trumpism revolves around a charismatic leader that has enough in common with fascist Italy and Nazi Germany to make opponents of Trump justifiably nervous. But does Trumpism have the other key element of fascism: mob or state violence that is at times directed at scapegoated enemies?

There is certainly an embrace of revenge and cruelty by Trump in general, which is being carried out in practice by Musk’s DOGE project. However, whether it is useful to call the second Trump administration fascist, or just fascistic for now, is a complex question within scholarly circles.

Five weeks into the second Trump administration, and many of the most destructive ideas that were laid out last year in the unofficial campaign manifesto Project 2025 are being put into place. It has been a long-term dream of many hardline conservatives to gut America’s foreign aid and development programs, which is now happening at a frightening pace.

What lies ahead that turns rhetoric into reality is hard to entirely predict, but many of Trump’s utterances this year have clearly been imperialistic and fascistic. Trump does not have to ignore the constitution or be a textbook fascist to be a terribly dangerous president. Being an authoritarian, which he has no qualms about embracing, is worrying enough.

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

– ref. Donald Trump is picking fights with leaders around the world. What exactly is his foreign policy approach? – https://theconversation.com/donald-trump-is-picking-fights-with-leaders-around-the-world-what-exactly-is-his-foreign-policy-approach-251238

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

The Albanese government has signed up New South Wales to its new schools funding agreement, with an extra A$4.8 billion in funding for the state’s public schools over ten years.

Queensland remains the only state still to join the agreement, which ties federal funding to schools to specific measures, such as phonics checks and teacher training. The federal government is working hard to finalise a deal with that state before going into caretaker mode for the election.

The federal government has been negotiating with states and territories over a new schools funding deal for more than 12 months.

NSW has been among states asking for a 5% increase in funds, while the federal government was initially only offering 2.5%. In January 2025, Victoria and South Australia successfully negotiated for a 5% increase from the federal government, leaving NSW and Queensland as the only two states without a deal ahead of a new school year.

The Commonwealth and NSW governments said in a statement that under the NSW deal, the federal government will provide an extra 5% of the Schooling Resource Standard (SRS).

This would lift the federal contribution from 20% to 25% of the SRS by 2034. It follows the NSW government delivering an election commitment to reach 75% of the SRS by 2025.

The 2011 Gonski review recommended all schools receive a minimum level of funding, called the SRS, with additional funds based on need. In 2025 the estimated SRS amounts are $13,977 for primary school students and $17,565 for secondary school students.

Under the new national agreement all states would reach the full SRS funding in a decade, although at different paces. A lot of the fine print has still to be negotiated.

NSW has committed to removing the 4% provision of indirect school costs such as capital depreciation, so NSW schools would be fully funded over the life of the agreement.

This national agreement ties the funding to teaching and other reforms. These include more individualised support for students, continuing evidence-based teaching practices, and more mental health and wellbeing support for schools.

The two governments said: “This is not a blank cheque. The agreement will be accompanied by a NSW Bilateral Agreement, which ties funding to reforms that will help students catch up, keep up and finish school”.

These include

• Year 1 phonics and early years of schooling numeracy checks to identify those needing more help

• evidence-based teaching and targeted and intensive supports such as small-group or catch-up tutoring

• wellbeing initiatives, including greater access to mental health professionals

• access to high-quality and evidence-based professional learning, and

• initiatives to attract and retain teachers.

The federal-state agreements incorporate national targets. These include improving NAPLAN reading and numeracy proficiency; increasing NAPLAN outcomes for priority equity cohorts; boosting student attendance; increasing the engagement rate of teacher education students, and raising the proportion of students successfully completing year 12.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said “every dollar of this funding will go into helping children learn”.

Federal Education Minister Jason Clare said: “This will help more than 780,000 kids in more than 2,200 public schools. This is real funding tied to real reforms to help students catch up, keep up and finish school.”

Premier Chris Minns said: “We’ve seen a 40% reduction in teacher vacancies since we came to government, but we know there’s still more to do. This investment is vital as we work to lift education standards across the state by ensuring there is a qualified, dedicated teacher at the front of the classroom.”

The Coalition has been critical of the time it has taken for the Albanese government to finalise the funding deal.

In January, opposition education spokeswoman Sarah Henderson said Clare had “failed to get the job done”. She noted students in NSW and Queensland “continue to pay the price”.

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. Schools agreement provides NSW $4.8 billion extra for public schools over a decade – https://theconversation.com/schools-agreement-provides-nsw-4-8-billion-extra-for-public-schools-over-a-decade-251255

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Taimoor Sohail, Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Melbourne

Flowing clockwise around Antarctica, the Antarctic Circumpolar Current is the strongest ocean current on the planet. It’s five times stronger than the Gulf Stream and more than 100 times stronger than the Amazon River.

It forms part of the global ocean “conveyor belt” connecting the Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian oceans. The system regulates Earth’s climate and pumps water, heat and nutrients around the globe.

But fresh, cool water from melting Antarctic ice is diluting the salty water of the ocean, potentially disrupting the vital ocean current.

Our new research suggests the Antarctic Circumpolar Current will be 20% slower by 2050 as the world warms, with far-reaching consequences for life on Earth.

Why should we care?

The Antarctic Circumpolar Current is like a moat around the icy continent.

The current helps to keep warm water at bay, protecting vulnerable ice sheets. It also acts as a barrier to invasive species such as southern bull kelp and any animals hitching a ride on these rafts, spreading them out as they drift towards the continent. It also plays a big part in regulating Earth’s climate.

Unlike better known ocean currents – such as the Gulf Stream along the United States East Coast, the Kuroshio Current near Japan, and the Agulhas Current off the coast of South Africa – the Antarctic Circumpolar Current is not as well understood. This is partly due to its remote location, which makes obtaining direct measurements especially difficult.

