Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Diane Dowdell, PhD Candidate in Sustainable Mining, The University of Queensland

This week, Environment Minister Murray Watt met with groups representing business, the environment, renewable energy and First Nations communities in a bid to restart Labor’s stalled environmental reforms. There was one group in the room Watt presumably had to woo hardest: Western Australia’s miners.

Last year, the WA mining lobby mounted an ultimately successful campaign opposing proposed changes to national environment laws, and the plan to set up an environmental protection authority. State premier Roger Cook also lobbied Prime Minister Anthony Albanese directly.

Watt has pledged to revive the reform process and on Thursday claimed a compromise could be reached. The existing laws, he said, are “not working for the environment, and they are not working for business”.

Whether his efforts will be enough to overcome the scepticism of the mining industry remains to be seen. These companies have influence – and they will use it if they see new laws as a threat.

The mining state

The mining industry dominates WA economically, politically and socially. WA’s mining sector is substantially larger than the mining interests in any other Australian state. Underground lie huge reserves of iron ore, gas, gold, lithium and many other resources.

The sector funnelled A$267 billion into the Australian economy in 2023–24 through salaries, royalties and taxes. About $60 billion directly flowed to Western Australians in wages and salaries.

The leaders of WA mining companies see themselves, by and large, as doing economically vital work.

I have interviewed many WA mining executives for my doctorate, which is currently underway. One clear common narrative emerged: they saw mining as a national good. They believed their companies brought wealth and prosperity to communities, built infrastructure, and funnelled money into state and federal treasuries.

The justification is powerful. It underpins the way those in the industry see their work – and how they respond to any threat, perceived or otherwise.

It also dates back over a century. The link between WA resources and prosperity originates from the 1890s WA gold rush, which transformed the fortunes of the state. This self image has been nurtured through successive resource booms, from gold to iron ore to natural gas and more gold.

Many company executives see any duplication of environmental approvals as time-consuming, unproductive and economically damaging. A 2023 WA Chamber of Commerce and Industry report suggested “green tape” (approval delays) was threatening 40% of mining proposals in the pipeline.

Miners and their political backers often frame the industry as environmentally positive, particularly for resources vital to the green energy transition such as lithium, rare earth elements and – more controversially – gas.

Federal Resources Minister Madeleine King – who is West Australian – regularly draws this link. As she said in 2023:

let me be clear, the global clean energy transition will need more mining, not less […] the road to net zero runs through the Australian resources sector.

Wielding influence

WA miners are represented by well-organised and well-resourced lobbying bodies such as the Chamber of Minerals and Energy WA, the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, and the Minerals Council of Australia.

These groups maintain relationships with politicians at both state and federal levels, regardless of which party is in power.

Broadly, their goals are to promote the continued expansion of resource projects (minerals, oil and gas) under conditions most advantageous to industry interests.

Mining companies use these industry lobby groups to support or critique government policy and push for changes. They exert influence through targeted lobbying, close relationships with elected officials and political candidates, and direct engagement with federal processes.

What happens when the sector sees a potential threat from policymakers in Canberra? Often, the mining companies unify against it.

For example, WA miners were prominent in the 2010 campaign against efforts by the Rudd government to introduce a super profits tax on mining.

Why WA miners oppose nature law reform

A tax is one thing. But what did the WA miners see as the key problems in the environmental reforms?

One issue was a perceived contradiction between the federal government’s intention to streamline developmental approvals and introduce a federal Environmental Protection Agency, while failing to deal with existing duplication between state and federal processes.

The Association of Mining and Exploration Companies lobby group gave another reason in a submission to government: the proposed independence of the EPA would remove the discretionary power of the minister.

Rather than an independent federal EPA, they pushed for a model similar to the WA version – the advice of which the minister can overrule. The group also warned the laws would impede the global competitiveness of the mining industry and hinder investment.

The state government echoed these statements, calling the reforms an overreach that would stifle economic development.

This alignment of government and industry messaging shows how closely their interests are intertwined.

Premier Roger Cook leaves no ambiguity about this. Ahead of this year’s WA and federal elections, Cook warned the “latte sippers” over east:

do not for a moment think that we will stand by idly and allow you to damage our economy because, ultimately, it will damage your standard of living.

Is a deal possible?

Across Australia, there is broad support for environmental law reform, because the current national laws are seen as not fit for purpose.

Murray Watt came to the role of environment minister with a reputation as a fixer. The question now is, what will he trade to get the miners on side?

The industry will be cautious and will insist on much more detail about any changes. It’s possible a deal could be struck. But we can expect to continue to see very strong pushback if Watt tries to expand federal powers into what is seen as state responsibilities.

The industry will also expect greater federal resourcing for delivery of timely approvals. Nationally important industries don’t like to wait.

Diane Dowdell is a PhD Candidate in the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) within the Sustainable Minerals Institute at the University of Queensland. She was the recipient of an industry scholarship from Newcrest Mining for her PhD research. She works for SLR Consulting Pty Ltd. Diane is a fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand (EIANZ).

– ref. West Australian miners flexed their muscle to block a federal EPA last year. Will it be different this time? – https://theconversation.com/west-australian-miners-flexed-their-muscle-to-block-a-federal-epa-last-year-will-it-be-different-this-time-257892

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa M. Given, Professor of Information Sciences & Director, Social Change Enabling Impact Platform, RMIT University

Technologies to enforce the Australian government’s social media ban for under 16s are “private, robust and effective”. That’s according to the preliminary findings of a federal government-commissioned trial that has nearly finished testing them.

The findings, released today, may give the government greater confidence to forge ahead with the ban, despite a suite of expert criticism. They might also alleviate some of the concerns of the Australian population about privacy and security implications of the ban, which is due to begin in December.

For example, a report based on a survey of nearly 4,000 people and released by the government earlier this week found nine out of ten people support the idea of a ban. But it also found a large number of people were “very concerned” about how the ban would be implemented. Nearly 80% of respondents had privacy and security concerns, while roughly half had concerns about age assurance accuracy and government oversight.

The trial’s preliminary findings paint a rosy picture of the potential for available technologies to check people’s ages. However, they contain very little detail about specific technologies, and appear to be at odds with what we know about age-assurance technology from other sources.

From facial recognition to hand movement recognition

The social media ban for under 16s was legislated in December 2024. A last-minute amendment to the law requires technology companies to provide “alternative age assurance methods” for account holders to confirm their age, rather than relying only on government-issued ID.

The Australian government commissioned an independent trial to evaluate the “effectiveness, maturity, and readiness for use” of these alternative methods.

The trial is being led by the Age Check Certification Scheme – a company based in the United Kingdom that specialises in testing and certifying identity verification systems. It includes 53 vendors that offer a range of age assurance technologies to guess people’s ages, using techniques such as facial recognition and hand-movement recognition.

According to the preliminary findings of the trial, “age assurance can be done in Australia”.

The trial’s project director, Tony Allen, said “there are no significant technological barriers” to assuring people’s ages online. He added the solutions are “technically feasible, can be integrated flexibly into existing services and can support the safety and rights of children online”.

However, these claims are hard to square with other evidence.

High error rates

Yesterday the ABC reported the trial found face-scanning technologies “repeatedly misidentified” children as young as 15 as being in their 20s and 30s. These tools could only guess children’s ages “within an 18-month range in 85 percent of cases”. This means a 14-year-old child might gain access to a social media account, while a 17-year-old might be blocked.

This is in line with results of global trials of face-scanning technologies conducted for more than a decade.

An ongoing series of studies of age estimation technology by the United States’ National Institute of Standards and Technology shows the algorithms “fail significantly when attempting to differentiate minors” of various ages.

The tests also show that error rates are higher for young women compared to young men. Error rates are also higher for people with darker skin tones.

These studies show that even the best age-estimation software currently available – Yoti – has an average error of 1.0 years. Other software options mistake someone’s age by 3.1 years on average.

This means, at best, a 16-year-old might be estimated to be 15 or 17 years old; at worst, they could be seen to be 13 or 19 years of age. These error rates mean a significant number of children under 16 could access social media accounts despite a ban being in place, while some over 16 could be blocked.

Yoti also explains businesses needing to check exact ages (such as 18) can set higher age thresholds (such as 25), so fewer people under 18 get through the age check.

This approach would be similar to that taken in Australia’s retail liquor sector, where sales staff verify ID for anyone who appears to be under the age of 25. However, many young people lack the government-issued ID required for an additional age check.

It’s also worth remembering that in August 2023, the Australian government acknowledged that the age assurance technology market was “immature” and could not yet meet key requirements, such as working reliably without circumvention and balancing privacy and security.

Outstanding questions

We don’t yet know exactly what methods platforms will use to verify account holders’ ages. While face-scanning technologies are often discussed, they could use other methods to confirm age. The government trial also tested voice and hand movements to guess young people’s ages. But those methods also have accuracy issues.

And it’s not yet clear what recourse people will have if their age is misidentified. Will parents be able to complain if children under 16 gain access to accounts, despite restrictions? Will older Australians who are incorrectly blocked be able to appeal? And if so, to whom?

There are other outstanding questions. What’s stopping someone who’s under 16 from getting someone who is over 16 to set up an account on their behalf? To mitigate this risk, the government might require all social media users to verify their age at regular intervals.

It’s also unclear what level of age estimation error the government may be willing to accept in implementing a social media ban. The legislation says technology companies must demonstrate they have taken “reasonable steps” to prevent under 16s from holding social media accounts. What is considered “reasonable” is yet to be clearly defined.

Australians will have to wait until later this year for the full results of the government’s trial to be released, and to know how technology companies will respond. With less than six months until the ban comes into effect, social media users still don’t have all the answers they need.

Lisa M. Given receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia and the international Association for Information Science and Technology.

– ref. Technology to enforce teen social media ban is ‘effective’, trial says. But this is at odds with other evidence – https://theconversation.com/technology-to-enforce-teen-social-media-ban-is-effective-trial-says-but-this-is-at-odds-with-other-evidence-259373

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yvonne Breitwieser-Faria, Lecturer in Criminal Law and International Law, Curtin University

Earlier this year, the European Union, the Council of Europe, Ukraine and an international coalition of states agreed to establish a new special tribunal.

The tribunal will eventually be tasked with holding Russia accountable for the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It’s expected to start operating in 2026.

Human rights organisations, international lawyers and some (mostly European) states have long been calling for the establishment of such a tribunal. Oleksandra Matviichuk, a Ukrainian human rights lawyer, called the establishment of the tribunal:

an important breakthrough for the international justice community and especially for the millions of Ukrainians who have been harmed by the Russian aggression.

However, important questions remain about if it could truly hold senior Russian officials accountable.

So, how will this new special tribunal work, and will it be effective – or necessary?

How does the special tribunal fill the gaps left by the ICC and ICJ?

This tribunal is separate to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The ICC can prosecute individuals charged with genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Russian war on Ukraine. So far, it has issued arrest warrants against four Russian senior officials, including President Vladimir Putin.

Because Russia is not a member state to the court, the court can’t exercise legal authority over what’s known in international law as a crime of aggression (when leaders of a state launch or plan a war). For the ICC to be able to exercise this jurisdiction, the aggressor state also must be a member state of the court.

The ICJ is a different court altogether. It primarily deals with and adjudicates disputes between states, not limited to war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. It can’t hold individuals accountable, and can only exercise jurisdiction over a dispute if both states to a dispute agree.

While the ICC seeks to establish individual criminal responsibility, the ICJ may establish state responsibility for a violation of international law.

Currently, there are also two cases between Ukraine and Russia before the ICJ.

Neither deals with the question of the legality of Russia’s use of force in its invasion in February 2022. Both Ukraine and Russia would need to consent to bring this issue before the court.

So, is a new tribunal necessary?

Yes, because the crime of aggression currently can’t be addressed by any other international court or tribunal.

Given the limitations of what the ICJ and ICC can do, a dedicated tribunal seems the obvious solution to hold those responsible for the illegal use of force against Ukraine accountable.

And it’s not uncommon for specialised tribunals with limited jurisdiction over a specific situation to be created.

Other historical examples include the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the Special Court for Sierra Leone.

Given the ICC’s lack of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, the new special tribunal would complement the court’s existing investigations into war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Who is running the new tribunal and how will it work?

The exact content and specifics of this new tribunal will remain unknown until the draft statute of the tribunal is published. That’s a document that outlines details including the tribunal’s jurisdiction, the applicable definition of aggression and how the tribunal will function.

At this stage, the Council of Europe has confirmed the tribunal will work within its legal framework and principles. It will be funded by an international coalition of supportive states.

A management committee of members and associate members of the tribunal will be responsible for the election of the tribunal’s judges and prosecutors. The management committee is made up of the Council of Europe’s council of ministers and Ukraine.

Diplomatic discussions are still ongoing at this point, but the legal process for establishing the special tribunal can begin now.

Will this special tribunal be more effective?

Political, legal and practical challenges for the special tribunal remain. It’s unclear if the most senior Russian state officials can and will be able to be brought to trial for the crime of aggression.

Nothing, so far, suggests the statute of the tribunal will contain an exception to state immunity enjoyed by heads of state, heads of governments and foreign ministers while in power.

That means these office holders can only be prosecuted if they are no longer in power or the Russian government expressly waives their immunity.

It’s also unclear whether states will be willing to arrest those sought by the special tribunal.

The ICC has long faced this challenge trying to get states to act on its arrest warrants.

Hungary, for instance, did not arrest Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visited in April, despite an ICC arrest warrant for alleged crimes against humanity in connection with the war in Gaza.

For the special tribunal to be effective, according to Oleksandra Matviichuk, it:

must not become a remote and hollow entity that does not engage with the Ukrainian victims.

Overall, much remains unclear. Will this new special tribunal be able to hold the likes of Putin accountable for the crime of aggression? Or will it become another empty promise?

Yvonne Breitwieser-Faria 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. A new special tribunal will investigate Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Will it be effective? – https://theconversation.com/a-new-special-tribunal-will-investigate-russias-aggression-against-ukraine-will-it-be-effective-257823

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vanessa Miller, Lecturer in Education (Classroom Management), Southern Cross University

Bullying is arguably one of the most serious issues facing Australia’s schools.

About one in four students between Year 4 and Year 9 report being bullied regularly. This can have serious and lasting consequences. Research suggests students who are bullied are at an increased risk of mental health problems and self-harm.

On Friday, submissions close for the federal government’s rapid review into school bullying. Here, we suggest six key areas on which governments, schools and education authorities need to focus to re-imagine Australia’s approach to tackling bullying.

Read more:
With a government review underway, we have to ask why children bully other kids

1. A national approach to bullying

At the moment, there is no clear, consistent definition of bullying in Australian schools. Nor are there consistent policies.

This naturally leads to confusion about current best practice to both prevent bullying and support students who have been bullied.

For example, there are several definitions of cyberbullying between the different states and territories.

2. Consistent data to track bullying

Australia also has no nationally consistent approach to track or measure bullying and cyberbullying.

This means it is impossible to say whether bullying is getting worse or better – or if certain parts of the country are more successfully addressing it.

So we need metrics to better track, analyse, report and respond to bullying incidents across schools, regions, states and territories.

