Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hrvoje Tkalčić, Professor, Head of Geophysics, Director of Warramunga Array, Australian National University

Tyres stick to hot asphalt as I drive the Stuart Highway from Alice Springs northward, leaving the MacDonnell Ranges behind. My destination is the Warramunga facility, about 500 kilometres north – a remote monitoring station I’ve directed for the Australian National University for nearly 19 years, and one of the most sensitive nuclear detection facilities on Earth.

When I started exploring Earth’s inner core in 1997, I had no idea my calling would lead me here, or that I’d spend years driving this highway through the red expanse of the Australian outback.

And today, as the New START treaty curbing the US and Russian nuclear weapons programs expires, the work we do in the red centre has become more important than ever before.

A giant telescope pointed at Earth’s centre

Located 37km southeast of Tennant Creek – or Jurnkkurakurr, as it’s known in the local Warumungu language – Warramunga consists of what might generously be called a demountable building, surrounded by sensors lined up across 20km of savannah, covered by red soil and long, white spinifex grass.

The facility operates two sophisticated arrays. One consists of 24 seismometers detecting vibrations through Earth, the other eight infrasound sensors picking up ultra-low-frequency sound waves inaudible to human ears.

When North Korea detonated its largest nuclear device in September 2017 – about 7,000km away – our instruments captured it clearly. Warramunga detected all six of North Korea’s declared nuclear tests, and our data was among the first to reach the International Data Centre in Vienna.

The geological stability and remoteness mean we detect events that might be masked elsewhere. When a wild brumby gallops past our sensors, we pick it up. When a nuclear bomb is tested on the other side of the world, we definitely know about it. We can distinguish it from an earthquake because of the different kinds of vibrations it produces.

Warramunga detects more seismic events than any other station in the global network. With multiple instruments in a carefully designed configuration, far from the coast and human activity, you have something like a giant telescope pointed at the centre of Earth.

An unusual partnership

Warramunga’s story began in 1965 when Australia and the United Kingdom jointly established it for nuclear test detection during the Cold War. In 1999, it was upgraded and later certified as a primary station in the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization’s International Monitoring System.

The CTBTO, headquartered in Vienna, operates a global network of more than 300 facilities designed to detect any nuclear explosion anywhere on Earth. Australia hosts 21 of these facilities – the third-largest number globally.

But Warramunga is unique. It’s operated by a university on behalf of both the CTBTO and the Australian government, located on Warumungu Country. The location of sensors was determined in consultation with Traditional Owners to ensure the instruments would not interfere with sacred sites.

The Research School of Earth Sciences at the Australian National University in Canberra has managed Warramunga for more than 50 years, and we still do.

Life at the station

The station requires constant attention. Two dedicated technicians drive from Tennant Creek to the array each morning. By the time they arrive, the Sun is already high above the red land across which the array’s elements and termite mounds are spread.

They keep a careful watch on the world’s earthquakes and explosions, enduring extreme heat, dust, flies, fires, floods, thunderstorms and the occasional visit from wildlife. They ensure data flows continuously via satellite to Vienna.

After one infrastructure reconstruction, we found two large goannas wrapped around a seismometer, having decided to spend their nights in the firm embrace of our equipment. You don’t learn about this kind of challenge in Vienna’s United Nations offices.

From Canberra, I coordinate between the on-site team, the Australian government, and our partners at the CTBTO. At least once a year, I make the drive up the Stuart Highway to Warramunga, checking equipment and discussing challenges with the technicians.

I also meet regularly with colleagues at the United Nations in Vienna. Managing this facility means bridging two worlds: the practical realities of maintaining sensitive equipment in a harsh environment and the international diplomacy of nuclear verification.

Why it matters now

For more than 30 years, the world has observed a de facto moratorium on nuclear explosive testing. The last US test was in 1992. Russia’s was in 1990.

This norm has been crucial in limiting nuclear weapons development. Verification systems such as Warramunga make this possible, because would-be violators know any significant nuclear explosion will be detected.

But this system faces its greatest challenge in decades. In October 2025, President Donald Trump announced the United States would begin testing nuclear weapons “on an equal basis” with Russia and China.