Understanding the influence of climate change

Ocean currents respond to changes in temperature, salt levels, wind patterns and sea-ice extent. So the global ocean conveyor belt is vulnerable to climate change on multiple fronts.

Previous research suggested one vital part of this conveyor belt could be headed for a catastrophic collapse.

Theoretically, warming water around Antarctica should speed up the current. This is because density changes and winds around Antarctica dictate the strength of the current. Warm water is less dense (or heavy) and this should be enough to speed up the current. But observations to date indicate the strength of the current has remained relatively stable over recent decades.

This stability persists despite melting of surrounding ice, a phenomenon that had not been fully explored in scientific discussions in the past.

What we did

Advances in ocean modelling allow a more thorough investigation of the potential future changes.

We used Australia’s fastest supercomputer and climate simulator in Canberra to study the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. The underlying model, ACCESS-OM2-01, has been developed by Australian researchers from various universities as part of the Consortium for Ocean-Sea Ice Modelling in Australia.

The model captures features others often miss, such as eddies. So it’s a far more accurate way to assess how the current’s strength and behaviour will change as the world warms. It picks up the intricate interactions between ice melting and ocean circulation.

In this future projection, cold, fresh melt water from Antarctica migrates north, filling the deep ocean as it goes. This causes major changes to the density structure of the ocean. It counteracts the influence of ocean warming, leading to an overall slowdown in the current of as much as 20% by 2050.

Far-reaching consequences

The consequences of a weaker Antarctic Circumpolar Current are profound and far-reaching.

As the main current that circulates nutrient-rich waters around Antarctica, it plays a crucial role in the Antarctic ecosystem.

Weakening of the current could reduce biodiversity and decrease the productivity of fisheries that many coastal communities rely on. It could also aid the entry of invasive species such as southern bull kelp to Antarctica, disrupting local ecosystems and food webs.

A weaker current may also allow more warm water to penetrate southwards, exacerbating the melting of Antarctic ice shelves and contributing to global sea-level rise. Faster ice melting could then lead to further weakening of the current, commencing a vicious spiral of current slowdown.

This disruption could extend to global climate patterns, reducing the ocean’s ability to regulate climate change by absorbing excess heat and carbon in the atmosphere.

Need to reduce emissions

While our findings present a bleak prognosis for the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, the future is not predetermined. Concerted efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could still limit melting around Antarctica.

Establishing long-term studies in the Southern Ocean will be crucial for monitoring these changes accurately.

With proactive and coordinated international actions, we have a chance to address and potentially avert the effects of climate change on our oceans.

The authors thank Polar Climate Senior Researcher Dr Andreas Klocker, from the NORCE Norwegian Research Centre and Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research, for his contribution to this research, and Professor Matthew England from the University of New South Wales, who provided the outputs from the model simulation for this analysis.

Taimoor Sohail receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Bishakhdatta Gayen receives funding from Australian Research Council (ARC). He works at University of Melbourne as ARC Future Fellow and Associate Professor. He is also A/Prof. at CAOS, Indian Institute of Science.

– ref. Melting Antarctic ice will slow the world’s strongest ocean current – and the global consequences are profound – https://theconversation.com/melting-antarctic-ice-will-slow-the-worlds-strongest-ocean-current-and-the-global-consequences-are-profound-251053

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

Peter Dutton says if he became prime minister he would lobby US President Donald Trump “to reconsider his position” on Ukraine.

The opposition leader, who previously rejected Trump’s description of Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky as a “dictator”, has gone further in distancing himself from Trump after the shouting match in the Oval Office, when Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated Zelensky.

“I was disappointed by the scenes out of the White House,” Dutton told a Monday news conference. “I believe that President Zelensky requires the support of European countries, of the United States, and countries like Australia as well.”

He said the United States has been “an incredibly important ally” for Australia and he regarded it as a reliable one.

But making decisions in Australia’s best interests sometimes meant “standing up to your friends and to those traditional allies because our views have diverged.

“In relation to Ukraine, the Australian view at the moment is different to the United States, and my job as prime minister will be to lobby the president of the United States to reconsider his position in relation to Ukraine. Because I think it’s in all of our collective best interests if we’re able to provide support to Ukraine, and that’s something I’m dedicated to.”

Dutton’s criticism of Trump is at odds with some in his base and some right wing commentators, who are wedded to Trump, right or wrong.

Unlike policy on the Middle East, where bipartisanship has broken, both sides of Australian politics have remained firmly behind Ukraine from the start of the war. There is no sign of the bipartisanship being under pressure.

Australia has supplied Ukraine with about $1.5 billion worth of assistance, of which $1.3 billion is military aid.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, speaking at the start of Monday’s cabinet’s meeting, reiterated Australia’s strong backing for the embattled country in its war with Russia.

“We regard this as an issue of doing what’s right, but also what is in Australia’s national interest.

“The brave people of Ukraine, led so extraordinarily by President Zelensky, are fighting not just for their national sovereignty and for their democracy. They are fighting for the international rule of law.

“And it is an easy choice that Australia has made.”

On Sunday Treasurer Jim Chalmers said “I think President Zelensky is a hero”.

Dutton on Monday used similar language. “President Zelensky is a modern-day hero. He’s a war hero and he deserves support.”

On another front – Australia’s bid to avoid the US tariffs on aluminium and steel – while there is bipartisanship, the opposition is from time to time critical of the government’s handling of the issue.

Shadow finance minister Jane Hume said on Monday: “The Coalition wholeheartedly supports the government’s efforts to make sure that these tariffs are not imposed by the US.

“We would hope that the government will pull out all stops here in order to make sure that Australia’s national interests, our economic interests, are protected. I do note that Anthony Albanese is the only member of the Quad, which is one of our most important diplomatic relationships with the US, that hasn’t met directly with Donald Trump yet.”

The new tariffs are due to come into effect on March 12.

Australia has been further alarmed by an article published late last week by Trump’s trade advisor, Peter Navarro.