For years, researchers have noted schools themselves also need accurate data to analyse, monitor and evaluate the degree to which an intervention is effective.

3. A whole-school approach

A national strategy should also prioritise whole-school approaches to bullying prevention – this is what research shows to be most effective.

A whole-school approach sees anti-bullying efforts as the responsibility of everyone connected to a school. School leaders, teachers, support staff, students, families and the wider community are all expected to promote safety and inclusion.

Addressing bullying should see strategies implemented across multiple locations, including the classroom, wider school and home environments.

This goes beyond simply dealing with individual bullying incidents as they arise.

Research also suggests schools should focus on proactive, non-punitive strategies and a positive school culture. This includes clear procedures to report bullying, effective education programs, and establishing consistent classroom and school rules.

If bullying occurs, schools can respond with a restorative approach, which focuses on repairing harm done to relationships.

Studies suggest whole-school approaches such as these can reduce bullying behaviours by 20-23% and victimisation by 17-20%.

4. Teach social and emotional skills

As part of the whole-school approach, we also need to make sure schools are teaching social and emotional skills. This includes how to identify and manage emotions as well as communicating and cooperating with others.

While it is part of the Australian Curriculum, research shows social and emotional skills are not always taught using evidence-based, formal approaches.

A large body of research demonstrates that schools which teach social and emotional learning across all aspects of school engagement, report higher academic achievement, lower rates of bullying, improved student wellbeing, and stronger connections between students and adults.

In part, this is because these approaches empower students to take ownership of their behaviour.

Read more:
Schools today also teach social and emotional skills. Why is this important? And what’s involved?

5. Training for teachers

Teachers play a pivotal role in making sure all students feel safe and supported at school, helping children and young people to understand and manage their emotions.

A 2014 study found teachers who had participated in anti-bullying training were able to provide this support more effectively.

Teachers specifically need training that helps them provide safe, inclusive spaces for students from marginalised groups, including students with disability and young people who face homophobic or transphobic bullying.

School staff should receive consistent, culturally responsive training, so they are equipped with the most current and effective ways to support all students.

6. Give students an active role

We should also look at ways to give students a greater role in shaping anti-bullying policies.

Research shows when students are included in decisions that affect them, it increases their engagement with learning and motivation at school.

Along with helping to make policies, students can also be involved in peer-mentoring programs and leading campaigns to raise awareness about respectful relationships. This can create a sense of shared ownership for anti-bullying interventions.

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. 6 things Australia must do if it’s serious about tackling school bullying – https://theconversation.com/6-things-australia-must-do-if-its-serious-about-tackling-school-bullying-258924

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh Breakey, Deputy Director, Institute for Ethics, Governance & Law, Griffith University

When a renewable energy developer announces a new project, there’s one big question mark – how will nearby communities react?

Community pushback has scuttled many renewables projects. Sometimes, communities are angry landowners hosting infrastructure will be paid, but neighbours and those further afield may not.

As a result, renewable projects often involve schemes where the developer gives funding or resources to local community initiatives.

Australia has dozens of these schemes, with many more to come as the clean energy transition accelerates. The Clean Energy Council estimates developers contribute about A$1,050 to communities for every megawatt of wind and about $850 for solar.

The problem is, research shows poorly designed schemes can look a lot like bribery. Developers dish out money to gain community acceptance. Our new research points to a clear solution: design these schemes carefully.

How do these schemes work?

Renewable developers usually structure community-benefit schemes in one of three ways:

• community funds, where a developer offers a one-time or ongoing payment for local infrastructure such as roads, services or community projects

• in-kind benefits, such as investment in local sports fields or tourism initiatives

• local ownership models, such as offering community members preferential access to shares in the company or a community co-ownership model of the project.

In Australia, a number of community schemes are already established or planned.

More are on their way. The Queensland government has introduced laws which require wind and solar farm developers enter into community benefit agreements.

Worldwide, offshore wind farms have for many years involved community benefit sharing. Australia is very likely to follow suit as this industry emerges.

Developers will sometimes set up more targeted neighbour payment schemes where funding is given to nearby landowners.

What are they for?

There are three reasons why benefit sharing can be a good idea overall. They are:

1. Impact on locals: solar farms take up large areas of land, while wind farms on land or sea draw the eye and can compete with other uses of the space. Community benefit schemes can help counterbalance these impacts.

2. Benefits are centralised: solar, wind and battery developments generate significant economic value. But this is largely captured by the developer. Benefit schemes can make residents feel the deal is fairer.

3. Acceptance: change of any kind is often hard. Offering incentives to towns and communities can make the change easier.

Straying into bribery?

The definition of a bribe is a benefit which influences or intends to influence a person to violate their role-based obligations. Offering money to a police officer to avoid losing your licence would count as a bribe.

Community benefit sharing isn’t a bribe in a strict legal sense. But the payments can resemble bribes if they influence community members to accept the new development. Improving community acceptance is often a central goal of such schemes.

The accusation is common. In the United Kingdom, researchers observe these schemes are regularly seen:

as an attempt by local developers to ‘bribe’ local communities to ‘buy’ support for their wind farm development.

Community members may decry a scheme as a “paltry bribe” or “shut up candy”. Some insist their “principles are not for sale”.

Developers recognise this too. As one says:

you don’t just turn up in a community and say, don’t worry, we’ll buy you a new rugby pitch […] because it really does look like you’re trying to buy them off.

But do local communities have obligations which accepting a renewables project might violate?

As part of a democracy, residents have civic obligations to make public-spirited decisions, evaluating policies and developments based not on self-interest but in a principled way.

This is why it’s illegal to pay someone to vote for a particular candidate in an election, for instance.

Offering money for community initiatives isn’t intrinsically wrong. As a community objector to a wind farm proposal put it:

Of course it is a relevant planning consideration if a wind power company is offering to pour significant sums of money into a community for the life of a wind farm […] Why should that not be recognised as a good thing?

But any economic boon to a town must be considered alongside other important concerns, rather than wiping them away.

If these schemes operate by influencing citizens to ignore their civic duties, that’s intrinsically wrong. Worse still, it risks a backlash from offended community members.

In the worst cases, benefit sharing operates as a pay-off, where uneasy communities are given money to reduce their resistance.

Achieving fairness, avoiding bribery

The solutions are straightfoward: design these schemes strategically so they are fair and avoid eroding civic obligations. Here are four aims:

1. Minimise self-interest. Schemes should avoid large up-front payments and focus on in-kind benefits.

2. Respect the community. Employ and contract local staff, keep the community informed and respond transparently to complaints.

3. Encourage community involvement. Big renewable projects should stack up on energy, environmental, economic and community grounds. Robust and genuine community consultation should be used when designing any benefit scheme.

4. Ensure integrity. Development and implementation of any scheme should be genuine, transparent and accountable.

Getting it right

As climate change intensifies, Australia’s clean energy transition has a clear moral urgency. But this cannot be done by steamrolling local residents or buying them off with cash for community projects.

When community benefit schemes are sensibly designed with local input, it will boost both climate action and civic legitimacy.

Hugh Breakey receives funding from the Blue Economy CRC. This research was funded through the project ‘Pre-conditions for the Development of Offshore Wind Energy in Australia’ by the Blue Economy Cooperative Research Centre.

Charles Sampford receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Professional Services Council and the Blue Economy CRC.

Larelle Bossi 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. Bribe or community benefit? Sweeteners smoothing the way for renewables projects need to be done right – https://theconversation.com/bribe-or-community-benefit-sweeteners-smoothing-the-way-for-renewables-projects-need-to-be-done-right-258903

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Lovering, Lecturer in International Relations, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Recent controversies over New Zealand’s Ka Ora, Ka Ako school lunch program have revolved around the apparent shortcomings of the food and its delivery. Stories of inedible meals, scalding packaging and general waste have dominated headlines.

But the story is also a window into the wider debate about the politics of “fiscal responsibility” and austerity politics.

As part of the mission to “cut waste” in government spending, ACT leader and Associate Education Minister David Seymour replaced the school-based scheme with a centralised program run by a catering corporation. The result was said to have delivered “saving for taxpayers” of $130 million – in line with the government’s overall drive for efficiency and cost cutting.

While Finance Minister Nicola Willis dislikes the term “austerity”, her May budget cut the government’s operating allowance in half, to $1.3 billion. This came on top of budget cuts last year of around $4 billion.

Similar policy doctrines have been subscribed to by governments of all political persuasions for decades. As economic growth (and the tax revenue it brings) has been harder for OECD countries to achieve over the past 50 years, governments have looked to make savings.

What is strange, though, is that despite decades of austerity policies reducing welfare and outsourcing public services to the most competitive corporate bidder, state spending has kept increasing.

New Zealand’s public expense as a percentage of GDP increased from 25.9% in 1972 to 35.9% in 2022. And this wasn’t unusual. The OECD as a whole saw an increase from 18.9% in 1972 to 29.9% in 2022.

How can we make sense of so-called austerity when, despite decades of cost cutting, governments spend more than ever?

Austerity and managerialism

In a recent paper, I argued that the politics of austerity is not only about how much governments spend. It is also about who gets to decide how public money is used.

Austerity sounds like it is about spending less, finding efficiencies or living within your means. But ever rising budgets mean it is about more than that.

In particular, austerity is shaped by a centralising system that locks in corporate and bureaucratic control over public expenditure, while locking out people and communities affected by spending decisions. In other words, austerity is about democracy as much as economics.

We typically turn to the ideology of neoliberalism – “Rogernomics” being the New Zealand variant – to explain the history of this. The familiar story is of a revolutionary clique taking over a bloated postwar state, reorienting it towards the global market, and making it run more like a business.

Depending on your political persuasion, the contradiction of austerity’s growing cost reflects either the short-sightedness of market utopianism or the stubbornness of the public sector to reform.

But while the 1980s neoliberal revolution was important, the roots of austerity’s managerial dimension go back further. And it was shaped less by a concern that spending was too high, and more by a desire to centralise control over a growing budget.

Many of the managerial techniques that have arrived in the public sector over the austerity years – such as results-based pay, corporate contracting, performance management or evaluation culture – have their origins in a budgetary revolution that took place in the 1960s at the US Department of Defense.

In the early 1960s, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara was frustrated with being nominally in charge of budgeting but having to mediate between the seemingly arbitrary demands of military leaders for more tanks, submarines or missiles.

In response, he called on the RAND Corporation, a US think tank and consultancy, to remake the Defense Department’s budgetary process to give the secretary greater capacity to plan.

The outcome was called the Planning Programming Budgeting System. Its goal was to create a “rational” budget where policy objectives were clearly specified in quantified terms, the possible means to achieve them were fully costed, and performance indicators measuring progress were able to be reviewed.

This approach might have made sense for strategic military purposes. But what happens when you apply the same logic to planning public spending in healthcare, education, housing – or school lunches? The past 50 years have largely been a process of finding out.

What began as a set of techniques to help McNamara get control of military spending gradually diffused into social policy. These ideas travelled from the US and came to be known as the “New Public Management” framework that transformed state sectors all over the world.

What are budgets for?

Dramatic moments of spending cuts – such as the 1991 “Mother of all Budgets” in New Zealand or Elon Musk’s recent DOGE crusade in the US – stand out as major exercises in austerity. And fiscal responsibility is a firmly held conviction within mainstream political thinking.

Nevertheless, government spending has become a major component of OECD economies. If we are to make sense of austerity in this world of permanent mass expenditure, we need a broader idea of what public spending is about.

Budgets are classically thought to do three things. For economists, they are a tool of macroeconomic stabilisation: if growth goes down, “automatic stabilisers” inject public money into the economy to pick it back up.

For social reformers, the budget is a means of progressively redistributing resources through tax and welfare systems. For accountants, the budget is a means of cost accountability: it holds a record of public spending and signals a society’s future commitments.

But budgeting as described here also fulfils a fourth function – managerial planning. Decades of reform have made a significant portion of the state budget a managerial instrument for the pursuit of policy objectives.

From this perspective, underlying common austerity rhetoric about eliminating waste, or achieving value for money, is a deeper political struggle over who decides how that public money is used.

To return to New Zealand’s school lunch program, any savings achieved should not distract from the more significant democratic question of who should plan school lunches – and public spending more broadly.

Should it be the chief executives of corporatised public organisations and outsourced conglomerates managing to KPIs on nutritional values and price per meal, serving the directives of government ministers? Or should it be those cooking, serving and eating the lunches?

Ian Lovering is affiliated with the Tertiary Education Union Te Hautū Kahurangi o Aotearoa.

– ref. Despite decades of cost cutting, governments spend more than ever. How can we make sense of this? – https://theconversation.com/despite-decades-of-cost-cutting-governments-spend-more-than-ever-how-can-we-make-sense-of-this-258902

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Saul Eslake, Vice-Chancellor’s Fellow, University of Tasmania

When the Western Australian state government handed down its state budget on Thursday, it showed a balance sheet solidly in the black with a A$2.5 billion surplus. But, as it has for seven years, the state has received an outsized boost to its coffers from the federal government.

In 2018, the Morrison government – with the full support of the then Labor opposition – handed WA a special deal for the distribution of income from the goods and service tax (GST).

Under the deal, WA gets a much greater share of the centrally collected GST revenue than it would have been entitled to under the methods previously used by the Commonwealth Grants Commission.

So what can be done to ensure a return to a fairer distribution of the GST revenue?

How the GST carve-up is supposed to work

The 2018 deal upended a principle known as “horizontal fiscal equalisation”. This principle seeks to ensure each state and territory has the fiscal capacity to provide its residents with a broadly similar range and quality of public services, while levying a similar level of state taxes. This applies to states with different populations and needs.

That principle is the main reason why the quality of health care, schooling and policing in your community depends much less on which state you happen to live in, compared with other countries with a federal system. Just think of the United States.

But that principle was jettisoned in the pursuit, by both major parties, of seats from WA in the House of Representatives, which in effect determined the outcome of the 2016, 2019 and 2022 elections.

Holding onto the mineral wealth

During the mining boom starting in 2000, WA became rich. While it previously received extra grants from other states, it was now having to share income from mining royalties with other states.

But the 2018 amendment changed how the GST revenue is distributed. Instead of equalising all states to have the fiscal strength of the strongest state (such as WA during the boom), funds were now equalised to the stronger of New South Wales or Victoria. States are also guaranteed a minimum per capita share of revenue.

The only state that benefits from these changes is Australia’s richest state: WA. Since 2018-19 it has received A$24.2 billion more than it would have done had the 2018 changes not been made.

Combined with the $58.3 billion it has collected in mineral royalties over the past seven years, that has enabled WA to rack up cash surpluses totalling more than $18 billion. Every other state and territory recorded cash deficits over that time.

Over the next four years, WA will receive $26.3 billion more from the carve-up of GST revenues than it would otherwise have done.

No one worse off?

To cajole the other states and territories into accepting this “deal”, the Morrison government agreed to “top up” the revenue from the GST to ensure none would be any worse off than if the long-standing system had remained in place.

It estimated this “No Worse Off guarantee” (or NoWO as it is now called) would cost the federal budget $8 billion over the nine years to 2026-27, when NoWO would expire.

To avoid expected pushback from the other states, the Albanese government agreed in 2023 to extend NoWO by another three years. It is now expected it will have cost the federal budget almost $60 billion by its scheduled expiry in 2029-30.