Days later, President Vladimir Putin directed Russian officials to prepare for possible nuclear tests. If this moratorium collapses, it opens the door to a new era of nuclear arms racing.

This is when verification becomes most crucial. The CTBTO’s network doesn’t just detect violations – its existence deters them. If the world knows a country has carried out a nuclear test and tried (but failed) to hide it, the testing country will face political consequences.

A hidden contribution

Warramunga’s data also helps researchers understand earthquakes, study Earth’s deep interior, such as the solid inner core, and track phenomena from meteorite impacts to Morning Glory clouds – extraordinary atmospheric waves travelling 1,400km from Cape York, first scientifically documented with Warramunga’s infrasonic array in the 1970s.

What strikes me after nearly two decades is how this unique partnership represents a remarkable example of academic institutions contributing directly to global security.

Few people realise that a university research school operates one of the world’s most crucial nuclear verification facilities. It’s an arrangement that brings together fundamental scientific research with practical obligations under international treaties – a model for how researchers can engage with pressing global challenges.

As nuclear rhetoric intensifies globally, the quiet technical work in the Australian outback gains new significance. Nuclear test monitoring is essential to deter would-be nuclear nations – and that’s a mission worth maintaining, even from the remote red centre of Australia.

Hrvoje Tkalčić receives funding from the Australian Research Council. The Australian National University operates and maintains the Warramunga Seismic and Infrasound Facility with funding from the CTBTO at the United Nations in Vienna.

– ref. In the Australian outback, we’re listening for nuclear tests – and what we hear matters more than ever – https://theconversation.com/in-the-australian-outback-were-listening-for-nuclear-tests-and-what-we-hear-matters-more-than-ever-272892

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon Cornwall, Senior Lecturer and Education Adviser, University of Otago

For centuries, work with donated bodies has shaped anatomical knowledge and medical training.

Now, digital technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) are reshaping education and we can imagine a future where AI-generated representations of dead people – chatbots specifically developed as “thanabots” – are used to support students’ learning.

The term thanabot is derived from thanatology, the study of death. Such AI replicas are already used to assist people during bereavement and could be integrated into medical education.

Thanabots based on information and data from a body donor could interact with students during dissections, providing personalised guidance drawn from medical records, linking clinical history to anatomical findings and improving factual learning.

They might even support the learner’s humanistic development through an intensive first encounter with a dead body who comes “alive” through AI.

At this point, thanabots remain hypothetical in educational settings, but the technology exists to make them a reality. At first glance, this looks like an educational breakthrough – a “first patient” brought to virtual life to enhance both anatomical factual learning and the acquisition of skills such as empathy and professionalism in students.

But as we show in our new research, there are many unknown risks associated with the development of such applications that might raise the question of what it actually means to be dead or even “not quite dead”.

The evolution of thanabots

Thanabots, also called deadbots or griefbots, already exist. They are, at present, mostly being used as tools to help comfort the bereaved, though thanabots of famous people are also available.

Technologies such as Project December, which simulates text-based conversations with the dead, and Deep Nostalgia, which animates old photos, show how digital afterlives are increasingly represented and even normalised.

Extending these tools to anatomy education seems a logical step. An educational version of a thanabot could answer student questions, guide dissection and provide contextual clinical narratives. These interactions would likely improve clinical reasoning and potentially help students navigate emotionally challenging encounters with the dead.

Yet significant risks accompany such innovation. AI-generated content is prone to error, and incorrectly interpreted medical records or hallucinations about data could mislead students. Also, emotional engagement with a digitally “resurrected” donor could overwhelm learners, or engender unhealthy parasocial attachments.

The illusion of a human presence risks trivialising the body donor’s physical reality and could compromise the leaners’ authentic encounter with mortality and respect for the deceased.

Cultural norms and individual grief may be disrupted, especially for students already sensitive to exposure to the dead or from backgrounds with strong constraints around postmortem representation.

This includes instances where death and the dead are considered sacred and further engagement with their likeness is considered taboo. In many cultures, the dead should be respectfully left to rest, not “brought back to life”.