Navarro wrote: “Consider Australia. Its heavily subsidised smelters operate below cost, giving them an unfair dumping advantage, while Australia’s close ties to China further distort global aluminium trade”.

“Australia and Canada represent frontal assaults on our aluminium markets.”

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. Dutton says as PM he would ‘lobby’ Donald Trump to reconsider Ukraine stand – https://theconversation.com/dutton-says-as-pm-he-would-lobby-donald-trump-to-reconsider-ukraine-stand-251256

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harriette Richards, Senior Lecturer, School of Fashion and Textiles, RMIT University

In a year with few surprises in the awards categories, there was also a dearth of surprises on the red carpet. The sartorial themes included sparkling metallics, coloured menswear and bows, bows and more bows.

Metallic gowns that resemble the Oscar statue are a familiar sight at the Academy Awards and this year was no different. Some of the standouts included best actress nominee Demi Moore in a magnificently glittering silver Armani Privé gown, Selena Gomez in custom Ralph Lauren encrusted with 16,000 individual blush-toned jewel teardrops, and Emma Stone in a minimalist Louis Vuitton sheath covered in iridescent fish scales.

In the menswear category, tuxedos reign supreme. This year was notable only for the diversity of colours in which these suits came.

Best actor nominee Timothée Chalamet lived up to his reputation for monochrome, richly hued ensembles in a custom butter yellow leather suit by Givenchy, paired with a matching silk shirt and delicate neck brooch in place of a tie. His best actor nominated compatriot, Colman Domingo (one of the best dressed men in Hollywood) was pristine in a double-breasted red silk jacket with black lapels, black trousers and matching red shirt by Valentino, similarly eschewing a tie in favour of a fine gold brooch. Andrew Garfield wore louche chocolate brown Gucci and Jeremy Strong wore a suit by Loro Piana in an unusual tone of olive green.

Bows of varying size and stature were perhaps the strongest theme of the night.

Best actress winner Mikey Madison in black and pink Dior, best supporting actress nominee Felicity Jones in shimmering liquid silver Armani, Elle Fanning in white and black Givenchy and Lupita Nyong’o in white Chanel were all adorned with bows at their waists.

The most remarkable bow of the night though was best actress nominee Cynthia Erivo in a structured deep emerald-green velvet Louis Vuitton gown, the broad, wing-like sleeves of which were crafted as a bow.

Notable mentions must also go to those attendees who do not fit neatly into any thematic category. Best supporting actress nominee Ariana Grande wore a meticulously crafted pale pink Schiaparelli confection and Lisa (of Blackpink and now White Lotus fame) perfected a feminine take on masculine suiting in a tuxedo dress by Markgong.

The only real surprise was the lack of political statements on display. Unlike recent years, when pins and ribbons in support of Ukraine and Palestine were widely worn, this year only Guy Pearce was spotted wearing a Free Palestine pin, Conclave writer Peter Straughan wore a Ukrainian flag pin and Kayo Shekoni had “free Congo” emblazoned on the sole of her high heels.

– Harriette Richards

The best picture: Anora

And the best picture Oscar goes to … Anora – the film that was favoured to win, so no surprises here.

Though he had been working for more than a decade at the time, writer-director-editor Sean Baker came onto the independent movie scene with a bang with 2015’s Tangerine, a gimmicky film that was mainly celebrated for being shot on an iPhone. Why this would be celebrated is anyone’s guess. I suspect it’s because of the “I could do it too” factor – something the average person certainly couldn’t say if we’re talking 35mm celluloid.

Since then, Baker’s films have relished in embracing the digital, neon world, but always in a kind of sentimental and shallow, rather than critical, register. None of his films are awful – and maybe that’s saying something in this day and age. Anora also is not awful, but it’s not particularly memorable either.

Anora follows a run of the mill American dream-type story about a hard-working stripper who seems to strike fairytale gold when a young, fun Russian oligarch falls in love with her. Only the dream turns out to be more of a nightmare (kind of) when things don’t quite work out and the film ends with the titular character once again independent and free.

The idea of undercutting the fairytale setup of the typical rom-com is not at all original, and the film strikes me as even more schmaltzy in its rejection of the fairytale dream than if it had embraced it and played like a tween-focused Nickelodeon film (it’s about as poignant as this).

The film’s cardinal sin, however – and it’s certainly not alone in this – is its critical overlength. Each of the film’s sections could have had some 20 minutes cut and we would have had an enjoyably tight romp at 80 minutes. Instead, Anora drags on, swept up in its imagining of its own profundity – at times pretentious, but mainly tedious.

– Ari Mattes

Not the year to stick a neck out

The speeches this year were conspicuously meek. No announcer majorly insulted anyone else. No winner assaulted anyone else. Even the James Bond retrospective lacked energy. What’s going on in Hollywood?

There are clues that help explain this curious flatness. Host Conan O’Brien mentioned the pressure of “divisive politics” while reflecting on California’s wildfires. Several winners spoke about the importance of shared experience, of what unites us, of film as a medium that brings people together, a force for “good and progress in the world” and “a reminder not to let hate go unchecked”.

The directors of No Other Land, receiving their Oscar for best documentary, shared the one clear critical voice. Palestinian Basel Adra wished his newborn daughter a life without the fear that governs daily life in his homeland. Israeli co-director Yuval Abraham agreed: “There is another way. It’s not too late for life and for the living. There is no other way.”

However, that was the only moment people at the Oscars seemed willing to confront the political elephant in the room.

Anora director Sean Baker used his last (of four!) acceptance speeches to compel more people to help keep cinema doors open. He made his point passionately: this was the best way to sustain an industry that could continue to make brilliant movies. That said, the most emotive speeches of past Oscars events went much further than just commenting on the bread and butter concerns of the film industry.

This year, there were more clues in what people did not say. There were feints at Russian dictators – but nobody mentioned the war in Ukraine. There was no discussion of a certain election result, nor of filmmakers’ fears that Washington is now in the control of a governing faction that loathes them. Most revealing of all: nobody raised a peep about the President or his friends.