This is the biggest blow-out in the cost of any single policy decision, with the exception of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). This $52 billion blowout from the GST carve-up represents a massive drain on the federal budget, at a time when it is forecast to be in deficit for the next ten years, to appease the greed of Australia’s richest, and luckiest, state.

A government that truly believed in equity, and was committed to prudent and responsible budget outcomes, would scrap this appalling piece of public policy. And an Opposition that was sincere in its claims to stand for fiscal responsibility would support any move by the government to do so.

The system is not working as intended

The 2018 legislation requires the Productivity Commission to report, by the end of 2026, on whether the new system is working “efficiently, effectively and as intended”. Since it clearly wasn’t intended for the changes to cost anywhere near as much as they have done, the answer to that question must surely be a resounding “no”.

But rather than giving it such a narrow remit, the Treasurer could, and should, task the Productivity Commission with devising a way of achieving the long-standing objective of “horizontal fiscal equalisation” in a simpler, more transparent and more predictable way.

This should be possible by reference to fewer than a dozen readily available economic, demographic and social indicators. These could replace the “black box” processes currently used by the Commonwealth Grants Commission to allocate GST. WA has been able to exploit this lack of transparency in pursuit of its claims on an unjustified share of GST revenue.

Steven Kennedy, in his new role as head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, is reportedly open to considering controversial tax changes, including the GST carve-up. Hopefully he will be making this suggestion to the Prime Minister.

An inquiry by the Productivity Commission along these lines would enable the government to step away from the 2018 changes in the 2027-28 budget. That would, in turn, represent a substantial contribution towards the task of budget repair. And it would reinstate a principle that has helped make Australia a fairer, and better, country than it would otherwise have been.

Saul Eslake 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. Is there any hope for a fairer carve-up of the GST between the states? – https://theconversation.com/is-there-any-hope-for-a-fairer-carve-up-of-the-gst-between-the-states-258913

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Will Jeffery, Sessional Academic, Discipline of Film Studies, University of Sydney

When I was eight years old, on a Saturday night before surf lifesaving training, my dad put on the film Jaws and it changed my life forever.

Unlike the generations of filmgoers who were afraid of sharks and going into the water during its initial release in 1975, I fell in love with the water and sharks.

Steven Spielberg’s film was the first summer blockbuster, received Academy Awards for sound, editing and music, and became the first film to earn US$100 million at the United States box office.

It was only the third film for the 28-year-old Steven Spielberg, and his second theatrical release (his first film, Duel, was made for TV), and success arrived only after much trouble.

A marketed behemoth

Chief of Police Martin Brody (Roy Scheider) has recently moved from New York City to Amity Island with his wife, Ellen (Lorriane Gary), and their two children. As the small town prepares for its crucial 4th of July celebrations, a series of shark attacks threatens the festivities – and the town’s summer economy.

Mayor Larry Vaughan (Murray Hamilton) insists on keeping the beaches open for “summer dollars”. When the shark strikes again, local fisherman Quint (Robert Shaw) is hired to hunt it down. Brody and visiting marine biologist Matt Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss) insist on joining the expedition to save the island.

The film was advertised as a suspense and horror monster movie. In what director Spielberg described as a marketing “blitzkrieg” campaign, Jaws, was released in the summer – peak swimming season.

Universal Pictures made sure every household knew about the film. There were multiple TV spots, a cover on Time Magazine, talk show appearances from cast and crew, and a wave of merchandise. It was the most money the company had ever spent on a film’s pre-release marketing.

The first American film released in more than 400 theatres at once, Jaws found its audience with overwhelmingly positive reviews and word of mouth – because Jaws was also extremely well made.

Wrangling the shark

Peter Benchley was hired to adapt his novel, but another screenwriter, Carl Gottlieb, was brought in to redraft Benchley’s more serious narrative and provide comic relief.

Jaws was initially planned for 55 days of shooting, but ballooned to 159 days and $8 million over budget. The main reason: the shark.

Apart from one scene using real underwater shark footage from Australians Ron and Valerie Taylor, the shark was mechanical. There were three sharks made for the film, all nicknamed “Bruce” after Spielberg’s lawyer.

Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts depicted the fictional Amity Island, and much of the second half was shot in water.

The mechanical shark sank … a lot. No wonder Spielberg named the temperamental and unreliable shark after his lawyer.

With the lack of a functioning shark, Spielberg made the artistic decision – echoing Alfred Hitchcock – to suggest the shark’s presence rather than show it outright in the film’s first half.

Spielberg even quotes Hitchcock’s Vertigo shot (a dolly zoom) in the scene when Brody realises a shark attack is unfolding under his watch.

Even without appearing onscreen, the shark has an overwhelming presence and effect on the audience, thanks to John Williams’ music: most of the film’s cues are associated with the shark.

Tension onscreen

One of my favourite moments in the film is in the aftermath of an attack on the young Alex Kintner (and poor dog Pippet!). Brody is slapped in the face by the mother of the slain Alex – but this is followed by a cute and wholesome encounter between Chief Brody and his son Sean.

As a father, Brody’s failure to prevent the attack on Alex reflects his loss of authority to capitalism. The water is the island’s summer revenue, and the hungry shark swims in it.

The film could have seen an early shark attack and immediately launched a shark hunt. However, the shark doesn’t appear much at all for a monster movie due to its malfunctioning. This worked in the film’s favour.

Instead, the film relied on good writing and strong performances to heighten the tension and build anticipation for the rare moments the shark has onscreen.

A lot of the film’s success comes from the dynamic and well-written trio of Brody, Hooper and Quint. In the final act set at sea with just the three leads on a boat surrounded by the shark, they needed to deliver – and they did, arguably stealing the movie from the shark.

Possibly the most famous scene in the entire film comes when the shark is fully revealed for the first time. Startled by its size, Brody backs into the cabin and delivers an improvised line: “you’re gonna need a bigger boat”.

Dreyfuss and Shaw famously didn’t get along in real life. You can see that tension play out onscreen. It arguably enhances their performances.

Still, one of the most iconic moments comes when Dreyfuss’s Hooper is left speechless by Quint’s USS Indianapolis monologue, describing being in the water with sharks after the warship was torpedoed.

The monologue was scripted, but Shaw improvised much of it.

A cinema classic

Jaws is now a cinema classic.

It launched Spielberg’s illustrious career, scared an entire generation from going into the water, and also inspired a new generation of marine activists – such as myself – who love sharks and the ocean.

I hope you’ll join me in revisiting Amity Island one more time to watch this timeless film that, apart from its mechanical shark, completely works.

Will Jeffery 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. Jaws at 50: the first summer blockbuster is still a film that bites – even when the shark didn’t work – https://theconversation.com/jaws-at-50-the-first-summer-blockbuster-is-still-a-film-that-bites-even-when-the-shark-didnt-work-246247

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher White, Historian, The University of Queensland

The history of the dead – or, more precisely, the history of the living’s fascination with the dead – is an intriguing one.

As a researcher of the supernatural, I’m often pulled aside at conferences or at the school gate, and told in furtive whispers about people’s encounters with the dead.

The dead haunt our imagination in a number of different forms, whether as “cold spots”, or the walking dead popularised in zombie franchises such as 28 Days Later.

The franchise’s latest release, 28 Years Later, brings back the Hollywood zombie in all its glory – but these archetypal creatures have a much wider and varied history.

Zombis, revenants and the returning dead

A zombie is typically a reanimated corpse: a category of the returning dead. Scholars refer to them as “revenants”, and continue to argue over their exact characteristics.

In the Haitian Vodou religion, the zombi is not the same as the Hollywood zombie. Instead, zombi are people who, as a religious punishment, are drugged, buried alive, then dug out and forced into slavery.

The Hollywood zombie, however, draws more from medieval European stories about the returning dead than from Vodou.

A perfect setting for a ‘zombie’ film

In 28 Years Later, the latest entry in Danny Boyle’s blockbuster horror franchise, the monsters technically aren’t zombies because they aren’t dead. Instead, they are infected by a “rage virus”, accidentally released by a group of animal rights activists in the beginning of the first film.

This third film focuses on events almost three decades after the first film. The British Isles is quarantined, and the young protagonist Spike (Alfie Williams) and his family live in a village on Lindisfarne Island. This island, one of the most important sites in early medieval British Christianity, is isolated and protected by a tidal causeway that links it to the mainland.

The film leans heavily on how we imagine the medieval world, with scenes showing silhouetted fletchers at work making arrows, children training with bows, towering ossuaries and various memento mori. There’s also footage from earlier depictions of medieval warfare. And at one point, the characters seek sanctuary in the ruins of Fountains Abbey, in Yorkshire, which was built in 1132.

The medieval locations and imagery of 28 Years Later evoke the long history of revenants, and the returned dead who once roved medieval England.

Early accounts of the medieval dead

In the medieval world, or at least the parts that wrote in Latin, the returning dead were usually called spiritus (“spirit”), but they weren’t limited to the non-corporeal like today’s ghosts are.

Medieval Latin Christians from as early as the 3rd century saw the dead as part of a parallel society that mirrored the world of the living, where each group relied on the other to aid them through the afterlife.

While some medieval ghosts would warn the living about what awaited sinners in the afterlife, or lead their relatives to treasure, or prophesise the future, some also returned to terrorise the living.

And like the “zombies” affected by the rage virus in 28 Years Later, these revenants could go into a frenzy in the presence of the living.

Thietmar, the Prince-Bishop of Merseburg, Germany, wrote the Chronicon Thietmari (Thietmar’s Chronicle) between 1012 and 1018, and included a number of ghost stories that featured revenants.

Although not all of them framed the dead as terrifying, they certainly didn’t paint them as friendly, either. In one story, a congregation of the dead at a church set the priest upon the altar, before burning him to ashes – intended to be read as a mirror of pagan sacrifice.

These dead were physical beings, capable of seizing a man and sacrificing him in his own church.

A threat to be dealt with

The English monastic historian William of Newburgh (1136–98) wrote revenants were so common in his day that recording them all would be exhausting. According to him, the returned dead were frequently seen in 12th century England.

So, instead of providing a exhausting list, he offered some choice examples which, like most medieval ghost stories, had a good Christian moral attached to them.

William’s revenants mostly killed the people of the towns they lived, returning to the grave between their escapades. But the medieval English had a method for dealing with these monsters; they dug them up, tore out the heart and then burned the body.

Other revenants were dealt with less harshly, William explained. In one case, all it took was the Bishop of Lincoln writing a letter of absolution to stop a dead man returning to his widow’s bed.

These medieval dead were also thought to spread disease – much like those infected with the rage virus – and were capable of physically killing someone.

The undead, further north

In medieval Scandinavia and Iceland, the undead draugr were extremely strong, hideous to look at and stunk of decomposition. Some were immune to human weapons and often killed animals near their tombs before building up to kill humans. Like their English counterparts, they also spread disease.

But according to the Eyrbyggja saga, an anonymous 13th or 14th century text written in Iceland, all it took was a type of community court and the threat of legal action to drive off these returned dead.

It’s a method the survivors in 28 Years Later didn’t try.

The dead live on

The first-hand zombie stories that were common during the medieval period started to dwindle in the 16th century with the Protestant Reformation, which focused more on individuals’ behaviours and salvation.

Nonetheless, their influence can still be felt in Catholic ritual practices today, such as in prayers offered for the dead, and the lighting of votive candles.

We still tell ghost stories, and we still worry about things that go bump in the night. And of course, we continue to explore the undead in all its forms on the big screen.

Christopher White 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 28 Days Later franchise redefined zombie films. But the undead have an old, rich and varied history – https://theconversation.com/the-28-days-later-franchise-redefined-zombie-films-but-the-undead-have-an-old-rich-and-varied-history-247900

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Dahlen, Professor of Midwifery, Associate Dean Research and HDR, Midwifery Discipline Leader, Western Sydney University

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is back in the news this week in a podcast discussing her viral “baby mama” video.

The video was made four years ago when she gave birth to daughter Lilibet, but only released recently. It shows the duchess in hospital, heavily pregnant, dancing and twerking to bring on labour. Her husband, Prince Harry, dances too.

She wrote on Instagram:

Both of our children were a week past their due dates […] so when spicy food, all that walking, and acupuncture didn’t work – there was only one thing left to do!

The video follows the trend of other celebrities sharing similar videos of themselves dancing while heavily pregnant.

So does the Duchess of Sussex have a point? Can dancing really bring on labour?

First, how about dancing during pregnancy?

Exercise is recommended during pregnancy, and while some higher-impact exercises may need to be moderated, it carries minimal risk for healthy women and their babies. In fact, evidence shows regular exercise during pregnancy is associated with a variety of benefits.

Exercise can lead to a lower risk of gestational diabetes, caesarean section, the use of forceps and vacuum during birth and perinatal mental health problems, as well as quicker postpartum recovery.

While pregnant women might more often gravitate towards a brisk walk, some laps in the pool, or a group exercise class, dancing is a good option too. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has even listed dance as one of the forms of exercise found to be safe and beneficial during pregnancy.

The movements of dance involve the hips and pelvic area (especially twerking) which may help the baby get into a more optimal position and tone the pelvic floor, though the evidence for this is lacking.

Choose any form of dancing you like – even belly dancing. In a small qualitative study with two pregnant women, belly dancing was found to be joyful and empowering, boosting feelings of wellbeing.

You can dance any time during pregnancy but you may need to adapt your dance moves as the pregnancy advances and your growing belly gets in the way.

If you have risk factors such as bleeding it’s best to be cautious and discuss any planned dancing with your health-care provider.

Music can also play an important role in mental health, as well as reducing pain, blood pressure and heart rate. So the combination of exercise with music, in the form of dance, could have added benefits.

What about dancing to induce labour, and during labour?

Meghan is not the first woman to report dancing to induce their labour, but this is all anecdotal. There’s no scientific evidence to show dancing is an effective way to bring on labour.

There is perhaps slightly more evidence suggesting benefits once labour has started.

Many women seek non-pharmacological options (not involving medications) during labour. Especially early in labour, dancing may decrease the intensity of pain and lead women to feel more satisfied and in control of their labour.

In one study, 60 women were randomly allocated to either dance during labour, or not. The dancing group had significantly lower pain scores and higher satisfaction than the control group.

And again, music can lower levels of pain in early labour. So combining relaxing music with some movement could be a good thing.

Dancing to your comfort levels during labour could be helpful due to the combination of pelvic movements, being upright, moving the body rhythmically and changing the position of the body frequently.

Evidence shows being upright and moving during labour is beneficial as it enables the pelvis to open up fully to let the baby through and reduces the length of labour.

Being upright and moving could also help transfer some pressure from the baby’s head onto the cervix, which can stimulate prostaglandin, a key chemical involved in progressing labour.

It’s been suggested dancing during labour could help get the baby into a better position for delivery and therefore help labour to proceed more smoothly and quickly. But ultimately we don’t have reliable evidence to substantiate these hypotheses.

So, did Meghan induce her labour with dance?

It’s unclear if dancing helped to induce the duchess’ labour as she was in hospital and may have later had a medical or surgical induction.