Risks of using thanabots in anatomy education

The ethical and legal frameworks covering thanabot use are underdeveloped because specific legislation and guidelines are scant or non-existent. This leaves many ethical and legal questions unanswered.

In a scenario where a thanabot were generated for use in anatomy education, who would own a digital donor? How would consent for AI use be obtained from families or estates, medical records ethically managed or privacy and dignity safeguarded?

Any implementation of thanabots would need to address these questions to ensure that potential educational gains don’t come at the cost of psychological well-being, ethical integrity or societal unease.

Beyond these practical concerns lies a deeper philosophical issue. What does it mean to be dead in an age of AI “resurrection”?

Anatomy education has long been shaped by societal understanding of mortality and the human body. Use of thanabots might alter these boundaries, blurring the line between life and death, providing representations of something “different” that is neither one nor the other.

Thus, even with the best intentions, students could experience emotional dissonance, confusion about mortality or a distorted understanding of what it means to be human if that understanding is tied to an AI proxy rather than a real person.

We are not suggesting that AI cannot play a role in anatomy education. Carefully designed tools that respect donor dignity, support reflection and augment (not replace) human interaction can enrich learning.

But the allure of technological novelty should not override caution.

Before bringing digital “ghosts” into anatomy laboratories, educators must ensure ethical governance and critically examine what these tools truly teach students about life, death and human dignity.

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

– ref. Digital ghosts: are AI replicas of the dead an innovative medical tool or an ethical nightmare? – https://theconversation.com/digital-ghosts-are-ai-replicas-of-the-dead-an-innovative-medical-tool-or-an-ethical-nightmare-273212

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kurt Sengul, Research fellow, Far-Right Communication, Macquarie University

One Nation is no stranger to the headlines, but it’s been a long time since the party has been talked about as a serious political force. Operating on the fringes of Australian political life for years, suddenly Pauline Hanson is in the news every day.

A significant part of this is the party’s well-documented meteoric rise in the polls. It’s prompted speculation about One Nation becoming Australia’s official opposition party, leaving the Liberals and Nationals in the dust.

But while politics is a fast-moving beast, you only need to look back a couple of years to be reminded of the long history of dysfunction that’s plagued the party.

So will this ascendancy amount to a lasting realignment of conservative politics in Australia? Can One Nation overcome its scandal-ridden past to emerge as the dominant force in Australian right-wing politics?

A tale of peaks and troughs

The 1998 Queensland state election remains One Nation’s electoral high point. It was the only time the party polled above 20%. The election saw the party pick up 11 of 89 seats, propelling it to the third largest party in the state parliament.

But One Nation’s stunning rise was over almost as soon as it started. The party was beset with internal disunity, political scandals and poor management. Most of the party’s Queensland parliamentarians abandoned it after demands to democratise the party organisation were ignored.

Hanson lost her seat in parliament soon after, narrowly failing to win the newly-formed Queensland seat of Blair at the 1998 federal election.

One Nation managed to gain the upper house balance of power in the 2001 Western Australian state election. However, Hanson’s resignation from the party in 2002 and conviction for electoral fraud in 2003 (later overturned) helped plunge the party into political irrelevance.

Returning to the party in 2014, and the leadership in 2015, Hanson led One Nation to its second breakthrough on the national stage at the 2016 double dissolution election. Four One Nation senators, including Hanson, were elected from just 4.29% of the first preference vote.

But the party was again wracked by defections and scandal. Rodney Culleton, Fraser Anning, and Brian Burston – all elected on the One Nation ticket – abandoned the party after falling out with Hanson.

One Nation was reduced to two Senate seats until the 2025 federal election, where it picked up a seat in New South Wales and WA, bringing the party back to four senators.

What’s driving this polling surge?

It’s useful to think of One Nation’s rising support as a combination of short-term factors and longer-term trends.

In the short term, dysfunction within the (former) Coalition parties and conservative voters’ dissatisfaction with moderate Liberal leader Sussan Ley have been a boon for One Nation.