Hollywood’s collective discipline was on show tonight – and 2025 is not the year to stick a neck out.

– Tom Clark

A banner year for independent film

Independent films were the big winners for this year’s Oscars. While many of the technical awards went to the big budget films, such as Wicked (the US$145 million film won costume design and production design) and Dune: Part 2 (made at a budget of US$190 million, and winning sound and visual effects), the night’s major awards went to small productions.

While the definitions of “independence” and “studio” films don’t exist in a neat binary when it comes to production and global distribution, we can distinguish between film juggernauts and smaller films.

Three independent films won significant awards that are of note. Latvian film Flow was the first independent film to win best animated feature, up against major films Inside Out 2 (Pixar Films) and The Wild Robot (DreamWorks).

The film follows a cat, a dog, a capybara, a secretary bird and a ring-tailed lemur navigating a post-apocalyptic world with rising sea levels. The film also only used free and open-source software Blender and mostly used sounds from real world counterparts of the various characters. It was made for a budget of just €3.5 million (A$5.9 million).

The best documentary film nominees were dominated by independent films. Notably, the winner No Other Land has sadly been unable to find a distributor to release the film in the United States. (It is available for streaming in Australia on DocPlay, and in select cinemas.) The film was only eligible because the Film Lincoln Centre in New York facilitated a one-week, qualifying theatrical run.

The night’s top glories went to Anora, made on a budget of just US$6 million (A$9.7 million), and taking home the awards for best film, director, actress, screenplay and editing.

In his acceptance speech for best director, Sean Baker spoke of the importance of films getting a theatrical release. Films, he said, are about humanity – and that is best experienced in watching a film with other people.

During awards season, Baker has often spoken about the importance of small budget films in the expression of core human experiences.

The final message of the night went to Baker when he thanked the Academy for recognising a truly independent film: “Long live independent film!”

Indeed, independent films ruled this year’s Oscars.

– Stuart Richards

Best actor and actress

Mikey Madison, who won the best actress award for Anora, is quite good in the role. That said, it’s difficult to evaluate her performance in such a meandering film.

She tries hard playing a stripper who falls for Prince Charming – a Russian oligarch (Hollywood’s anti-Russian sentiment has certainly grown in recent years) who turns out to be a bit of a weakling with meanie parents. But Madison never really convincingly embodies the character, and we’re ever aware as we watch the film that she’s an actress working her way through relevant emotions and intensities.

That said, Madison is good at yelling and stripping, and this is the main way she shows her chops here. She screamed well in Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019), too. The bar this year was admittedly pretty low, and truth be told Madison’s performance in Anora (aside from Fernanda Torres for I’m Still Here) is probably the best out of the nominees.

In contrast, Adrien Brody, who won the best actor award, is absolutely unforgettable in the flawed but magnificent The Brutalist – the best he’s been since The Pianist, and the deserved winner by a mile out of a similarly mediocre field. Brody is simply a pleasure to watch, and drives, in a wholly embodied way, this grandiose and exceedingly long film (the fact it doesn’t feel long is largely due to his magnetism).

The screenplay, in which the character comes across as a combination of arrogant, sweet and at times comedic, allows Brody to display the full range of his talent, and he plays the whole thing with an endearing vulnerability. But, again, it’s unfair to compare Brody and Madison – The Brutalist is a spectacularly accomplished cinematic epic, while Anora feels as stylish and profound as a social media video (I know that’s the point, but that doesn’t make it any more compelling).

– Ari Mattes

A lacklustre year for music

This was a strong year for music-based films, with three of the most nominated ones being musicals of various types: the big-budget Broadway adaptation Wicked, the original film musical Emilia Pérez, and the musician biopic A Complete Unknown.

The music of the ceremony itself was nicely assembled, with a live orchestra (conducted by Michael Bearden) accompanying proceedings from above the stage.

But the show was marred by an absence: the best song nominations were not performed live. The new songs this year were so bland, however – especially when compared to the Wicked score and Bob Dylan – that I can hardly blame the producers. The nominations included a dull Elton John song, some soft guitar rock from Sing Sing, Diane Warren’s 16th (!) nominated song (more soft rock), and two forgettable songs from Emilia Pérez (one of which, El Mal, was the winner).

So little faith did the Academy have in the songs that only a few seconds were played from each, mostly covered by a montage of interviews with the songwriters.

This year’s nominated best scores were not much more memorable, but Daniel Blumberg deserved his win for The Brutalist. It demonstrates a high level of composition and orchestration craft. It uses edgy instrumental textures to increase the feelings of uncertainty and imbalance that the film imparts.

The show included a lot of Wizard of Oz. Ariana Grande sang Over the Rainbow from the 1939 film and Cynthia Erivo sang Home from The Wiz, the 1974 soul musical based on the book. Then they performed Defying Gravity from Wicked together.

Another subtle Wizard of Oz nod was the music played during the commercial breaks: a loop based on Brand New Day from The Wiz, whose 1979 film version had its music produced by the late Quincy Jones. Queen Latifah and backup dancers brought some much needed energy to the last hour of the ceremony with Ease on Down the Road, also from The Wiz, as part of a Jones tribute.

One surprise was an unnecessary but enjoyable James Bond sequence featuring Margaret Qualley dancing to John Barry’s famous theme, a performance of Live and Let Die by K-pop star Lisa, Doja Cat singing Diamonds Are Forever, and Raye’s rendition of Skyfall.

This plus the various numbers from the Oz Musical Universe only highlighted how lacklustre this year’s nominated music was.

– Gregory Camp

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. From the fashion to the speeches to the music, this was an Oscars of few surprises. 5 experts break it down – https://theconversation.com/from-the-fashion-to-the-speeches-to-the-music-this-was-an-oscars-of-few-surprises-5-experts-break-it-down-251264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mary Louise Stewart, Senior Career Medical Officer, Northern Sydney Local Health District; PhD Candidate, University of Sydney

An estimated one in five women and one in 16 men in Australia have experienced sexual violence.