Labour can be medically induced with hormones, by using a balloon-shaped catheter placed in the woman’s cervix to open it up, or by breaking the bag of water around the baby.

Alternatively, Meghan’s labour may have eventually begun naturally without her dancing having played a role if she chose to wait another few days.

However, the joy on her face and connection and support of her husband Prince Harry is a good way to increase oxytocin, a hormone that stimulates contractions. This could have helped too.

Meghan may have been on the right track, but we need more research before we can confidently recommend dancing to bring on or during labour.

In the meantime, while there’s no evidence to show dancing is effective for inducing labour, it’s highly unlikely to have any downsides – and it may contribute to a more positive childbirth experience. So, if you feel inclined, I say dance away.

Hannah Dahlen receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

– ref. Is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, right? Can dancing or twerking really bring on labour? – https://theconversation.com/is-meghan-duchess-of-sussex-right-can-dancing-or-twerking-really-bring-on-labour-259257

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Annesley, Senior Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Cell and Molecular Biology, La Trobe University

Myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is as complex as its name is difficult to pronounce. It’s sometimes referred to as simply “chronic fatigue”, but this is just one of its symptoms.

In fact, ME/CFS is a complex neurological disease, recognised by the World Health Organization, that affects nearly every system in the body.

The name refers to muscle pain (myalgia), inflammation of the brain (encephalomyelitis), and a profound, disabling fatigue that rest can’t relieve.

However, the illness’s complexity – and its disproportionate impact on women – means ME/CFS has often been incorrectly labelled as a psychological disorder.

What is ME/CFS?

ME/CFS affects people of all ages but is most commonly diagnosed in middle age. It is two to three times more common in women than men.

While the exact cause is unknown, ME/CFS is commonly triggered by an infection.

The condition has two core symptoms: a disabling, long-lasting fatigue that rest doesn’t relieve, and a worsening of symptoms after physical or mental exertion.

This is known as post-exertional malaise. It means even slight exertion can make symptoms much worse, and take much longer than expected to recover.

This varies between people, but could mean simply having a shower or attending a social event triggers worse symptoms, either immediately or days later.

These symptoms include pain, sleep issues, cognitive difficulties (such as thinking, memory and decision-making), flu-like symptoms, dizziness, gastrointestinal problems, heart rate fluctuations and many more.

For some people, symptoms can be managed in a way that allows them to work. For others, the disease is so severe it can leave them housebound or bedridden.

Symptoms can fluctuate, changing over time and in intensity, making ME/CFS a particularly unpredictable and misunderstood condition.

Not just ‘in your head’

A growing body of scientific evidence, however, clearly shows ME/CFS is a biological, not mental, illness.

Neuroimaging studies have revealed differences in the brain activity and structure of people with ME/CFS, including poor blood flow and lower levels of neurotransmitters (chemical messengers in the nervous system).

Other research indicates the condition affects how the body produces energy (the metabolism), fights infection (the immune system), delivers oxygen to muscles and tissues, and regulates blood pressure and heart rate (the vascular system).

Issues with criteria

To diagnose ME/CFS, a clinician will also exclude other possible causes of fatigue, which can be a lengthy process. A patient needs to meet a set of clinical criteria.

But one of the major challenges in researching ME/CFS is that the diagnostic criteria clinicians use vary worldwide.

Some criteria focus solely on fatigue and include people with alternate reasons for fatigue, such as a psychiatric disorder.

Others are more narrow and may only capture ME/CFS patients with more severe symptoms.

As a result, it can be very difficult to compare across different studies, as the reasons they include or exclude participants vary so much.

Changes to the guidelines

In Australia, doctors often receive little formal education about ME/CFS.

Most commonly, they follow the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners’ clinical guidelines to diagnose and manage ME/CFS. These are based on the Canadian Consensus Criteria which are considered more stringent than other ME/CFS diagnostic criteria.

They include post-exertional malaise and fatigue for more than six months as core symptoms.

However, these guidelines are outdated and rely heavily on controversial studies that assumed the primary cause of ME/CFS was “deconditioning” – a loss of physical strength due to a fear or avoidance of exercise.

These guidelines recommend ME/CFS should be treated with cognitive behavioural therapy – a common psychotherapy which focuses on changing unhealthy thoughts and behaviours – and graded exercise therapy, which gradually introduces more demanding physical activity.

While cognitive behaviour therapy can be effective for some people managing ME/CFS, it’s important not to frame this condition primarily as a psychological issue.

Graded exercise therapy can encourage people to push beyond their “energy envelope”, which means they do more than their body can manage. This can trigger post-exertional malaise and a worsening of symptoms.

In June 2024, the Australian government announced A$1.1 million towards developing new clinical guidelines for diagnosing and managing ME/CFS.

Leading organisations have scrapped the recommendation of graded exercise therapy in the United States (in 2015) and the United Kingdom (in 2021). Hopefully Australia will follow suit.

What can people with ME/CFS do?

While we wait for updated clinical guidelines, “pacing” – or working within your energy envelope – has shown some success in managing symptoms. This means monitoring and limiting how much energy you expend.

Some evidence also suggests people who rest in the early stages of their initial illness often experience better long-term outcomes with ME/CFS.

This is especially relevant after the COVID pandemic and with the emergence of long COVID. Studies indicate more than half of those affected meet stringent clinical criteria for ME/CFS.

In times of acute illness we should resist the temptation to push through. Choosing to rest may be a crucial step in preventing a condition that is much more debilitating than the original infection.

Sarah Annesley receives funding from The Judith Jane Mason & Harold Stannett Williams Memorial Foundation and ME Research UK (SCIO charity number SCO36942).

– ref. It’s not just ‘chronic fatigue’: ME/CFS is much more than being tired – https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-chronic-fatigue-me-cfs-is-much-more-than-being-tired-258803

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

As Israel continues its attacks on Iran, US President Donald Trump and other global leaders are hardening their stance against the Islamic Republic.

While considering a US attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, Trump has threatened Iran’s supreme leader, claiming to know his location and calling him “an easy target”. He has demanded “unconditional surrender” from Iran.

Meanwhile, countries such as Germany, Canada, the UK and Australia have toughened their rhetoric, demanding Iran fully abandon its nuclear program.

So, as the pressure mounts on Iran, has it been left to fight alone? Or does it have allies that could come to its aid?

Has Iran’s ‘axis of resistance’ fully collapsed?

Iran has long relied on a network of allied paramilitary groups across the Middle East as part of its deterrence strategy. This approach has largely shielded it from direct military strikes by the US or Israel, despite constant threats and pressure.

This so-called “axis of resistance” includes groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) in Iraq, the Houthi militants in Yemen, as well as Hamas in Gaza, which has long been under Iran’s influence to varying degrees. Iran also supported Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria before it was toppled last year.

These groups have served both as a regional buffer and as a means for Iran to project power without direct engagement.

However, over the past two years, Israel has dealt significant blows to the network.

Hezbollah — once Iran’s most powerful non-state ally — has been effectively neutralised after months of attacks by Israel. Its weapons stocks were systematically targeted and destroyed across Lebanon. And the group suffered a major psychological and strategic loss with the assassination of its most influential leader, Hassan Nasrallah.

In Syria, Iranian-backed militias have been largely expelled following the fall of Assad’s regime, stripping Iran of another key foothold in the region.

That said, Iran maintains strong influence in Iraq and Yemen.

The PMF in Iraq, with an estimated 200,000 fighters, remains formidable. The Houthis have similarly sized contingent of fighters in Yemen.

Should the situation escalate into an existential threat to Iran — as the region’s only Shiite-led state — religious solidarity could drive these groups to become actively involved. This would rapidly expand the war across the region.

The PMF, for instance, could launch attacks on the 2,500 US troops stationed in Iraq. Indeed, the head of Kata’ib Hezbollah, one of the PMF’s more hardline factions, promised to do so:

If America dares to intervene in the war, we will directly target its interests and military bases spread across the region without hesitation.

Iran itself could also target US bases in the Persian Gulf countries with ballistic missiles, as well as close the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the world’s oil supply flows.

Will Iran’s regional and global allies step in?

Several regional powers maintain close ties with Iran. The most notable among them is Pakistan — the only Islamic country with a nuclear arsenal.

For weeks, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has tried to align Iran more closely with Pakistan in countering Israel’s actions in Gaza.

In a sign of Pakistan’s importance in the Israel-Iran war, Trump has met with the country’s army chief in Washington as he weighs a possible strike on its neighbour.

Pakistan’s leaders have also made their allegiances very clear. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has offered Iran’s president “unwavering solidarity” in the “face of Israel’s unprovoked aggression”. And Pakistani Defence Minister Khawaja Asif recently said in an interview Israel will “think many times before taking on Pakistan”.

These statements signal a firm stance without explicitly committing to intervention.

Yet, Pakistan has also been working to de-escalate tensions. It has urged other Muslim-majority nations and its strategic partner, China, to intervene diplomatically before the violence spirals into a broader regional war.

In recent years, Iran has also made diplomatic overtures to former regional rivals, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, in order to improve relations.

These shifts have helped rally broader regional support for Iran. Nearly two dozen Muslim-majority countries — including some that maintain diplomatic relations with Israel — have jointly condemned Israel’s actions and urged de-escalation.

It’s unlikely, though, that regional powers such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey would support Iran materially, given their strong alliances with the US.

Iran’s key global allies, Russia and China, have also condemned Israel’s strikes. They have previously shielded Tehran from punitive resolutions at the UN Security Council.

However, neither power appears willing — at least for now — to escalate the confrontation by providing direct military support to Iran or engaging in a standoff with Israel and the US.

Theoretically, this could change if the conflict widens and Washington openly pursues a regime change strategy in Tehran. Both nations have major geopolitical and security interests in Iran’s stability. This is due to Iran’s long-standing “Look East” policy and the impact its instability could have on the region and the global economy.

However, at the current stage, many analysts believe both are unlikely to get involved directly.

Moscow stayed on the sidelines when Assad’s regime collapsed in Syria, one of Russia’s closest allies in the region. Not only is it focused on its war in Ukraine, Russia also wouldn’t want to endanger improving ties with the Trump administration.

China has offered Iran strong rhetorical support, but history suggests it has little interest in getting directly involved in Middle Eastern conflicts.

Ali Mamouri 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. Who are Iran’s allies? And would any help if the US joins Israel in its war? – https://theconversation.com/who-are-irans-allies-and-would-any-help-if-the-us-joins-israel-in-its-war-259265

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Greaves, Associate Professor of Politics, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Yesterday’s announcement that the five-yearly national census would be scrapped has raised difficult questions about the effectiveness, ethics and resourcing of the new “administrative” system that will replace it.

An administrative census will use information collected in day-to-day government activities, such as emergency-room admission forms, overseas travel declarations and marriage licences.

The move is not necessarily bad in principle, especially given the rising cost of the census and declining participation rates. But to make it effective and robust it must be properly resourced. And it must give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi), as set out in the Data and Statistics Act.

The transformation process so far leaves considerable room for doubt that these things will happen. In particular, there are major ethical and Māori data sovereignty issues at stake.

As Te Mana Raraunga (the Māori Data Sovereignty Network) advocates, data is a living taonga (treasure), is of strategic value to Māori, and should be subject to Māori governance. Changes to census methods risk compromising these values – and undermining public trust in the official statistics system in general.

Because the new system takes census data gathering out of the hands of individual citizens and households, it also raises questions about state surveillance and social licence.

Surveillance and social licence

Surveillance means more than police stakeouts or phone-tapping. The state constantly collects and uses many kinds of data about us and our movements.

For more than a decade, the Integrated Data Infrastructure has been the government’s tool to patch gaps in its own data ecosystems.

This administrative data is collected without our direct and informed consent, and there is no real way to opt out. The safeguard is that information about individuals is “de-identified” once it enters the Integrated Data Infrastructure – no names, just data points.

Stats NZ, which administers the system, says it has the social licence to collect, cross-reference and use this administrative data. But genuine social licence requires that people understand and accept how their data is being used.

Stats NZ’s own research shows only around one in four people surveyed have enough knowledge about its activities to make an informed judgement.

The risks associated with this form of surveillance are amplified for Māori because of their particular historical experience with data and surveillance. The Crown used data collection and monitoring systems to dispossess land and suppress cultural practices, which continue to disproportionately affect Māori communities today.

Meaningful work to address this has taken place under the Mana Ōrite agreement, a partnership between Stats NZ and the Data Iwi Leaders Group (part of the National Iwi Chairs Forum). The agreement aims to solidify iwi authority over their own data and ensure Māori perspectives are heard in decision-making around data and statistics.

Data and a distorted picture of Māori

On the face of it, repurposing administrative data seems like a realistic solution to the census budget blowout. But there are questions about whether the data and methods used in an administrative census will be robust and of high quality. This has implications for policy and for communities.

Administrative data in its current form is limited in many ways. In particular, it misses what is actually important to Māori communities, and what makes life meaningful to them.

Administrative data often only measures problems. It is collected on Māori at their most vulnerable – when they’re in crisis, sick or struggling – which creates a distorted picture. In contrast, Te Kupenga (a survey by Stats NZ last run in 2018) included information by Māori and from a Māori cultural perspective that reflected lived realities.

Before increasing reliance on administrative data, greater engagement with Māori will be needed to ensure a data system that gathers and provides reliable, quality data. It is especially important for smaller hapori Māori (Māori communities), which need the data to make decisions for their members.

Stats NZ plans to partly fill the data void left by removing the traditional census with regular surveys. But the small sample size of surveys often makes it impossible to obtain reliable information on smaller groups, such as takatāpui (Māori of diverse gender and sexualities) or specific hapū or iwi groups.

It is not clear the implications of this have been fully been worked through in the census change process. Nor is it clear whether the recommendations from Stats NZ’s Future Census Independent External Review Panel – from Māori and a range of experts – have been fully considered.

This included crucial recommendations around commissioning an independent analysis informed by te Tiriti principles, meaningful engagement with iwi-Māori, and the continuing implementation of a Māori data governance model developed by Māori data experts.

We are not opposed to updating the way in which census data is collected. But for the new approach to be just, ethical and legal will require it to adhere to te Tiriti o Waitangi and the relationship established in the Mana Ōrite agreement.

Lara Greaves receives funding from the Royal Society of NZ, MBIE, and Horizon Europe. Lara is affiliated with Te Mana Raraunga-Māori Data Sovereignty Network.

Ella Pēpi Tarapa-Dewes is affiliated with Te Mana Raraunga-Māori Data Sovereignty Network.

Kiri West receives funding from Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga. She is affiliated with Te Mana Raraunga-Māori Data Sovereignty Network.

Larissa Renfrew is affiliated with Te Mana Raraunga-Māori Data Sovereignty Network.

– ref. Scrapping the national census raises data sovereignty and surveillance fears for Māori – https://theconversation.com/scrapping-the-national-census-raises-data-sovereignty-and-surveillance-fears-for-maori-259274

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phillipa C. McCormack, Future Making Fellow, Environment Institute, University of Adelaide

The South Australian parliament today passed a new law to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity.