As she did after the 2014 Lindt cafe siege, Hanson has connected the 2025 Bondi terror attack to immigration and multiculturalism, criticising the government for allowing “the wrong people” to migrate to Australia.

The party has also benefited from increased salience of immigration and national security, connecting housing and cost-of-living pressures to so-called “mass migration”.

Long-term, the party has been buoyed by the mainstreaming of far-right politics globally, profound shifts in media and communication landscapes, and the decline in support of the major political parties in Australia.

Succeeding in spite of itself

One Nation’s polling surge appears to defy conventional wisdom about the viability of a far-right party in Australia.

Parties like One Nation perform relatively poorly compared with their European counterparts. It’s typically assumed this reflects a lack of supply of effective leadership and strong party organisation, rather than a shortage of demand for a far-right party.

Of course the test for One Nation is translating their current polling boost into electoral success. If they succeed, it will challenge long-held ideas that features of our electoral system, such as compulsory voting, provide a bulwark against more extreme forms of politics.

One of the greatest barriers One Nation has faced to electoral success has been itself. Research has shown the party has a history of serious organisational dysfunction.

One Nation has struggled to properly vet candidates for election. Candidates have resigned or been disendorsed by the party for potential breaches of election law and making sexist and homophobic comments. One candidate made headlines for mowing a swastika into their lawn.

Issues of candidate quality have been exacerbated by the lack of on-the-ground support and campaign co-ordination. Recent claims about booming One Nation membership should be viewed sceptically, unless accompanied by actual membership numbers. But most parties, including Labor and the Liberals, rarely publish such figures.

Likewise, claims the party has branches in all 151 federal electorates require qualification. Though a significant milestone for the party, the existence of a branch doesn’t automatically mean there is an active grassroots body able to knock on doors and hand out how-to-vote cards. One Nation has historically struggled with these things, outside of a handful of seats.

On top of this, while the defections of former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce and former Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi have kept One Nation in the spotlight, Hanson’s history of falling out bitterly with elected representatives (think Mark Latham) raises questions about whether such partnerships can last.

Crucially, this kind of polling – with One Nation well ahead of the Coalition –should bring greater scrutiny from media and voters alike. The problem One Nation faces as it tries to reposition itself from a party of protest to a potential party of government is that people will rightly expect policy detail and costings.

One Nation’s strength is the politics of identity and grievance, not policy substance.

Proceeding with caution

There are many reasons to treat One Nation’s surge with caution. We should be circumspect about prematurely declaring the death of the Coalition parties or a realignment of Australian conservative politics. Infighting and dysfunction have been constant features of One Nation since its inception. There is little evidence to expect this will change.

Yet the scale of One Nation’s support in the polls and the collapse of the Coalition’s primary vote is uncharted territory. Despite its many challenges, the next federal election may for the first time see a well-funded One Nation pose a serious threat to the Coalition’s dominance of the Australian right. If their polling remains above 20%, it’s entirely possible there will be serious pressure to include Hanson in televised leaders’ debates.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Hanson nabs ex-Liberal for One Nation’s real time test in SA election

Essential questions remain about One Nation’s electoral viability on polling day. The party’s success will rely on its ability to run a disciplined campaign, endorse quality candidates, and manage intra-party conflicts – all of which the party has previously struggled with.

The first test of whether One Nation can translate polling support into electoral success will come at the upcoming South Australian election, where the party plans to field candidates in every seat.

Kurt Sengul receives funding from The Australian Research Council, NSW Government and the NSW RNA Research & Training Network

Jordan McSwiney receives funding from the Australian Research Council, NSW Government, and NSW RNA Research & Training Network.

– ref. Can One Nation turn its polling hype into seats in parliament? History shows it will struggle – https://theconversation.com/can-one-nation-turn-its-polling-hype-into-seats-in-parliament-history-shows-it-will-struggle-274632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Thomas, Professor of Public Health, Deakin University

Every person with functioning ovaries will eventually experience menopause. While the biology is relatively universal, the experience varies dramatically between individuals and in the same person over time.