After such a traumatic experience, it’s understandable many are unsure if they want to report it to the police. In fact, less than 10% of Australian women who experience sexual assault ever make a police report.

In Australia there is no time limit on reporting sexual assault to police. However, there are tight time frames for collecting forensic evidence, which can sometimes be an important part of the police investigation, whether it’s commenced at the time or later.

This means the decision of whether or not to undergo a medical forensic examination needs to be made quite quickly after an assault.

I work as a medical forensic examiner. Here’s what you can expect if you present for a medical forensic examination after a sexual assault.

A team of specialists

There are about 100 sexual assault services throughout Australia providing 24-hour care. As with other areas of health care, there are extra challenges in regional and rural areas, where there are often further distances to travel and staff shortages.

Sexual assault services in Australia are free regardless of Medicare status. To find your nearest service you can call 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) or Full Stop Australia (1800 385 578) who can also provide immediate telephone counselling support.

It’s important to call the local sexual assault service before turning up. They can provide the victim-survivor with information and advice to prevent delays and make the process as helpful as possible.

The consultation usually occurs in a hospital emergency department which has a designated forensic suite, or in a specialised forensic service.

The victim-survivor is seen by a doctor or nurse trained in medical and forensic care. There’s a sexual assault counsellor, crisis worker or social worker present to support the patient and offer counselling advice. This is called an “integrated response” with medical and psychosocial staff working together.

In most cases the victim-survivor can have their own support person present too.

Depending on what the victim-survivor wants, the doctor or nurse will take a history of the assault to guide any medical care which may be needed (such as emergency contraception) and to guide the examination.

Sexual assault services are always very aware of giving victim-survivors a choice about having a medical forensic examination. If a person presents to a sexual assault service, they can receive counselling and medical care without undergoing a forensic examination if they do not wish to.

Collecting forensic samples

Samples collected during a medical forensic examination can sometimes identify the perpetrator’s DNA or intoxicating substances (alcohol or drugs that might be relevant to the investigation). The window of opportunity to collect these samples can be as short as 12 hours, or up to 5–7 days, depending on the nature of the sexual assault.

In most of Australia, an adult who has experienced a recent sexual assault can be offered a medical forensic examination without making a report to police.

Depending on the state or territory, the forensic samples can usually be stored for 3 to 12 months (up to 100 years in Tasmania). This allows the victim-survivor time to decide if they want to release them to police for processing.

The doctor or nurse will collect the samples using a sexual assault investigation kit, or a “rape kit”.

Collecting these samples might involve taking swabs to try to detect DNA from external and internal genital areas and anywhere there may have been DNA transfer. This can be from skin cells, where the perpetrator touched the victim-survivor, or from bodily fluids including semen or saliva.

The doctor or nurse carrying out the examination do their best to minimise re-traumatisation, by providing the victim-survivor information, choices and control at every step of the process.

How about STIs and pregnancy?

During the consultation, the doctor or nurse will address any concerns about sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and pregnancy, if applicable.

In most cases the risk of STIs is small. But follow-up testing at 1–2 weeks for infections such as chlamydia and gonorrhoea, and at 6–12 weeks for infections such as syphilis and HIV, is usually recommended.

Emergency contraception (sometimes called the “morning after pill”) can be provided to prevent pregnancy. It can be taken up to five days after sexual assault (but the sooner the better) with follow-up pregnancy testing recommended at 2–3 weeks.

Things have improved over time

When I was a junior doctor in the late 90s, taking forensic swabs was usually the responsibility of the busy obstetrics and gynaecology trainee in the emergency department, who was often managing multiple patients and had little training in forensics. There was also usually no supportive counsellor.

Anecdotally, both the doctor and the patient were traumatised by this experience. Research shows that when specialised, integrated services are not provided, victim-survivors’ feelings of powerlessness are magnified.

But the way we carry out medical forensic examinations after sexual assault in Australia has improved over the years.

With patient-centred practices, and designated forensic and counselling staff, the experience for the patient is thought to be empowering rather than re-traumatising.

Our research

In new research published in the Australian Journal of General Practice, my colleagues and I explored the experience of the medical forensic examination from the victim-survivor’s perspective.

We surveyed 291 patients presenting to a sexual assault service in New South Wales (where I work) over four years.

Some 75% of patients reported the examination was reassuring and another 20% reported it was OK. Only 2% reported that it was traumatising. The majority (98%) said they would recommend a friend present to a sexual assault service if they were in a similar situation.

While patients spoke positively about the care they received, many commented that the sexual assault service was not visible enough. They didn’t know how to find it or even that it existed.

We know many victim-survivors don’t present to a sexual assault service or undergo a medical forensic examination after a sexual assault. So we need to do more to increase the visibility of these services.

The National Sexual Assault, Family and Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) – is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.

Mary Louise Stewart receives funding from the Ramsay Research and Education Grant and from the University of Sydney via the Postgraduate Research Support Scheme. Mary Louise Stewart works as a medical forensic examiner where her research is being undertaken.

– ref. I’m a medical forensic examiner. Here’s what people can expect from a health response after a sexual assault – https://theconversation.com/im-a-medical-forensic-examiner-heres-what-people-can-expect-from-a-health-response-after-a-sexual-assault-244404

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ari Chand, Lecturer in Illustration and Animation, University of South Australia

Director Chantelle Murray’s new family film The Lost Tiger is the first animated feature written and directed by an Indigenous woman.

Continuing with a long history of Indigenous storytelling, Murray has embedded the film with themes of identity, heritage and adventure. In doing so, she tells a story that is utterly heartwarming and wholly unique to place.

In Murray’s own words:

I didn’t have anything like this growing up. I had the things that reinforced the horrible narratives of Indigenous people globally. So, to have something there for the next generation, representation means everything.