It brings together native vegetation management, protection for native species and habitat, and conservation on private land. When introducing the bill to the Parliament, Deputy Premier Susan Close said:

Just as South Australia has led the way on climate action, committing to net zero emissions by 2050, we must now take the same ambitious approach to biodiversity. (This) crucial piece of legislation … will modernise and strengthen protections for South Australia’s biodiversity to benefit us and our future generations.

SA is not the first state to revise its nature laws. But this is the first environment law in years to be drafted from scratch in Australia. Rather than waiting for federal reform, SA has leapfrogged the protracted process. This new legislation achieves some things no Australian law has done before.

National environment law reform has stalled

This all comes at a time when the federal law reform is up in the air.

The Albanese government failed to pass new national environment laws during its first term.

Environment protection even went backwards just before the election. The rushed amendments limited powers to reconsider certain environment approvals when an activity is harming the environment.

Last month, the new Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt said environmental law reform was a priority. Still, it may be difficult to get the essential ambitious national reforms over the line.

In the meantime, state and territory governments are forging ahead.

Time for states and territories to lead?

The last state to write a new nature law was New South Wales, in 2016. But a scathing 2023 review of the law recommended a major overhaul.

The NSW government committed to most of the recommendations, announcing big plans for nature law reforms in July last year. These plans include strengthening land-clearing codes, improving species protections and monitoring, and preparing a new “nature positive” strategy.

So far, the NSW government has only managed to pass legislation to fix problems with biodiversity offsets. Offset schemes allow developers to compensate for their destruction of vital habitat with gains elsewhere.

In Victoria, the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 was amended in 2019. These reforms inserted new principles around how the Act should be implemented, and a new approach to crucial habitat. The reforms also emphasised the need to improve species’ survival and adaptation to climate and environmental change.

The Nature Conservation Act and strategy in the ACT are also due for review. Early consultation concluded in July 2024. A revised Act is likely to be released later this year.

Does Australia really need two layers of environment laws?

The short answer is yes, Australia needs both state and federal environment laws. But the interactions between the two could be managed better.

The Australian Constitution doesn’t give the federal government explicit authority to make laws about the environment. That’s left to the states and territories, which means they make most laws about threatened species, waterways, native vegetation and protected areas.

The federal government has an overarching responsibility to protect environments that are important to all of us, in national laws. We call these “matters of national environmental significance”.

Some matters are significant because they involve Australia’s promises to the rest of the world. Australia has international obligations to protect world heritage areas and internationally significant wetlands, for example.

Other matters cross state borders. The orange-bellied parrot, for instance, migrates across three states to find food and nesting sites.

Individual states and territories do not have sufficient resources or the national perspective needed to protect these species and places.

Why do the South Australian reforms matter?

SA’s new Biodiversity Act does some things no Australian law has done before.

For example, it looks beyond species and ecosystems, offering protection to so-called “ecological entities”. Regulations will be needed to define what an ecological entity is. But the concept may protect refuges where species shelter from extreme events. It might also offer a new way to protect important landscape features such as coastal dunes.

Another new concept is “culturally significant biodiversity entities”. The Act defines a culturally significant biodiversity entity as:

• a native species or ecological community
• with cultural value to some or all Aboriginal people
• which is critical to Aboriginal peoples’ relationships with and adaptation to Country.

The Act also sets up a new Aboriginal Biodiversity Committee. That committee will co-develop policies with the minister. One of these policies will explain how culturally significant biodiversity entities will be identified and managed.

Other policies will be developed in collaboration with the Aboriginal Biodiversity Committee. These include policies to guide cultural burning of native plants, or to consider and apply Aboriginal knowledge. At long last, Aboriginal people will have a “seat at the table”.

SA becomes the third state (after NSW and Victoria) to mention climate change in its nature law. This is an important reform. Laws are needed to help nature survive more frequent and severe droughts, floods and fires.

All hands on deck

Australian environments are extraordinary, diverse and ancient. But Australia has long been an extinction hotspot. The continent’s ecosystems remain under serious pressure.

Our environment laws must be clear and avoid complex clashes or gaps between national and state responsibilities. But SA, NSW, Victoria and soon the ACT show law reform can also be more ambitious. Nature laws can truly help the environment to flourish even as the climate changes.

Phillipa C. McCormack receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Natural Hazards Research Australia, the National Environmental Science Program, Green Adelaide and the ACT Government. She is a member of the National Environmental Law Association and affiliated with the Wildlife Crime Research Hub and the Centre for Marine Socioecology.

– ref. As the federal government fumbles on nature law reform, the states are forging ahead – https://theconversation.com/as-the-federal-government-fumbles-on-nature-law-reform-the-states-are-forging-ahead-257666

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Pay, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania

Millions of birds are killed by power lines each year. Sometimes they collide with the lines when flying and are either electrocuted or fatally injured. Other times they are electrocuted when perching on power poles.

Power line collisions are one of the leading causes of injury and death for large birds of prey. In Tasmania, an endangered population of wedge-tailed eagles lost 110 individuals to power lines between 2017 and 2023.

New research I led, the first of its kind in Australia, used GPS tracking data to predict which power lines were most dangerous for these eagles.

We hope the findings will help protect birds and other wildlife from overhead wires as electricity networks expand.

Power lines and birds: a fatal mix

Overhead power lines span more than 90 million kilometres of our planet. The network keeps growing as demand for electricity rises and renewable energy projects expand into new areas.

In the United States alone, between 12 and 64 million birds are estimated to be killed by power lines each year. These deaths can damage populations of some species.

Birds can also be killed when perched on poles – for example, if they stretch their wings and connect two energised parts.

The economic costs can be considerable – disrupting electricity services, causing fires and damaging infrastructure.

Energy companies can reduce the risks through various measures. They include attaching objects to power lines to make them more visible to birds, and redesigning poles to reduce the likelihood of electrocution.

But these solutions can be expensive, and challenging to implement on a large scale. So, prioritising the riskiest power lines is the most cost-effective solution.

The presence of bird carcasses has traditionally been used as a way to identify high-risk power lines. But this approach can give a biased picture, because people are more likely to find dead birds in accessible, less vegetated areas.

New research by my colleagues and I explores a different approach.

Tracking Tasmania’s wedgies

We used GPS tracking of animal movements to predict which power lines were most dangerous for Tasmania’s wedge-tailed eagles.

GPS tracking can record a bird’s location, altitude and speed – as frequently as every few seconds. This detailed information can show how birds behave around power lines, helping identify when and where they’re most at risk.

In 2017, my colleagues and I attached lightweight GPS trackers to 23 Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagles, then analysed six years of tracking data. We identified more than 9,400 power line crossings at risky altitudes.

We then linked these crossings to different landscape features. This allowed us to build a model predicting where eagles are most likely to cross power lines at dangerous heights across Tasmania.

Power line crossings were most likely at or near open land, forest edges, rural residential developments, wet forest and freshwater sources. Risky crossings peaked in autumn and winter.

Almost half of known collisions occurred on the 20% of Tasmania’s power line network with the highest risk.

Importantly, we tested our predictions against locations where eagles had collided with power lines. The model accurately predicted many of these collision sites, confirming that areas with more low-flying eagle activity carry a greater risk of collisions.

This means our model can not only pick up on known hotspots, but can reveal risky areas that would be missed if carcass records were used exclusively to identify risk. It also means dangerous power lines can be identified before birds have died.

A powerful new tool

Our research is part of a growing number of studies examining animal movement to improve wildlife management.

Risky animal behaviours have been monitored using GPS trackers and then used to inform models predicting the risk of wildlife interactions with road vehicles, wind turbines and aircraft.

Recently, GPS tracking data was used in Europe, North Africa and North America to map and reduce wildlife risks around power lines.

Like ours, these studies can help guide where devices should be attached to lines and inform where new lines are built.

GPS tracking data offers a powerful tool to guide the sustainable design of power lines, target mitigation efforts, and make our expanding energy infrastructure safer for wildlife.

James Pay receives funding from the Australian Research Council (LP210200539), NRM South, Woolnorth Renewables, TasNetworks, the Bookend Trust, New Forests, Norske Skog, ACEN Renewables, Ark Energy and Goldwind Australia.

– ref. Overhead power lines kill millions of birds a year. Scientists found a way to help cut the devastating toll – https://theconversation.com/overhead-power-lines-kill-millions-of-birds-a-year-scientists-found-a-way-to-help-cut-the-devastating-toll-258295

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne Quain, Senior Lecturer, Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney

Last week, the peak body for equestrian sport in Australia suspended a prominent member after footage allegedly depicted Australian Olympic dressage rider Heath Ryan whipping a horse more than 40 times.

Ryan confirmed he was the rider in the footage, which was reportedly taken about two years ago.

He explained the horse, Nico, had belonged to a friend who had been hospitalised for serious injuries inflicted by the animal.

Ryan wrote Nico had “always been a problem child” and was about to be sent to slaughter.

However, Ryan, an experienced trainer and instructor, intervened to “salvage” the horse.

But horses, just like humans, feel pain, which is why more needs to be done to minimise the use of whips on horses.

What happened next?

The footage depicts Ryan mounted on Nico, forcefully whipping him.

Both the whoosh of the whip travelling at speed and the sound of it contacting Nico’s flesh are audible.

Nico kicks out several times in response, yet the whipping continues.

Nico seems “shut down” – a term used to describe a horse when they appear to have no understanding of what they need to do to make an adverse experience stop.

Whipping causes horses pain. The skin in the gluteal area of the horse, which Ryan repeatedly struck with the whip, is sensitive to pain just like the skin of humans.

This is not the first time whipping has been in the spotlight. In July 2024, footage emerged of three-time Olympic dressage gold medallist Charlotte Dujardin repeatedly whipping a horse on the hind legs.

This led to the International Equestrian Federation fining her CHF 10,000 (A$18,867) and imposing a 12-month suspension.

Read more:
The Paris Olympics horse-whipping scandal shows the dangers of ‘Disneyfication’ in horse sports

More recently in Australia, in May 2025, the RSPCA prosecuted a case against trainer Liandra Gray, who was recorded striking a horse with a padded racing whip more than 40 times. A Tasmanian court found Gray had caused unreasonable and unjustifiable pain and the whip use constituted cruelty.

Equestrian Australia’s national dressage rules forbid excessive use of whips.

Despite stating he “hated” whipping Nico, Ryan argued he was acting in the horse’s interests.

After an undisclosed period, Nico was re-homed, and according to Ryan “is now thriving in a loving and competitive home with an exciting future”.

Does the end justify the means?

Ryan’s justification of his treatment of Nico is based on the positive consequences for the horse (avoiding slaughter) and the current owners (Nico can continue to be ridden).

This justification is a type of consequentialism, where an outcome is judged to be good or not based on the consequences it brings about. This raises an important question: what counts as a “good” outcome and by whose standard are we judging?

Ryan’s justification points to a culture where horses’ needs and interests are not respected and where they are valued solely for their utility to humans.

But we know horses are sensitive, sentient beings, capable of suffering.

The relationship between a rider and horse is often described as a partnership. In reality, horses have little choice.

The equipment and cues riders rely on to control horses work because they are aversive and even painful. Because horses are motivated to escape from painful stimuli, they rapidly learn to perform in the desired way.

Because of this reliance on aversive stimuli to control horses, it is essential riders remove it as soon as the horse performs the desired behaviour (for example, releasing tension on the reins).

Why was Nico a ‘problem child’ in the first place?

During riding, a horse knows it has responded correctly if the rider removes the aversive stimulus that was used to cue the horse.

If the rider removes the stimulus at the wrong time or not at all, the horse may become confused, stressed and express unwanted behaviours.

If this is repeated, the unwanted responses can quickly become a habit and the horse may be labelled a problem.

Based on the footage, it seems that instead of learning to move forward to escape pressure from the rider’s heels or whip, Nico appears to have developed a habit of stalling (slowing or coming to a stop instead of moving forward).

Stress and fear can impair animals’ ability to learn and problem solve and horses vary considerably in their personalities and ability to learn what humans require of them.

The combination of personality, stress, fear and rider inconsistencies can quickly lead to the development of unwanted behaviours.

It is likely Nico’s behaviour reflects these factors.

It’s time for a change

This incident likely taught Nico to fear humans and to expect that being ridden will involve inescapable pain unless he does exactly what his rider wants.

Training methods like this are considered outdated and unethical.

This is because there is ample scientific evidence showing the modification of unwanted behaviour in ridden horses can be achieved without resorting to violence to force them into submission.

International groups such as the International Society for Equitation Science (ISES) and the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe have highlighted the risks of misusing aversive training stimuli.

They argue training methods that lead to fear and stress are inefficient and pose unacceptable welfare risks.

ISES has even developed a set of 10 principles for training even the most difficult horses.

While Ryan has justified his intervention as the only possible solution to Nico’s unwanted behaviour, the scientific evidence shows it is neither necessary nor ethical to violently whip a horse to teach it a lesson.

Anne Quain has consulted for animal welfare organisations including the RSPCA. She is a member of the Australian Veterinary Association, the Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists, and the European College of Animal Welfare and Behaviour Medicine in Animal Welfare Science, Ethics and Law. She has been a recipient of an Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation Grant. She has undertaken two residencies at The Ethics Centre.

Cathrynne Henshall receives funding from the Hong Kong Jockey Club Welfare Research Funding

– ref. Horse whipping is painful and cruel. The latest incident shows why it should be banned – https://theconversation.com/horse-whipping-is-painful-and-cruel-the-latest-incident-shows-why-it-should-be-banned-259041

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane McAdam, Scientia Professor and ARC Laureate Fellow, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney

As thousands of Australian citizens and permanent residents stuck in Iran and Israel continue to register for repatriation flights, the government is scrambling to find safe ways to evacuate them.

With the airspace over both countries closed, the government is considering other ways to bring them home.

The current plan is to charter buses from private companies to take people from Israel into neighbouring Jordan. As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stressed: “We want to make sure people are looked after, but they need to be looked after safely as well”.

This is not the first time Australia has faced challenges in evacuating nationals stranded abroad. When conflict, disasters or other emergencies occur overseas, the government regularly works to bring Australians home.

In the early days of the COVID pandemic, for instance, the government arranged repatriation flights and established quarantine facilities to assist Australians who were stuck outside the country. Australia has repeatedly assisted its citizens caught in conflict zones to get back home, including from Afghanistan in 2021 and Lebanon in 2024.

And when an earthquake devasted Vanuatu last December, Australia moved swiftly to get Australians out.

Is Australia legally required to repatriate people?

While there is a longstanding and widespread practice of governments repatriating their nationals in emergencies, countries generally do not have a legal responsibility to do so.

Instead, governments’ decisions are discretionary and made on a case-by-case basis. They are often influenced by diplomatic, logistical and security considerations.

Governments have a right – but not a duty – to provide consular assistance to their nationals abroad. This includes issuing travel documents, liaising with local authorities and, in exceptional cases, facilitating evacuations.

The Consular Services Charter outlines what Australians abroad can expect from their government. It makes clear that while the government will do what it can, there are limits. Assistance is not guaranteed, especially in areas where Australia has no diplomatic presence or where security conditions make intervention too dangerous.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) is the lead agency responsible for coordinating Australians’ evacuation with embassies, airlines and international partners. Decisions to evacuate are ultimately made by the minister for foreign affairs following a recommendation, where possible, by the Inter-Departmental Emergency Task Force (IDETF).