Menopause has long been shrouded in stigma and shame but recently burst into mainstream attention. This may have reduced stigma but has also created confusion, as media, celebrity and commercial interests recognise a new marketing opportunity.

New research from one of us (Samantha) has found women are frustrated at being bombarded with marketing for menopause “solutions” that simply don’t work.

How menopause is marketed

Pharmaceutical companies, the wellness industry, workplace consultancies, coaches and influencers have all jumped on the menopause market. The “hot flush gold rush” is projected to reach US$24.4 billion by 2030.

One common tactic is creating feminised narratives of empowerment and care, positioning companies and influencers as supportive allies for women.

They encourage individuals to take charge of their menopause experiences by consuming a range of products and services. These include teas, supplements, chocolates, shakes, cooling blankets, pillows and creams promising relief from a wide range of symptoms that might not be related to menopause. There are apps which track symptoms, workplace accreditation programs, and even a “hot flush survival kit”.

Weight-loss companies now offer menopause-specific programs, marketed by celebrities such as Queen Latifah:

Companies frame how we think about menopause

Most online information about menopause has a commercial “for profit” interest.

This information shapes women’s expectations and fears by often positioning menopause as the defining, catastrophic challenge of midlife.

This raises concerns about the commercial exploitation of vulnerable women, encouraging purchasing of unproven and inappropriate treatments and products.

This hormone focus may overshadow the broad range of midlife stressors that many women experience in midlife, including intergenerational care-giving responsibilities, financial worries, workplace challenges, and gendered ageism.

Such an approach may also fuel health inequalities by ignoring structural issues that make life hard for women in midlife.

Read more:
Midlife adults are overextended with multiple roles

Concerns about commercial exploitation

A recent qualitative survey of over 500 Australian women aged 45–64 years demonstrated support for greater awareness of menopause but also concern about the commercialisation of menopause.

Women reported that companies and some social media influencers would “push anything to make a dollar”.

They were also worried that exaggerated and catastrophising narratives about the impact of menopause could unnecessarily fuel women’s fears and concerns about ageing:

There are very vulnerable women out there who are ripe for the picking […] and the influencers, marketing firms and companies seeking profits fully understand this and will exploit this.

Women also described feeling misled and disappointed when wellness “solutions” ultimately did “fuck all”.

Complex and conflicting information on social media sites left women struggling to determine what information to trust:

It is concerning as a lot will be preying on the insecurities of women. Women are going through changes they don’t understand and are reaching out to find a solution. There is conflicting information, you really need to fact check everything.

What would actually help?

Women deserve to be listened to and provided with trustworthy information and supportive environments. Here’s what would make a meaningful difference:

1. Better access to high-quality information to support decision-making

There is a tsunami of low-quality information online which is drowning out credible information.

Women need to know what to expect, how to prepare, and where to get help if needed. Independent, evidence-based information and critical media literacy tools can help women consider their options based on risks versus benefits and preferences.

2. Stop scaring women

Catastrophising menopause is unhelpful. Like all life transitions, menopause carries both losses and gains.

Most do not experience severe symptoms and those entering menopause with negative attitudes may have a worse experience.

Some women express relief when periods stop and report feelings of liberation, freedom, autonomy and the start of a new phase of life.

3. Better regulation of product claims and misinformation

Greater scrutiny and standards from federal government agencies will be essential in helping to safeguard women from misleading product claims, promotions, or inappropriate treatment.

4. Recognise that environmental adjustments can help support women in midlife

Simple workplace adjustments – such as flexible hours, supportive managers, cooler spaces, or regular breaks – can support the diverse experiences that women may have in midlife.

5. Protect policy from vested interests

We need a strong, clear commitment to women’s health and research that addresses women’s priority questions. This should support sustained funding, evidence-based care, equity and long-term wellbeing.

This process must be protected from commercial vested interests, including the pharmaceutical and wellness industries, and clinicians and researchers with conflicts of interest. This will ensure policy decisions are in the best interests of women, not for profit agendas.

Cutting through the commercial noise that has been created about menopause is essential. Only then can we create the social and structural changes need to support women’s health and wellbeing in midlife and beyond.