The film is produced by Brisbane-based and woman-run Like a Photon Creative, the studio behind The Sloth Lane (2024) and Scarygirl (2023).

A powerful message

The Lost Tiger is classic orphan story founded on identity. The main character is a thylacine (Tasmanian tiger) named Teo (voiced by Thomas Weatherall), whose hero’s journey starts when he begins to grapple with his differences.

Teo is found as a baby, alongside a mysterious crystal, by a couple from the gregarious wrestling kangaroo troupe Roomania. Young Teo struggles with his identity as he’s coming of age and wants to fit in.

After visiting a museum, Teo meets platypus and aspiring guild adventurer named Plato (Rhys Darby). Once Plato identifies Teo as one of the world’s last thylacines, he tells him of a legendary lost “Tiger Island” said to be inhabited by thylacines – and the two begin a quest to find the island.

The film critiques the “doctrine of discovery” through its antagonist, adventure guild explorer Quinella Quoll (Celeste Barber). The doctrine of discovery refers to a legal and ideological approach through which colonisers tried to justify the seizing of land, resources and objects by Indigenous peoples.

Quoll – who is always looking to “discover” powerful new artifacts for her museum collection – embodies all the extractive qualities of historical European explorers and museum founders.

This is an important message at a time when museums both nationally and internationally are reevaluating what they hold in their collections – and trying to address the historical injustices associated with colonial acquisitions.

With a simple but well-executed plot, the film allows for some fun colloquialisms such as “2-up” (an old Aussie gambling game) and “stop, drop and roll”, along with a slate of side characters that highlight the value of simply doing what’s right.

It taps into the universal truth that each person’s story is irrevocably connected to the stories of others, and that the effect of our choices go far beyond our own lives.

Visually, The Lost Tiger has a distinct texture, underpinned by a vivid vision of the bush. Murray, who is from the Kimberley region, was highly intentional in her portrayal of Australia’s dynamic landscapes. As she explains:

I grew up with red rocks, super white sand, and this aqua coloured ocean, and it looks just like a painting. And it wasn’t until I left Broome and came back, and went, ‘This country has such a juxtaposition’. One minute you can be in the desert, and then you walk into a rain forest with these waterfalls.

The animation itself is created on “stepped keys”, a process in which only every second frame is animated. So instead of seeing 24 frames of motion per second, as you would in a traditional computer-animated film, you see 12 frames per second. This pose-to-pose movement gives the film a stop-motion feel.

This unique approach is complemented by some whiz-bang moments sure to draw in younger viewers. The film’s wrestling scenes and action sequences, supported by animation director Tania Vincent, are choreographed with high levels of energy, leading to a climactic end.

Between two worlds

Animation has the unique ability to tell stories that are both inclusive and diverse – which acknowledge our differences, yet connect us through our shared loves and experiences.

The Lost Tiger does this beautifully by focusing on messages of respect, unity, connection to place and the importance of conserving precious resources on First Nations lands. It also taps into the difficulties of belonging (and struggling to belong) across different cultural worlds.

Murray’s film helps lead us towards an industry that embraces diverse voices, and which will be able to support the uniquely Australian voices of future generations.

The creators of the film acknowledge the Turrbal and Yuggera Peoples as the Traditional Owners and Custodians of the lands in Queensland on which the film was made.

The Lost Tiger is in cinemas now.

Ari Chand 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 Lost Tiger: first animated film by an Indigenous woman explores heritage and identity through a thylacine – https://theconversation.com/the-lost-tiger-first-animated-film-by-an-indigenous-woman-explores-heritage-and-identity-through-a-thylacine-251033

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kevin Witzenberger, Research Fellow, GenAI Lab, Queensland University of Technology

After a year of shoehorning generative AI into its flagship products, Microsoft is trying to recoup the costs by raising prices, putting ads in products, and cancelling data centre leases. Google is making similar moves, adding unavoidable AI features to its Workspace service while increasing prices.

Is the tide finally turning on investments into generative AI? The situation is not quite so simple. Tech companies are fully committed to the new technology – but are struggling to find ways to make people pay for it.

Shifting costs

Last week, Microsoft unceremoniously pulled back on some planned data centre leases. The move came after the company increased subscription prices for its flagship 365 software by up to 45%, and quietly released an ad-supported version of some products.

The tech giant’s CEO, Satya Nadella, also recently suggested AI has so far not produced much value.

Microsoft’s actions may seem odd in the current wave of AI hype, coming amid splashy announcements such as OpenAI’s US$500 billion Stargate data centre project.

But if we look closely, nothing in Microsoft’s decisions indicates a retreat from AI itself. Rather, we are seeing a change in strategy to make AI profitable by shifting the cost in non-obvious ways onto consumers.

The cost of generative AI

Generative AI is expensive. OpenAI, the market leader with a claimed 400 million active monthly users, is burning money.

Last year, OpenAI brought in US$3.7 billion in revenue – but spent almost US$9 billion, for a net loss of around US$5 billion.

Microsoft is OpenAI’s biggest investor and currently provides the company with cloud computing services, so OpenAI’s spending also costs Microsoft.

What makes generative AI so expensive? Human labour aside, two costs are associated with AI models: training (building the model) and inference (using the model).

While training is an (often large) up-front expense, the costs of inference grow with the user base. And the bigger the model, the more it costs to run.

Smaller, cheaper alternatives

A single query on OpenAI’s most advanced models can cost up to US$1,000 in compute power alone. In January, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said even the company’s US$200 per month subscription is not profitable. This signals the company is not only losing money through use of its free models, but through its subscription models as well.

Both training and inference typically take place in data centres. Costs are high because the chips needed to run them are expensive, but so too are electricity, cooling, and the depreciation of hardware.

To date, much AI progress has been achieved by using more of everything. OpenAI describes its latest upgrade as a “giant, expensive model”. However, there are now plenty of signs this scale-at-all-costs approach might not even be necessary.