Repatriation efforts are guided by the Australian Government Plan for the Reception of Australian Citizens and Approved Foreign Nationals Evacuated from Overseas (AUSRECEPLAN). This arrangement that sets out a process for “the safe repatriation of Australians, their immediate dependants, permanent residents and approved foreign nationals (evacuees) following an Australian government-led evacuation in response to an overseas disaster or adverse security situation”. It outlines how federal, state and territory agencies coordinate to receive and support evacuees once they arrive in Australia, ensuring that returns are not only swift, but also safe and orderly.

Challenges and constraints

Repatriation during a crisis is a complex undertaking. Quite aside from the emergency conditions, which may close off usual travel options or routes, the Australian government cannot force another country to allow an evacuation. It also cannot guarantee safe passage, especially in conflicts.

Identifying and communicating with citizens overseas can also be tricky, often requiring people to have self-registered with consular authorities to receive updates. In addition, consular services may be strained when embassies and consular offices have closed, as is the case in Israel and Iran.

For these reasons, countries sometimes band together to assist each other. For instance, Australia and Canada have agreed that where one has a consular presence but the other does not, they will help to repatriate the other’s citizens.

Similarly, the United States helped evacuate Australians and other allies’ nationals from Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover in 2021. Countries in the European Union can activate a special regional mechanism to facilitate the repatriation of their citizens caught up in emergencies abroad.

In exceptional circumstances, countries have sometimes extracted their stranded nationals through military operations, known as “non-combatant evacuation operations” (NEOs). This involves the military temporarily occupying a location on foreign soil to evacuate people. Some recent examples include the large-scale evacuations of foreign nationals from Afghanistan in 2021, Sudan during the civil war that began in 2023 and Lebanon during the 2024 Israeli–Hezbollah conflict.

NEOs generally require the consent of the country from where the evacuation takes place, but their precise legal basis remains ambiguous under international law.

In all cases, the evacuation of nationals is operationally complex – as exemplified by the current situation in Iran and Israel. Countries with limited resources may struggle to repatriate their nationals at all. This can mean some foreign nationals are “rescued”, while others are left behind.

And, of course, local populations generally aren’t eligible for evacuation at all. This can leave people in extremely dangerous circumstances.

That is why we have proposed the creation of an Australian framework for humanitarian emergencies that, among other things, would facilitate the safe and swift departure of certain non-citizens at particular risk. This would underscore that Australia’s approach to evacuations is, at its heart, about protecting people during crises.

Jane McAdam receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and is the Director of the ARC Evacuations Research Hub at the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney.

Regina Jefferies and Thomas Mulder 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. Australian citizens in Iran and Israel are desperate to leave. Is the government required to help? – https://theconversation.com/australian-citizens-in-iran-and-israel-are-desperate-to-leave-is-the-government-required-to-help-259272

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Friedlander, PhD Candidate in Sociology, University of Waikato

Period-tracking apps are popular digital tools for a range of menstrual, reproductive and general health purposes. But the way these apps collect and use data involves risk.

Many apps encourage users to log information well beyond their menstrual cycle, including sexual activity, medications, sleep quality, exercise, social activity and perimenopause symptoms. As well as this logged data, apps often collect location and other personally identifiable information.

Period tracking apps may pose a particularly high risk in places where abortion is illegal because user data may be accessed by law enforcement on request.

Our new research examines how aware app users in Aotearoa New Zealand are of these risks. We found a range of levels of understanding and perspectives on risk, from untroubled to concerned and deeply worried about the implications of digital tracking for reproductive rights.

Privacy, data and risk

The first period-tracking app was released in 2013. Since then, hundreds of such apps have been created, with collectively hundreds of millions of downloads worldwide.

A recent analysis found app downloads are particularly prevalent in North America, Europe, Australia and Aotearoa. The same study found three apps – Flo, Clue and Period Tracker – make up the majority of downloads.

Some period apps can link to and import information from other apps and wearables. For example, Clue can link to and import information from the Oura smart ring and Apple Health, both of which gather personal health metrics. Flo can similarly import information from other health apps.

A recent analysis of period app privacy policies found they often collect a range of personally identifiable information.

Personal health data flows to third parties

Some participants in our research have used an app for a decade or longer. This means the app holds a comprehensive database of years of intimate health data and other personal information, including some which they may not have chosen to provide.

This data can be used by a range of third parties in commercial, research or other applications, sometimes without app users’ explicit knowledge or consent. One study found many period apps exported more data than was declared in privacy policies, including to third parties.

Another study reported that apps changed privacy policies without obtaining user consent. Apps can also infer sensitive information not explicitly logged by users by combining data.

In 2021, Flo reached a settlement with the US Federal Trade Commission on charges over its sharing of user data with marketing and analytics companies without user consent.

App privacy policies often state that user data may be accessed by law enforcement on request, which is a major concern in places where abortion is illegal. Users may explicitly log the start and end of pregnancies, but pregnancy can also be inferred or predicted using other data. In some cases, period app data may therefore reveal a user’s miscarriage or abortion.

Making sense of the risk in New Zealand

Our exploration of user attitudes about the risk of period-tracking apps has revealed that about half of participants were unconcerned about their data. Some imagined positive uses for their data, such as improving the app or contributing to reproductive healthcare research. These potential uses are often highlighted by period-tracking apps in marketing materials.

Other participants were concerned about their data. Some had risk minimisation strategies, including limiting what information they logged. Concerned participants were often resigned to uncontrolled uses of their data.

One said:

[there’s] no such thing as private data these days.

Another thought that:

everyone that does anything online […] is kind of accepting the fact that your data is being potentially accessed and used by third parties. It’s just kind of where it is now.

About a third of participants in our study contextualised their concerns with respect to reproductive rights and abortion access, especially since the 2022 overturn of Roe v Wade in the US.

Others wondered if what happened in the US could happen in New Zealand. One participant referenced concepts such as rangatiratanga and mana motuhake (self determination) when thinking about period app data. She said:

I worry about the politics that happen overseas coming here to Aotearoa […] knowing that I don’t have full control or rangatiratanga over the data I provide .  I worry for all users about what this information can be used for in future, as much as we like to say ‘this is New Zealand, that would never happen here’, we have no idea.

With gender and reproductive rights at risk around the world, such concerns are reasonable and justified.

Study participants used period-tracking apps for diverse reasons, including to plan for periods, to track pain and communicate it to doctors, to help get pregnant, and to learn about their bodies. Some participants told us that using period apps was empowering. Some perceived period apps as risky, with limits to how they can mitigate the risk.

Menstruators shouldn’t have to trade data privacy and security in order to access the benefits of period-tracking apps. Legislators and policy makers should understand the benefits and risks and ensure strong data protections are in place.

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. Popular period-tracking apps can hold years of personal data – new NZ research finds mixed awareness of risk – https://theconversation.com/popular-period-tracking-apps-can-hold-years-of-personal-data-new-nz-research-finds-mixed-awareness-of-risk-258920

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eric Warrant, Professor of Zoology at the University of Lund, Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University, and Adjunct Professor, University of South Australia

It’s a warm January summer afternoon, and as I traverse the flower-strewn western slopes of Australia’s highest mountain, Mount Kosciuszko, I am on the lookout for a tell-tale river of boulders that winds its way down into the alpine valleys below.

Here, hidden in cave-like hollows and crevices formed deep within the river of boulders, is one of the most spectacular natural phenomena in the insect world – the summer mass gathering of an iconic Australian insect, the bogong moth (Agrotis infusa).

Tightly huddled together in their dim cool cavernous world, with each moth’s head pushed slightly under the wings of the moth just ahead, millions of bogong moths sleep out the summer, slumbering in a state of dormancy known as “aestivation”.

Their little bodies coat the stone surfaces in an endless soft brown carpet, with 17,000 of them tiling each square metre of cave wall. It’s a sight that never fails to take my breath away.

Marathon migrations

To get here, these moths have flown from all over southeast Australia through the spring, arriving from as far away as south-eastern Queensland and far-western Victoria. Converted to human body length, these journeys of roughly 1,000 kilometres would be equivalent to a person circumnavigating Earth twice.

The moths’ marathon voyages to the Alps are likely undertaken to escape the lethal heat of the coming summer in their breeding areas. When the cool of autumn arrives, the moths leave the mountains to produce their own offspring and die.

But how on Earth do they know how to find these caves? How do they know the direction to travel and how do they know when they’ve arrived?

These questions have fascinated me and the other members of my research group for many years. It turns out bogong moths possess a most extraordinary ability to navigate, harnessing Earth’s magnetic field and the stars as compasses to follow their inherited migratory direction.

Moths, magnets and stars

We made these remarkable discoveries in a specialised lab we built a few years ago near Adaminaby in the Snowy Mountains of New South Wales.

First we light-trapped bogong moths that were either migrating towards the Alps in spring or away again in autumn. We next placed them in a special flight arena inside the lab, and finely controlled Earth’s magnetic field (with magnetic coils around the arena) and the starry night sky (by projecting a highly realistic starry night sky on the roof of the arena).

Because we already knew bogong moths have a magnetic sense, we used the coils to completely remove, or null, the magnetic field in the arena. This ensured any orientation using the stars was not confounded by the ability to detect Earth’s magnetic field.

What we found next astounded us. Using only the local Australian starry night sky projected above them, bogong moths flying in our arena were able to discern and follow their inherited migratory direction – both in spring and in autumn.

If we turned this projected sky by 180°, the moths turned and flew in exactly the opposite direction. If we then took all of the stars in this projected natural sky and randomly distributed them across the roof of the arena, the moths became completely confused and lost their ability to migrate in their inherited migratory direction.

Navigators with tiny brains

In the absence of all other possible cues, bogong moths clearly used the stars as a true compass to discern a geographic direction relative to north.

This is the first invertebrate we so far know of that can do this. Only human beings and some species of night-migratory birds are known to have this ability.

But in moths this ability is even more remarkable considering their brain is approximately one-tenth the volume of a grain of rice and their eyes only a couple of millimetres wide.

A magnetic backup system

We made a final discovery when we moved our flight arena up onto the hill behind the lab under the magnificent dome of the natural starry sky. As expected, the moths were beautifully oriented in their inherited migratory direction.

But on one of these nights the sky was heavily overcast with cloud. To our great surprise, the moths remained oriented in their migratory direction, even though the stars were obscured.

The only remaining cue that could have been used was Earth’s magnetic field, which showed very clearly that moths rely on two compasses – a magnetic compass and a stellar compass.

But of course, two compasses will always be better than one – if one becomes corrupted or drops out, the other can take over. Nature’s perfect solution for robust navigation!

Bogong moths under threat

Despite its fantastic abilities, this tiny navigator is under threat. A result of anthropogenic climate change, the recent drought in Australia saw bogong moth numbers fall by a jaw-dropping 99.5%.

Endangered alpine marsupials that depend on the moth’s arrival in spring for food – such as the mountain pygmy possum – suffered heavily as a result.

Droughts in southeast Australia are only predicted to worsen in both frequency and intensity. The future of the bogong moth, as well as the fragile alpine ecosystem that depends on it, does not look very bright.

Eric Warrant receives funding from the Swedish Research Council, the European Research Council, the Wenner-Gren Foundation and the Carl Tryggers Foundation. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science, The German National Academy of Science Leopoldina, the Royal Danish Society of Sciences and Letters, the Royal Institute of Navigation and the Royal Physiographic Society.

– ref. Migrating bogong moths use the stars and Earth’s magnetic field to find ancestral summer caves each year – https://theconversation.com/migrating-bogong-moths-use-the-stars-and-earths-magnetic-field-to-find-ancestral-summer-caves-each-year-259361

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Long, Strategic Professor in Palaeontology, Flinders University

It’s been 50 years since Steven Spielberg’s movie Jaws first cast a terrifying shadow across our screens.

At a low point during production, Spielberg worried he’d only ever be known for “a big fish story”. The film, however, did not tank.

Jaws broke box office records and became the highest-grossing movie at the time, only surpassed by the first Star Wars released two years later in 1977.

A combination of mass advertising, familiar “hero” tropes and old-school showmanship launched Jaws as the first modern blockbuster.

Hollywood, and our relationship to oceans and the sharks within them, would never be the same.

An unrealistic monster

In Peter Benchley’s 1974 novel that Jaws is based on, the shark is 6 metres long. For added screen excitement, in the movie it grew to a whopping 7.6 metres.

However, that’s unrealistically large.

The average size of a mature great white (Carcharodon carcharias, also known as the white shark) is between 4.6 and 4.9 metres for female sharks and up to 4 metres for male sharks.

The largest recorded living specimens peak at about 6 metres, with one monster specimen caught in Cuba in 1945 reaching 6.4 metres.

Earth’s oceans have seen bigger predatory sharks in the past. The biggest one of all time was the megalodon (Otodus megalodon) which lived from 23 to 3 million years ago, and may have been up to 24 metres in length. However, it looked nothing like the modern white shark.

They’re not even directly related – another thing scientists learned quite recently.

Who was the megalodon, then?

White sharks first evolved between 6 and 4 million years ago in the shadows of the megalodon. A recent study showed the megalodon’s large serrated teeth show signs of it being a supreme opportunistic super-predator.

That means it ate just about anything, but especially liked whales and marine mammals.

Read more:
Friday essay: Giant shark megalodon was the most powerful superpredator ever. Why did it go extinct?

But white sharks are not directly related to the megalodon, whose lineage began with a shark called Cretalamna during the age of dinosaurs about 100 million years ago.

By contrast, the white shark lineage began with an ancient mako shark, Carcharodon hastalis. It was 7 to 8 metres long and had large, similarly shaped teeth to the modern white shark but lacking serrated edges.

A fossil intermediate species, Carcharodon hubbelli shows the transition over time from weakly serrated to strongly serrated teeth.

How did Jaws affect white shark populations?

Last year, the International Shark Attack File reported 47 unprovoked shark bites to humans worldwide, resulting in seven fatalities. This was well below the previous ten-year average of 70 bites per year; your chances of getting bitten by a shark are extremely rare.

Following the movies that made up the Jaws franchise, there was an increase in hunting and killing sharks – with a particular focus on great white sharks that were already going into a decline due to overfishing, trophy hunting and lethal control programs.

Between 80% and 90% of white sharks have disappeared globally since the middle of the 20th century. Recent estimates calculate there are probably less than 500 individual white sharks in Australian waters right now.

When Jaws first aired, scientists didn’t know how long sharks took to reproduce, or how many offspring a white shark could have each year. We now know it takes about 26 years for a male and 33 years for a female to sexually mature before they can start having pups.

Data about white shark births is sparse, but recently a 5.6-metre-long female caught on a drum line off the coast of Queensland had just four large pups inside her. This is a very small number. Some large sharks, such as the whale shark, can give birth to up to 300 young.

Now that we know just how slow they are to breed, it’s clear it will take many decades to reestablish the “pre-Jaws” population of white sharks – important apex predators in the marine ecosystem.

Will white sharks survive?

White sharks are currently listed as vulnerable.

This classification means if we don’t change the current living conditions for white sharks, including impacts caused by human activities such as commercial fishing, and the impacts of climate change and ocean pollution, they will continue to decline and eventually could go extinct.