Read more:
Feminist narratives are being hijacked to market medical tests not backed by evidence

Samantha Thomas has received research funding from the Australian Research Council, ACT Office of Gaming and Racing, Department of Social Services, VicHealth, Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, Healthway, NSW Office of Responsible Gambling, Deakin University. The research mentioned in this article was supported by Jean Hailes for Women’s Health. She is currently Editor in Chief for Health Promotion International, an Oxford University Press journal. She receives an honorarium for this role.

Martha Hickey receives funding from the NHMRC, MRFF, Medical Research Council (UK), Wellcome LEAP and Global Challenge on Women’s Cardiovascular Health

– ref. The ‘hot flush gold rush’: how women feel about being flooded with menopause marketing – https://theconversation.com/the-hot-flush-gold-rush-how-women-feel-about-being-flooded-with-menopause-marketing-269810

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

Most public debate about schooling focuses on what happens inside the classroom – on lessons, tests and academic results.

But students also spend significant time at school outside formal classes. While break times vary between Australian schools, a 2026 study suggests average recess and lunch periods take up about 12-16% of school time. This is between 62-82 minutes per day across both primary and high school. By comparison, Finland – regarded as one of the world’s leading education systems – sets aside more than 19% of the school day for breaks.

Recess and lunch are generally regarded as “breaks” from learning – where children can play or have free time. But given they make up such a significant part of the school day, should schools and education systems give them more consideration?

Our study

In a new study, we surveyed 130 primary and high school teachers about their views on school break times.

Teachers came from 25 countries and were recruited by targeted posts on social media. The majority of participants were female, from co-educational schools, had taught for more than 11 years and were working within early elementary/primary grade levels up to Year 2.

Teachers completed an online survey that included short, rating questions and longer, open-ended responses.

We deliberately included teachers from outside Australia. Schools across the world face similar pressures in terms of crowded curricula, accountability demands, risk management requirements and growing concerns about students’ wellbeing.

Teachers from Australia, the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and other countries told remarkably similar stories.

Why breaks are important

Teachers in our study were clear that time outside the classroom supports learning. As well as recharging students, other studies show outdoor play and exploration are linked to stronger social skills, self-regulation, confidence, physical health and classroom engagement.

One New Zealand teacher noted:

physical strength via play supports academic learning, ability to concentrate, and the importance of risky play […] supports resilience.

Several teachers said when this time was supported well, it helped them build relationships and understand students in ways classroom teaching alone could not.

Research also tells us active supervision from teachers can strengthen students’ sense of belonging at school, which is a powerful protective factor against bullying.

It’s demanding for teachers

Teachers described rostered playground supervision during recess and lunch (often labelled “yard duty”) as demanding, unpredictable work.

Teachers need to constantly scan outdoor areas for safety risks, manage injuries and conflicts, support distressed or dysregulated students and make rapid decisions about inclusion and behaviour. This includes decisions about when to allow children to work things out and when to step in, when there is rough-and-tumble play and minor conflicts.

But there’s no training

Despite the benefits and demands of recess and lunch periods, teachers consistently reported they were rarely given preparation or professional learning to support students and give them opportunities to learn during these times.

On average, teachers rated their preparation to support in this area at just two out of ten (one UK teacher said they had to source their own training). As a result, decisions were often driven by risk avoidance rather than developmental value.

But with more training and expertise, teachers could support play by scanning for early signs of harm or exclusion, then using brief coaching prompts. For example, “What do you think would make this activity work for everyone?”, “How could you solve this so it feels fair?” and “What rule do you want to agree on before you restart?” can help students negotiate, reset boundaries and re-join the group.

This helps students to learn social skills and resilience, rather than relying on teachers to sort things out.

What about the weather?

Amid episodes of extreme heat and wild weather, teachers also need to be able to make rapid safety decisions about outdoor time.

Teachers in our study reported they have limited guidance here, beyond students needing to come indoors at certain temperatures. This highlighted the need for clearer preparation about handling weather. As one Australian high school teacher noted, colleagues “dread” wet weather days or extreme heat, with multiple classes in a confined space.