Chinese company DeepSeek made waves earlier this year when it revealed it had built models comparable to OpenAI’s flagship products for a tiny fraction of the training cost. Likewise, researchers from Seattle’s Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) and Stanford University claim to have trained a model for as little as US$50.

In short, AI systems developed and delivered by tech giants might not be profitable. The costs of building and running data centres are a big reason why.

What is Microsoft doing?

Having sunk billions into generative AI, Microsoft is trying to find the business model that will make the technology profitable.

Over the past year, the tech giant has integrated the Copilot generative AI chatbot into its products geared towards consumers and businesses.

It is no longer possible to purchase any Microsoft 365 subscription without Copilot. As a result subscribers are seeing significant price hikes.

As we have seen, running generative AI models in data centres is expensive. So Microsoft is likely seeking ways to do more of the work on users’ own devices – where the user pays for the hardware and its running costs.

A strong clue for this strategy is a small button Microsoft began to put on its devices last year. In the precious real estate of the QWERTY keyboard, Microsoft dedicated a key to Copilot on its PCs and laptops capable of processing AI on the device.

Apple is pursuing a similar strategy. The iPhone manufacturer is not offering most of its AI services in the cloud. Instead, only new devices offer AI capabilities, with on-device processing marketed as a privacy feature that prevents your data travelling elsewhere.

Pushing costs to the edge

There are benefits to the push to do the work of generative AI inference on the computing devices in our pockets, on our desks, or even on smart watches on our wrists (so-called “edge computing”, because it occurs at the “edge” of the network).

It can reduce the energy, resources and waste of data centres, lowering generative AI’s carbon, heat and water footprint. It could also reduce bandwidth demands and increase user privacy.

But there are downsides too. Edge computing shifts computation costs to consumers, driving demand for new devices despite economic and environmental concerns that discourage frequent upgrades. This could intensify with newer, bigger generative AI models.

And there are more problems. Distributed e-waste makes recycling much harder. What’s more, the playing field for users won’t be level if a device dictates how good your AI can be, particularly in educational settings.

And while edge computing may seem more “decentralised”, it may also lead to hardware monopolies. If only a handful of companies control this transition, decentralisation may not be as open as it appears.

As AI infrastructure costs rise and model development evolves, shifting the costs to consumers becomes an appealing strategy for AI companies. While big enterprises such as government departments and universities may manage these costs, many small businesses and individual consumers may struggle.

Kevin Witzenberger receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Michael Richardson 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. Microsoft cuts data centre plans and hikes prices in push to make users carry AI costs – https://theconversation.com/microsoft-cuts-data-centre-plans-and-hikes-prices-in-push-to-make-users-carry-ai-costs-250932

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Welch, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Despite community resistance and legal push-back, the government isn’t slowing down on its plan to roll back speed limit reductions on many roads. In the process, it’s going against expert advice from transport officials and solid economic evidence showing the benefits of slower speeds.

Documents recently released quietly by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) show Land Transport Director Brent Alderton raised serious concerns in 2024 about the proposed speed limit changes and urged decision makers to rely on evidence rather than ideology:

There is well founded evidence, nationally and internationally, that establishes the link between vehicle speed and the likelihood of a crash occurring, as well as the severity and consequences of any crash.

But the government is also bypassing evidence that contradicts its own justification that raising some speed limits will help increase productivity.

A comprehensive economic assessment prepared by engineering consulting firm WSP for the NZTA in March 2024 (later released under the Official Information Act) analysed the impact of previous speed limit changes implemented between 2020 and 2023 (with one dating back to 2011). It found the reductions delivered substantial economic benefits to New Zealand.

For road corridors with reduced speed limits, nearly 27 fewer deaths and serious injuries per year were recorded: “The crash cost savings generally outweigh the travel time disbenefits by a factor of 2 to 10 (or more).”

In other words, for every dollar lost in slightly increased travel times, the report estimates New Zealand gains between NZ$2 and $10 in reduced crash costs.

Economic benefits of lower speeds

All the road corridors with reduced speed limits in the WSP assessment showed positive benefit-cost ratios using NZTA’s standard methodology. Even under various sensitivity tests, including if crash benefits were reduced or project costs increased, most speed reductions maintained positive ratios.

But despite the local and international evidence showing lower speed limits save lives and money, the government persists in claiming raising some limits will reduce travel times and therefore increase productivity.

In fact, everything points to any productivity gains from faster travel being significantly outweighed by increased crash costs. As of 2023, the Ministry of Transport estimates those costs at $769,400 per serious injury and $14,265,600 per fatality.

When the WSP report was released, it projected traffic would experience mean speed reductions of between 5% and 9% on roads with lowered limits. This projection was based on actual changes in driving speeds recorded using GPS-based traffic data.

The data showed these reductions resulted in actual death and injury savings “much greater than predicted”. While the observed speed reductions aligned with expectations, the projected safety benefits significantly underestimated the actual harm reduction.

For example, on the Blenheim to Nelson stretch of State Highway 6, the predicted death and injury reduction was 22%, but the actual reduction was 82%. On State Highway 51, the reduction was 100% compared to an expected 31%.

Conversely, where speed limits were increased from 100 km/h to 110 km/h, as on the Cambridge section of the Waikato Expressway in December 2017, deaths and serious injuries rose by 133% compared to pre-increase levels.

In Auckland, dozens of urban corridors will soon see speed limits rise from 50 km/h to 60 km/h. The Auckland Transport agency will also raise the limit on one stretch of Te Irirangi Drive from 60 km/h to 80 km/h – exactly the kind of substantial increase the WSP report linked to dramatically higher crash risks.

Expediency vs evidence

Overall, the WSP report shows speed limit reductions worked better than expected at preventing harm, with significantly lower numbers of deaths and serious injuries annually across the studied corridors.