Currently, white sharks are protected in several countries and form the basis for an important tourist industry in Australia, South Africa, western United States and most recently Nova Scotia, Canada.

These sharks are iconic apex predators that fascinate people. One of us (John) went cage diving with them recently off the Neptune Islands of South Australia and can attest to how breathtaking it is to watch them in their natural environment.

In terms of economic impact, they are worth far more alive than dead.

There’s still much we don’t know about white sharks

The complete white shark genome was first published only in 2019. It has 4.63 billion base pairs, making it much larger than the human genome (3.2 billion base pairs).

The genome revealed some surprising things, like how white sharks show strong molecular adaptations for wound-healing processes, and a suite of “genome stability” genes – those used in DNA repair or DNA damage response.

The transcriptome (or sum total of the messenger RNA) of the white shark showed greater similarity to the human transcriptome than to that of other fishes. This hints that “unexpressed genes” in the shark could one day play a role in uncovering genetic pathways for potential cures in human diseases.

Jaws and its sequels certainly brought white sharks to the attention (and nightmares) of humans, with devastating impacts on how we treated them as a species.

Our relationship with white sharks reflects our relationship with nature more broadly – a feared antagonist within the current capitalist paradigm; an enemy to be tamed, contained or consumed.

As we learn more of the peril and potential of these remarkable creatures, we can learn how to live with them, to see beyond our fears and value their role within our delicate ocean ecosystems.

John Long receives funding from The Australian Research Council.

Heather L. Robinson 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. Jaws at 50: how a single movie changed our perception of white sharks forever – https://theconversation.com/jaws-at-50-how-a-single-movie-changed-our-perception-of-white-sharks-forever-258306

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam D Hines, Research Fellow, Centre for Robotics, Queensland University of Technology

Robots are increasingly becoming a part of our lives – from warehouse automation to robotic vacuum cleaners. And just like humans, robots need to know where they are to reliably navigate from A to B.

How far, and for how long, a robot can navigate depends on how much power it consumes over time. Robot navigation systems are especially energy hungry.

But what if power consumption was no longer a concern?

Our research on “brain-inspired” computing, published today in Science Robotics, could make navigational robots of the future more energy efficient than previously imagined.

This could potentially extend and expand what’s possible for battery-powered systems working in challenging environments such as disaster zones, underwater, and even in space.

How do robots ‘see’ the world?

The battery going flat on your smartphone is usually just a minor inconvenience. For a robot, running out of power can mean the difference between life and death – including for the people it might be helping.

Robots such as search and rescue drones, underwater robots monitoring the Great Barrier Reef, and space rovers all need to navigate while running on limited power supplies.

Many of these robots can’t rely on GPS for navigation. They keep track of where they are using a process called visual place recognition. Visual place recognition lets a robot estimate where it’s located in the world using just what it “sees” through its camera.

But this method uses a lot of energy. Robotic vision systems alone can use up to a third of the energy from a typical lithium ion battery found onboard a robot.

This is because modern robotic vision, including visual place recognition, typically relies on power-hungry machine learning models, similar to the ones used in AI like ChatGPT.

By comparison, our brains require just enough power to turn on a light bulb, while allowing us to see things and navigate the world with remarkable precision.

Robotics engineers often look to biology for inspiration. In our new study, we turned to the human brain to help us create a new, energy-efficient visual place recognition system.

Mimicking the brain

Our system uses a brain-inspired technology called neuromorphic computing. As the name suggests, neuromorphic computers take principles from neuroscience to design computer chips and software that can learn and process information like human brains do.

An important feature of neuromorphic computers is that they are highly energy-efficient. A regular computer can use up to 100 times more power than a neuromorphic chip.

Neuromorphic computing is not limited to just computer chips, however. It can be paired with bio-inspired cameras that capture the world more like the human eye does. These are called dynamic vision sensors, and they work like motion detectors for each pixel. They only “wake up” and send information when something changes in the scene, rather than constantly streaming data like a regular camera.

These bio-inspired cameras are also highly energy efficient, using less than 1% of the power of normal cameras.

So if brain-inspired computers and bio-inspired cameras are so wonderful, why aren’t robots using them everywhere? Well, there are a range of challenges to overcome, which was the focus of our recent research.

A new kind of LENS

The unique properties of a dynamic vision sensor are, ironically, a limiting factor in many visual place recognition systems.

Standard visual place recognition models are built on the foundation of static images, like the ones taken by your smartphone. Since a neuromorphic sensor doesn’t produce static images but senses the world in a constantly changing way, we need a brain-inspired computer to process what it “sees”.

Our research overcomes this challenge by combining neuromorphic chips and sensors for robots that use visual place recognition. We call this system Locational Encoding with Neuromorphic Systems, or LENS for short.

LENS uses the continuous information stream from a dynamic vision sensor directly on a neuromorphic chip. The system uses a machine learning method known as spiking neural networks. These process information like human brains do.

By combining all these neuromorphic components, we reduced the power needed for visual place recognition by over 90%. Since nearly a third of the energy needed for a robot is vision related, this is a significant reduction.

To achieve this, we used an off-the-shelf product called SynSense Speck, which combines a neuromorphic chip and a dynamic vision sensor all in one compact package.

The entire system only required 180 kilobytes of memory to map an area of Brisbane eight kilometres in length. That’s a tiny fraction of what would be needed in a standard visual place recognition system.

A robot in the wild

For testing, we placed our LENS system on a hexapod robot. Hexapods are multi-terrain robots that can navigate both indoors and outdoors.

In our tests, the LENS performed as well as a typical visual place recognition system, but used much less energy.

Our work comes at a time when AI development is trending towards creating bigger, more power-hungry solutions for improved performance. The energy needed to train and use systems like OpenAI’s ChatGPT is notoriously demanding, with concerns that modern AI represents unsustainable growth in energy demands.

For robots that need to navigate, developing more compact, energy-efficient AI using neuromorphic computing could be key for being able to go farther and for longer periods of time. There are still challenges to solve, but we are closer to making it a reality.

Michael Milford receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Economic Accelerator, the Queensland Government, Amazon, Ford Motor Company, iMOVE CRC, the DAAD Australia-Germany Co-operation Scheme and DSTG. He is affiliated with the Motor Trades Association of Queensland as a non-executive board member.

Tobias Fischer receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the DAAD Australia-Germany Co-operation Scheme, the Great Barrier Reef Foundation via the Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program, and the Queensland Department of Environment, Science and Innovation.

Adam D Hines 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. Robot eyes are power hungry. What if we gave them tools inspired by the human brain? – https://theconversation.com/robot-eyes-are-power-hungry-what-if-we-gave-them-tools-inspired-by-the-human-brain-257978

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tu Nguyen, PhD Candidate, Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

Winter is here, along with cold days and the inevitable seasonal surge in respiratory viruses.

But it’s not only the sniffles we need to worry about. Heart attacks and strokes also tend to rise during the winter months.

In new research out this week we show one reason why.

Our study shows catching common respiratory viruses raises your short-term risk of a heart attack or stroke. In other words, common viruses, such as those that cause flu and COVID, can trigger them.

Wait, viruses can trigger heart attacks?

Traditional risk factors such as smoking, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity and lack of exercise are the main reasons for heart attacks and strokes.

And rates of heart attacks and strokes can rise in winter for a number of reasons. Factors such as low temperature, less physical activity, more time spent indoors – perhaps with indoor air pollutants – can affect blood clotting and worsen the effects of traditional risk factors.

But our new findings build on those from other researchers to show how respiratory viruses can also be a trigger.

The theory is respiratory virus infections set off a heart attack or stroke, rather than directly cause them. If traditional risk factors are like dousing a house in petrol, the viral infection is like the matchstick that ignites the flame.

For healthy, young people, a newer, well-kept house is unlikely to spontaneously combust. But an older or even abandoned house with faulty electric wiring needs just a spark to lead to a blaze.

People who are particularly vulnerable to a heart attack or stroke triggered by a respiratory virus are those with more than one of those traditional risk factors, especially older people.

What we did and what we found

Our team conducted a meta-analysis (a study of existing studies) to see which respiratory viruses play a role in triggering heart attacks and strokes, and the strength of the link. This meant studying more than 11,000 scientific papers, spanning 40 years of research.

Overall, the influenza virus and SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID) were the main triggers.

If you catch the flu, we found the risk of a heart attack goes up almost 5.4 times and a stroke by 4.7 times compared with not being infected. The danger zone is short – within the first few days or weeks – and tapers off with time after being infected.

Catching COVID can also trigger heart attacks and strokes, but there haven’t been enough studies to say exactly what the increased risk is.

We also found an increased risk of heart attacks or strokes with other viruses, including respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), enterovirus and cytomegalovirus. But the links are not as strong, probably because these viruses are less commonly detected or tested for.

What’s going on?

Over a person’s lifetime, our bodies wear and tear and the inside wall of our blood vessels becomes rough. Fatty build-ups (plaques) stick easily to these rough areas, inevitably accumulating and causing tight spaces.

Generally, blood can still pass through, and these build-ups don’t cause issues. Think of this as dousing the house in petrol, but it’s not yet alight.

So how does a viral infection act like a matchstick to ignite the flame? Through a cascading process of inflammation.

High levels of inflammation that follow a viral infection can crack open a plaque. The body activates blood clotting to fix the crack but this clot could inadvertently block a blood vessel completely, causing a heart attack or stroke.

Some studies have found fragments of the COVID virus inside the blood clots that cause heart attacks – further evidence to back our findings.

We don’t know whether younger, healthier people are also at increased risk of a heart attack or stroke after infection with a respiratory virus.

That’s because people in the studies we analysed were almost always older adults with at least one of those traditional risk factors, so were already vulnerable.

The bad news is we will all be vulnerable eventually, just by getting older.

What can we do about it?

The triggers we identified are mostly preventable by vaccination.

There is good evidence from clinical trials the flu vaccine can reduce the risk of a heart attack or stroke, especially if someone already has heart problems.

We aren’t clear exactly how this works. But the theory is that avoiding common infections, or having less severe symptoms, reduces the chances of setting off the inflammatory chain reaction.

COVID vaccination could also indirectly protect against heart attacks and strokes. But the evidence is still emerging.

Heart attacks and strokes are among Australia’s biggest killers. If vaccinations could help reduce even a small fraction of people having a heart attack or stroke, this could bring substantial benefit to their lives, the community, our stressed health system and the economy.

What should I do?

At-risk groups should get vaccinated against flu and COVID. Pregnant women, and people over 60 with medical problems, should receive RSV vaccination to reduce their risk of severe disease.

So if you are older or have predisposing medical conditions, check Australia’s National Immunisation Program to see if you are eligible for a free vaccine.

For younger people, a healthy lifestyle with regular exercise and balanced diet will set you up for life. Consider checking your heart age (a measure of your risk of heart disease), getting an annual flu vaccine and discuss COVID boosters with your GP.

Tu Nguyen is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program PhD Scholarship and a Murdoch Children’s Research Institute Top-Up Scholarship.

Christopher Reid receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council and the Medical Research Future Fund.

Jim Buttery receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, the US Centres for Disease Control, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Victorian State Government.

Diana Vlasenko and Hazel Clothier 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. Winter viruses can trigger a heart attack or stroke, our study shows. It’s another good reason to get a flu or COVID shot – https://theconversation.com/winter-viruses-can-trigger-a-heart-attack-or-stroke-our-study-shows-its-another-good-reason-to-get-a-flu-or-covid-shot-256090

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendon Hyndman, Associate Dean (Academic), Faculty of Arts and Education, Charles Sturt University

Children spend thousands of hours in playgrounds at school. A lot of this time does not have the same levels of teacher preparation and supervision as classrooms do.

Research shows school playgrounds are one of the main locations where bullying occurs.

The federal government is doing a rapid review into what works and what else needs to be done to stop bullying in schools. School playgrounds can sometimes be overlooked when considering anti-bullying approaches.

What is the relationship between playgrounds and bullying? And how can we better set up playgrounds to help prevent this damaging behaviour?

Why do play spaces matter?

The reasons for bullying are complex and stem from a range of factors.

But research suggests bullying is more common in confined or contested spaces – for example, when students are mixing with other year levels.

This research also suggests some students are more likely to bully other students, lash out and break rules when they are bored and frustrated in school play spaces.

A new report from not-for-profit group Play Australia estimates just 2% of all Australian schools are using innovative, research-informed strategies that best encourage and support healthy play behaviours.

What happens in Australia?

School play spaces are not regulated in the way playgrounds are for younger children. For example, there are no minimum space requirements per student in high schools. There are some emerging primary school space guidelines, but these are not always followed.

The lack of regulation for playground space has also seen classroom buildings taking over play areas and rules stopping students from moving in some areas (for example, no running or ball games).

Many primary schools still rely on fixed play equipment installed in the 1980s. But primary school students report they get bored of playing on the same equipment over and over again.

In public high schools, playgrounds tend to be large open spaces with ovals, hard-surfaced courts and picnic tables or benches.

Not only is this not particularly stimulating or inviting, the design can lead to some (typically male) students dominating the open spaces with games.

This can exclude other students from the playground. Research suggests if students lack a sense of community and belonging to their school, they are more likely to bully others.

What should primary schools do?

A growing body of research based on interviews with teachers and student observations suggests positive behaviours can be encouraged if primary students have more options and fewer restrictions on how they engage in play.

Resources that can be moved, adapted and selected by students (with varying colours, shapes, sizes, quantities and types) can help develop problem-solving and teamwork skills and reduce bullying because children are busy and engaged.

Examples of resources include both natural (rocks and twigs), loose sports equipment (small hurdles, bats and frisbees, balls) and other manufactured items (blocks, boxes, pipes, planks and crates).

Research also suggests teachers’ engagement with students in the playground can help reduce bullying and antisocial behaviour.

The “active supervision” method is recognised as one of the most effective ways to to do this, as it can improve students’ sense of belonging and safety.

The method includes adults using positive language, showing an interest in supporting play and modelling positive play behaviours, which increase students’ participation and cooperation.

What about high schools?

Research with school architects suggests high school spaces with well maintained, diverse features can help promote a more positive social culture.

It also suggests multiple spaces for students – as opposed to a single dominant space in a playground – can support students to feel as though there is space for them, and they belong at school.

It is important for high school students to be consulted about what they want – they are the main users and have evolving needs as they progress through school.

A 2025 Australian study found high school students want opportunities to retreat and be themselves.

Examples include maintained gardens and courtyards to help relax after the stresses of classroom rules and routines. Students suggested trees, rocks and gardens could break up open spaces. Providing sufficient shade can also ensure students have more accessible space to engage with each other throughout a school year.

What next?

Improving playgrounds to better address student needs will require more resources from governments.

But addressing bullying is complex and we know physical settings can impact social dynamics. So we need to look more closely at school playgrounds as a key place where bullying occurs and the role they play in this behaviour.

Brendon Hyndman’s work on school play is mentioned in the Play Australia report referenced in this article.