Further support for teachers could include flexible timetabling (having outdoor play earlier, when the day is cooler) and resources to support consistent decisions and safe adaptation when conditions allow.

Do we need a name change?

Teachers also identified broader barriers around break times. These included limited funding for outdoor spaces and school policies that frame breaks as a supervision “duty” rather than as a legitimate part of education.

Many teachers felt terms such as “recess” or “break time” signal this time is less important. Several suggested reframing it as “discovery time” or “outdoor exploration” to better reflect what children are actually doing and learning.

Teachers also expressed concern that opportunities for outdoor time decline sharply in high school. Even though young people face increasing mental health and wellbeing challenges and may benefit from more support to be outside.

What else could we do?

Improving learning beyond the classroom requires a shift in mindset from school leadership and education policy makers.

Schools can start by recognising this time as a legitimate part of learning. This includes providing teachers with basic professional guidance on play, inclusive supervision and risk-benefit decision making in the playground.

Allowing teachers to supervise students they know well can also help build relationships. This may include setting up simple play opportunities (such as helping to set up a student-led play zone or theme).

At a broader level, clearer links between learning beyond the classroom and curriculum goals are needed. This can give teachers evidence and guidance to help them get the most of this time, not just for students’ wellbeing but for their learning.

Brendon Hyndman 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. School breaks make up more than an hour of the day. Should they be considered part of learning? – https://theconversation.com/school-breaks-make-up-more-than-an-hour-of-the-day-should-they-be-considered-part-of-learning-274199

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mohamed Shaheen, Lecturer in Structural Engineering, Loughborough University

When structural engineers design a building, they aren’t just stacking floors; they are calculating how to win a complex battle against nature. Every building is built to withstand a specific “budget” of environmental stress – the weight of record snowfalls, the push of powerful winds and the expansion caused by summer heat.

To do this, engineers use hazard maps and safety codes. These are essentially rulebooks based on decades of historical weather data. They include safety margins to ensure that even if a small part of a building fails, the entire structure won’t come crashing down like a house of cards.

The problem is that these rulebooks are becoming obsolete. Most of our iconic high-rises were built in the 1970s and 80s – a world that was cooler, with more predictable tides and less violent storms. Today, that world no longer exists.

Climate change acts as a threat multiplier, making the consequences of environmental stress on buildings much worse. It rarely knocks a building down on its own. Instead, it finds the tiny cracks, rusting support beams and ageing foundations and pushes them toward a breaking point. It raises the intensity of every load and strain a building must weather.

To understand the challenge, I have been studying global hotspots where the environment is winning the battle against engineering.

The 2021 collapse of Champlain Towers South in Miami, Florida, killed 98 people. While the 12-storey building had original design issues, decades of rising sea levels and salty coastal air acted as a catalyst, allowing saltwater to seep into the basement and garage.

When salt reaches the steel rods inside concrete that provide structural strength (known as reinforcement), the metal rusts and expands. This creates massive internal pressure that cracks the concrete from the inside out — a process engineers call spalling. The lesson is clear: in a warming world, coastal basements are becoming corrosion chambers where minor maintenance gaps can escalate into catastrophic structural failure.

While the Miami case affected a single building, the historic coastal city of Alexandria, Egypt, is more widely at risk. Recent research shows that building collapses there have jumped from one per year to nearly 40 per year in the past few years.

Not only is the sea rising, the salt is liquefying the soft ground beneath the city foundations. As the water table rises, saltwater is pushed under the city, raising the groundwater level. This salty water doesn’t just rust the foundations of buildings; it changes the chemical and physical structure of soil. As a result, there are currently 7,000 buildings in Alexandria at high risk of collapse.

In Hong Kong during Super Typhoon Mangkhut in 2018, wind speeds hit a terrifying 180 miles per hour. When strong winds hit a wall of skyscrapers, they squeeze between the buildings and speed up — like water sprayed through a narrow garden hose.