It is likely the number of lives saved from these speed limit reductions are reflected in the 2024 road fatality statistics, where road deaths across New Zealand were below 300 for the first time in a decade.

The director of land transport can only promise to “monitor” the impacts of the speed limit increases. In reality, there has been sufficient monitoring and measuring already to show speed limit reductions reduce harm as well as deliver economic benefits.

But the speed limit issue fits within a broader pattern of transport policy where ideology or political expediency appear to trump expert advice and economic analysis.

The government has frozen funding for cycling and walking projects, cancelled Auckland’s light rail plan, abandoned regional passenger rail initiatives and prioritised new highway construction over maintenance of existing roads.

This is despite economic assessments consistently showing better benefit-cost ratios for public and active transport investments than for new road projects.

Such decisions also contradict the government’s own climate commitments and overlook mounting evidence that car-centric transport planning worsens congestion rather than alleviating it.

Similarly, economic assessment shows unequivocally that the financial benefits of lower speeds and safer roads far outweigh the costs. If economic rationality were the driving force behind transport policy, speed limit reductions would be expanded rather than rolled back.

Timothy Welch 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. False economies: the evidence shows higher speed limits don’t make financial sense – https://theconversation.com/false-economies-the-evidence-shows-higher-speed-limits-dont-make-financial-sense-251138

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yetta Gurtner, Adjunct senior lecturer, Centre for Disaster Studies, James Cook University

Tropical Cyclone Alfred is predicted to make landfall anywhere between Bundaberg and northern New South Wales this week. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has warned it may bring severe hazards and “dangerous and life-threatening flash flooding”.

So, how do you prepare for a cyclone – and what do you do if it’s too late to leave?

How to prepare

Your starting point is to consider the risk to yourself and everyone in your household (including pets). Consider ensuring you have:

• non-perishable food that everyone in the family will eat (enough for five to seven days)
• water for drinking and cleaning (three litres per person per day)
• medication (two weeks worth)
• toiletries and first aid kit
• pet food/supplies
• torches
• batteries
• a back up battery for your phone
• baby formula and nappies if needed
• protective clothing and closed-in shoes
• cash in small denominations
• valuable documents such as passports, title deeds, ID, insurance details, photos (these can be photographed or packed in weather-proof container or envelope)
• kids’ books, card games, board games, headphones
• anything else you may need or really value (and isn’t too heavy to carry).

Make sure you have a grab-and-go kit that you can carry by yourself if authorities suddenly tell you to evacuate immediately.

Conventional wisdom used to be to prepare enough supplies for three days of disruption. Now, experts recommend having enough for five to seven days. After the initial disaster there may be road blockages or supply chain problems.

Ensure you have enough medication for a week or two, because pharmacies may take days or weeks to re-open. And remember that many medications, such as insulin, need to be refrigerated, so consider how you’d keep them cool if the power went out.

Fill containers with water and stick them in your freezer now; they can keep your freezer cool if you lose power. They can also become drinking water in future.

Talk to your neighbours. Do they have a generator or a camping fridge you can use? This is a great opportunity to get to know your community and pool your resources.

Ask yourself if you have friends with whom you or a pet can stay. One of the main reasons people don’t evacuate is because they can’t bring their pets (not all evacuation shelters allow them, so check in advance).

Consider what you can do now to prepare your house. One of the most common call-outs the SES receives is about blocked drains and gutters, so check if there’s time to clean your gutters now. You won’t be able to do it during the storm.

Stay informed – and don’t rely on hearsay

Have a plan for getting truthful information before, during and after the cyclone.

Rely on the information provided by official sources, as they will tell you when it’s too late to evacuate or when it’s safe to come out. This is highly context-specific and will depend on where you are located.

Get advice where possible from your local council’s disaster dashboard (most councils have one).

It should provide information such as where to get sandbags, which roads are closed (which can affect your evacuation plan) and evacuation centre openings and locations.

Anyone who monitors social media will see how many amateur meteorologists and maps are out there, but these are often not the best source. Always rely on official sources rather than hearsay, trending footage or amateur “experts”.

Always have an battery-operated AM-FM radio. If power goes out, relying on your phone to track information will drain your phone battery very quickly.

You may be able to charge it via your car or laptop, but telecommunications networks may not be active.

So having a battery-operated radio on hand – and plenty of batteries – is crucial.

What if the cyclone hits while you’re at home?

If it’s too late to evacuate, have a plan for sheltering in place.

Find the smallest room in your house with the least windows (which can shatter in a storm). This is often the bathroom, but it could be under the stairs. It is usually on the lowest level of the house.

Bring your food, water, radio, blankets and supplies there. Avoid walking around the house during the cyclone to fetch things; there could be glass on the floor or debris flying around.

It’s hard to predict how long you will need to shelter there, but it’s important not to leave until official sources say it is safe to do so.

Cyclones come in stages. They arrive from one direction, then comes an eerie calm as the “eye of the storm” passes over. Next, the other half of the cyclone arrives. Don’t go outside during the eye of the storm, because it’s not over.

Outside the house, there may be powerlines down, broken glass and other hazards. Don’t venture out until you get official clearance from the disaster dashboard or official sources on the radio saying it is safe.

For non-life threatening emergencies – such as a tree on your roof, or water running through your house – call the SES on 132 500 or register on the SES Assistance app (if you’re in Queensland). They will not come during the event itself but will come later.

If it’s a life threatening emergency, always call triple 0.

After the storm

After the storm, consider how to make your house more cyclone-ready in future. Many houses in North Queensland are designed for cyclone zones, but not as many further south will be.

Climate change means cyclones are likely to be more severe in future. These days, be cyclone-ready 365 days a year.

Yetta Gurtner has received funding in the past from the Bureau of Meteorology. She is a community engagement officer with the Queensland State Emergency Services.

– ref. How to prepare for a cyclone, according to an expert – https://theconversation.com/how-to-prepare-for-a-cyclone-according-to-an-expert-251251