– ref. School playgrounds are one of the main locations for bullying. How can they be set up to stop it? – https://theconversation.com/school-playgrounds-are-one-of-the-main-locations-for-bullying-how-can-they-be-set-up-to-stop-it-258566

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert B Whait, Senior Lecturer in Taxation Law, University of South Australia

Soon, more than 15 million Australians should be lodging a tax return with the Australian Taxation Office in the hope of receiving at least a small refund.

About 60% of taxpayers use an accountant to prepare their tax return while the other 40% lodge their returns via their MyGov account. This links them to the tax office, Medicare and other government services.

The tax office receives about 1000 tip-offs a week from people who know or suspect evasion. Of these, the office deems about 90% warrant further investigation.

What to remember when preparing your tax return

These days, the tax office prefills much of your income information. The ATO will let you know through your MyGov account when your income statements from your employer are “tax ready”.

But other income including bank interest, dividends and managed investment funds distributions may take longer to appear, so don’t rush to complete and lodge your tax return on July 1 if these aren’t there. When these items prefill, check them for accuracy and correct any errors.

The tax office does not know about all your income so remember to provide details of other sources including capital gains on investments and income from other jobs for which you have an Australian Business Number.

Some items, such as private health insurance information, are only partially pre-filled so be sure to check that all questions have been answered and all necessary information provided.

How to claim deductions

To claim a deduction you must have spent the money yourself and were not reimbursed from another source.

The expense must be directly related to earning your income from either employment or services provided, from investments such as shares or a rental property, or from a business you operate.

And you must have a record to prove your expense. This usually needs to be in the form of a receipt or a diary.

If you don’t know how to record your deductions, an easy option is to use the tax office myDeductions app. You can scan receipts and allocate them to the correct section of your return.

What the tax office will be looking for in 2025

Each year the tax office targets particular areas. For 2025, these are:

Working from home expenses: you can choose between two methods: the fixed rate method or the actual cost method.

The fixed rate method allows you to claim 70 cents for each hour worked from home during the year. You do not need to keep receipts, but you must keep a record of the hours worked at home.

The actual cost method allows you to claim the costs of working from home, but taxpayers must have a dedicated room set aside for the office and remove all private use.

You cannot claim personal items like interest on a home loan or rent expenses unless you are operating a business from home.

Personal items, such as coffee machines, are not claimable even if you use them while working from home. Mobile phone and internet costs are included in the 70 cents per hour fixed rate. The ATO will be looking for taxpayers who claim these twice – for example, on their return and from their employer.

The 70 cents per hour rate does not include depreciation of work-related technology and office furniture, cleaning of the home office and repairs to these items. So these amounts can be claimed separately.

Motor vehicle expenses: there are also two methods to work out this claim. The log book method requires you to have kept a record for 12 weeks. You then need to work out the percentage you used your car for work or business which is applied to your expenses.

The cents per kilometre method allows you to claim 88 cents for each kilometre up to 5,000 km of work or business travel. No receipts need to be kept for this method, but you must be able to justify the total kilometres that you have claimed.

If you use the cents per kilometre method, do not double dip by claiming additional motor vehicle expenses.

Rental properties: make sure the expenses you claim do not include your personal costs. For example, the interest expenses must only be for the rental property and not interest from your personal home.

Also, if you own 50% of the rental you can only claim 50% of the expenses, even if your taxable income is higher than the other owner. If you have a holiday home you can only claim expenses for when that home was rented out, not the whole year.

Cryptocurrency: many taxpayers are buying and selling cryptocurrency. These transactions need to be reported in your tax return when they are sold as a capital gain or capital loss.

Other forms of income: if you earn money through the sharing or gig economies, you must include all income from these activities in your return. If you sell goods online, the tax office may consider it to be a business, and it will expect the income to be declared.

Don’t be tempted to cheat

The ATO already knows a lot about your tax situation, which makes it harder than ever to cheat.

The tax office uses data matching to check information you include in your return against data provided by other parties including share registries and your health insurer. It also gathers information from the internet.

If the data doesn’t match your return, or your claim is considered excessive, the ATO may contact you. You may be asked to explain why and, if your explanation is unsatisfactory, you might be audited.

Penalties of 25% to 75% of the tax owed may apply for falsely claiming deductions. The more dishonest the claim, the higher the penalty).

The link between what you claim and what you earn has to be real. So do not claim the cost of your Armani suit as a work uniform or your pet as a mascot for your business. Even the cost of a massage chair to relieve work stress cannot be claimed.

Dubious claims received by the tax office in recent years are many and varied. They have included Lego, school uniforms and sporting equipment purchased for kids, $9000 worth of wine bought by a wine expert while on a European holiday, for personal consumption, and a claim using receipts lodged by a doctor for an overseas conference he didn’t attend.

What if I make a mistake or the ATO finds an error?

If you make a mistake in your tax return, you can always amend it via MyTax.

The tax office will not fine you unless you did not take reasonable care, but you will have to pay back the shortfall in tax.

The due date to lodge your own return is October 31. If you are having trouble meeting this date, contact the tax office and ask for an extension.

Disclaimer: this is general information only and not to be taken as financial or tax advice.

Robert B Whait receives funding from the Federal Government as part of the National Tax Clinic Program, Financial Literacy Australia (now Ecstra Foundation), ANZ Bank, and the Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC). He is affiliated with the Tax Institute of Australia and Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand.

Connie Vitale receives funding from the Federal Government as part of the National Tax Clinic Program. She is affiliated with the Institute of Public Accountants and Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand.

– ref. Would you cheat on your tax? It’s a risky move, the tax office knows a lot about you – https://theconversation.com/would-you-cheat-on-your-tax-its-a-risky-move-the-tax-office-knows-a-lot-about-you-258587

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Llewellyn Spink, AI Corporate Governance Lead, Human Technology Institute, University of Technology Sydney

Australia’s productivity is flatlining, posting the worst vitals we’ve seen in 60 years.

Politicians and chief executives are prescribing artificial intelligence (AI) like it’s the new penicillin – a wonder drug with almost magical healing powers. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Treasurer Jim Chalmers and the Productivity Commission all see AI as a key part of the plan to cure Australia’s productivity ills, with estimates that automation and AI could add A$600 billion to Australia’s annual economy.

Unfortunately, AI is no panacea. It’s more like physiotherapy after major surgery: it only delivers if you put in the effort, follow the program and work with experts who know which muscles to strengthen and when.

AI projects have high fail rates

AI is a broad suite of tools and techniques, of which generative AI such as ChatGPT is just the latest iteration. When implemented well, AI can undoubtedly lift productivity across a wide variety of applications. Unilever’s legal team reports generative AI tools save its lawyers 30 minutes daily on document review and contract analysis.

Other AI applications can deliver life-saving results at even greater efficiency. In a German study, AI-supported mammography screening reduced radiologists’ reading time by 43% for examinations tagged as normal, while improving cancer detection rates.

The federal government is focused on improving productivity. In this five-part series, we’ve asked leading experts what that means for the economy, what’s holding us back and their best ideas for reform.

But the hard truth is that AI-driven productivity gains like these depend on both smart implementation and trusted adoption. Organisations that skip the tough part – such as staff engagement, training and good governance – often find the promised benefits never materialise.

The numbers back this up: some 80% of AI projects end up failing, twice the rate of traditional IT projects. Only one in four executives in a global survey report meaningful returns on their AI investments.

We shouldn’t really be surprised. Other general-purpose technologies, such as electricity and earlier digital technologies followed a similar path. US economist Robert Solow famously said: “You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics.”

Workers don’t trust the technology

Like the early days of the internet in the 1990s, the success of AI relies on adoption and trust. Without trust, uptake stalls and the benefits evaporate.

That’s a big challenge in Australia, where public trust and optimism in AI remains comparatively low. Why? Australians also report lower levels of AI use, training and confidence. And people are less likely to trust what they don’t understand.

Closing that trust gap means involving workers from the start. By listening to worker concerns and identifying existing pain points in processes, companies can deploy AI systems that help, rather than sideline employees.

Conversely, when workers aren’t meaningfully involved, things don’t go well.

Take Klarna. The Swedish fintech volunteered to be the generative AI platform OpenAI’s “favourite guinea pig”. It slashed jobs and claimed to have automated the equivalent of 700 employees. But
CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski now admits the shift to AI hurt customer service, forcing the company to rehire humans.

Similarly, Duolingo recently faced a user backlash when it replaced 10% of contractors with AI.

Regrets? Bosses have a few

These aren’t isolated cases. Some 55% of UK executives who replaced workers with AI later regretted it. In the rush to automate, workers are often seen as expendable.

This attitude to AI leads to what US economists Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepro call “so-so automation”, where technology displaces workers without delivering meaningful productivity gains.

Rather than trying to replace staff with AI, organisations should be deeply engaging with them. Engaging workers can dramatically boost the AI’s return on investment.

Like other general-purpose technologies, getting the most out of AI means transforming the way we work. And the data show companies that engage workers in organisational transformations are nine times more likely to succeed.

The companies that are unlocking the benefit of AI understand it works best when it amplifies human capability, rather than replacing it. Workers still know things that algorithms don’t. They deeply understand the practical realities of their jobs, which is crucial for designing AI systems that actually get things done.

Designing better solutions

Our own research confirms this. Australian workers feel AI is being imposed on them without adequate consultation or training. This not only creates resistance to adoption but also means organisations are missing the experience of the people who actually do the work.

Our most recent report shows worker engagement strengthens competitive advantage and profitability, and leads to better AI solutions rooted in workers’ problems and needs. When workers are involved in deciding how AI is used, the solutions are better designed, more effective and more widely adopted.

Australia’s new Industry and Innovation Minister, Tim Ayres, recognises this. In a recent speech he emphasised the need to work “cooperatively with workers and their unions” on tech adoption.

It’s a promising place to start. If AI is going to be an effective treatment for Australia’s productivity challenge, then workers must be an essential part of the recovery team.

Llewellyn Spink receives funding from the Minderoo Foundation as part of the Human Technology Institute’s AI Corporate Governance Program. HTI is funded by a wide variety of academic, corporate and philanthropic partners.

Nicholas Davis receives funding from the Minderoo Foundation as part of the Human Technology Institute’s AI Corporate Governance Program. HTI is funded by a wide variety of academic, corporate and philanthropic partners.

– ref. Companies are betting on AI to help lift productivity. Workers need to be part of the process – https://theconversation.com/companies-are-betting-on-ai-to-help-lift-productivity-workers-need-to-be-part-of-the-process-258396

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katrina Muller-Townsend, Lecturer in Psychology, Edith Cowan University

Sabrina Carpenter’s Man’s Best Friend album cover has fans divided.

Carpenter poses on all fours, her glossy blond hair grasped by a male figure cropped from the frame. Her wide-eyed expression intensifies an ambiguous performance of subservience, tapping into a visual language tied to female objectification, from classic pin-up imagery to contemporary pop culture.

The emotionally loaded image plays on her hyper-feminine, tongue-in-cheek pop star persona, forcing us to question where irony ends and objectification begins.

Is it satire, or self-degradation?

Up for debate

At first glance, the cover seems like just another stylised, provocative pop image. It delivers what we’ve come to expect: a bold, ironic twist on the exaggerated Juno-style pose she reinvents on stage.

To some fans, it’s clever satire: a pop star reclaiming and amplifying her image to mock industry norms. Satire uses exaggeration, irony, or humour to critique power structures – and Carpenter’s pose walks that tightrope.

To others it crosses a line, reinforcing regressive attitudes about women’s sexuality and drawing criticism from domestic violence advocates.

The debate reflects our unresolved discomfort about gender, power and control. There is a tension between Carpenter’s ironic persona and the submissive pose, creating uncertainty for the viewer.

We can use psychology to better understand this dichotomy.

The schema violation

This mismatch between expectation and perception is a schema violation.

A schema is a mental shortcut: a template built from experience and unspoken rules that helps us make sense of the world and predict what to expect. When something breaks that pattern, it’s called a schema violation.

Carpenter’s brand is cheeky, self-aware irony – so when she adopts a pose steeped in submission and hyper-femininity as in this album image, it feels off.

That can trigger cognitive dissonance: the mental tension we feel when two ideas (here, empowerment and obedience) don’t align.

To resolve the conflict, some fans reinterpret the image as feminist sarcasm. Others reject it, fearing it panders to outdated, dangerous norms.

Both reactions reflect our emotional and ideological investments in who Carpenter is or should be.

Exploring confirmation bias

Part of this conflicted reaction is driven by confirmation bias: our tendency to filter information to support what we already believe.

Fans who see Carpenter as witty and empowered interpret the image as intentionally ironic. Others – more sceptical of the industry’s history of exploiting female sexuality – view it as a throwback to damaging norms.

Either way, our interpretations often reflect more about ourselves than about Carpenter’s intent.

When her image contradicts both her public persona and our social values, it creates a gap between what we think is right and what we want to be right. So, we try to explain it away, by either defending the image or criticising it.

Satire and scandal

Carpenter’s cover follows a long tradition of female artists whose work straddles satire and scandal, complicating public reception.

Madonna’s Like a Prayer drew outrage for mixing religion with sexual imagery. Yet it positioned her as a provocateur – a woman resisting the lack of agency that so often defines sexualised media.

Miley Cyrus’ Bangerz era shocked fans with a bold shift from Hannah Montana innocence to hypersexualised rebellion, challenging the narrow roles women in pop culture are confined to.

Doja Cat’s shift from glam pop princess to glitch villainess unsettled audiences. Was it satire, rebellion, or just chaos?

These women, like Carpenter, force us to confront our own discomfort with women who won’t stay in one lane.

Performer and provocateur

Audience reaction is also shaped by emotional investment in Carpenter’s persona. Through carefully curated social media, interviews and lyrics, fans build intimate narratives forming parasocial relationships – one-sided emotional bonds with celebrities.

When an image contradicts that imagined persona, it can feel jarring, even like betrayal.

Audiences often expect idols to be empowering but not polarising, sexy but safe, to challenge norms – but only in ways that affirm our own values.

Carpenter’s image breaks that implicit contract, which creates discomfort for some viewers.

Carpenter’s cover raises uncomfortable but necessary questions about how much freedom female artists have to be both critical and complicit. Can they play with society and play along, to be both performer and provocateur?

This highlights the double bind many women face in media and popular culture. Female artists are expected to both subvert and satisfy; to entertain without offending; empower without alienating. The burden to be palatable and provocative is one male artists rarely face.

It’s what we make of it

Is Carpenter undermining herself or subverting the system? Perhaps both. Or perhaps the image isn’t the message: our reaction is.

The image forces us to confront not only our perception of Sabrina Carpenter but also our cultural discomfort with women who defy neat categorisation. Satire demands interpretation, especially when it comes from women addressing sex or power.

More than provocation, Carpenter’s cover mirrors our cultural struggle to accept women who defy simple labels of satire or submission. The image can reflect broader social ideals and tensions projected onto public figures.

What we see says more about our assumptions than her intent. Understanding those reactions doesn’t kill the fun – it deepens it.

Katrina Muller-Townsend 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. Is Sabrina Carpenter’s Man’s Best Friend album cover satire or self-degradation? A psychology expert explores our reactions – https://theconversation.com/is-sabrina-carpenters-mans-best-friend-album-cover-satire-or-self-degradation-a-psychology-expert-explores-our-reactions-259043