This pressure turned hundreds of offices into wind tunnels, causing glass windows to pop out of their frames and raining broken glass onto the streets below. With 82 deaths and 15,000 homes destroyed across the region, skyscrapers became “debris machines”, even if they didn’t fully collapse.

Supercomputer simulations of Japan’s river systems show that in a world warmed by 2°C, floods of today’s “once in a century” magnitude could recur about every 45 years. With 4°C of warming, they could be every 23 years. These surges in water volume will expand flood zones into areas previously considered safe, potentially overflowing sea walls and flood defences. In a critical region like Osaka Bay, storm surges could rise by nearly 30%.

In the US, a study of 370 million property records from 1945 to 2015 found over half of all structures are in hazard hotspots. Nearly half are facing multiple threats like earthquakes, floods, hurricanes and tornadoes. In the UK, climate-driven weather claims hit £573 million in 2023, a 36% rise from 2022. Annual flood damage to non-residential properties in the UK is also projected to nearly double from £2 billion today to £3.9 billion by the 2080s.

Maintenance is our best defence

Much of the world’s building stock is therefore entering its middle age under environmental conditions it was never designed to face. Instead of panicking or tearing everything down, the solution is to adapt and treat building maintenance as a form of climate resilience – not as an optional extra.

Mid-life building upgrades can help protect our skylines for the next 50 years. Our hazard maps must look at future climate models — not just historical weather — to set new safety standards. Regular structural health monitoring is essential – by using sensors to track invisible stresses in foundations and frames before they become fatal, dangerous situations can be foreseen.

Buildings can stay strong by focusing retrofits on the weakest and most vulnerable parts. This includes glass facades, the underground drainage, the foundation piles and corrosion protection.

Climate change isn’t rewriting the laws of engineering, but it is rapidly eating away at our margins of safety. If we want our cities to remain standing, we must act now – before small, invisible stresses accumulate into irreversible failure.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 47,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Mohamed Shaheen 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. City skylines need an upgrade in the face of climate stress – https://theconversation.com/city-skylines-need-an-upgrade-in-the-face-of-climate-stress-267763

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy J. Dixon, Emeritus Professor in the School of the Built Environment, University of Reading; University of Oxford

Following a visit to Gaza in January, the UN undersecretary general, Jorge Moreira da Silva, called the level of destruction there “overwhelming”. He estimated that, on average, every person in the densely populated territory is now “surrounded by 30 tonnes of rubble”.

This staggering level of destruction raises urgent questions about how, and by whom, Gaza should be rebuilt. Since 2023, a variety of reconstruction plans and other initiatives have tried to imagine what Gaza could look like when the conflict ends for good. But which of these visions will shape Gaza’s future?

The Israeli government’s Gaza 2035 plan, which was unveiled in 2024, lays out a three-stage programme to integrate the Gaza Strip into a free-trade zone with Egypt’s El-Arish Port and the Israeli city of Sderot.

AI renderings show futuristic skyscrapers, solar farms and water desalination plants in the Sinai peninsula. The plan also shows offshore oil rigs and a new high-speed rail corridor along Salah al-Din Road, Gaza’s main highway that connects Gaza City and Rafah.

The US government has proposed a similar futuristic vision for Gaza. Its August 2025 Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust plan shows a phased series of modern, AI-powered smart cities developed over a ten-year time frame. The plan, which would place Gaza under a US-run trusteeship, suggested that poor urban design lies at the heart of “Gaza’s ongoing insurgency”.

The latest iteration of this vision was unveiled by Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos.

He presented slides showing Gaza reconstructed as a “Riviera” of the Middle East, with luxury beachfront resorts, gleaming tower blocks, residential zones and modern transport hubs. Kushner suggested it was “doable” to complete the construction of a “new” Rafah city in “two to three years”.

It has been reported that the US and Israeli visions are heavily influenced by US-based economics professor Joseph Pelzman’s economic plan for Gaza. This plan, Pelzman said on a podcast in 2024, would involve destroying Gaza and restarting from scratch.

In contrast to the US and Israeli visions, the February 2025 Gaza “Phoenix” plan includes input from the people of Gaza. It has a much stronger focus on maintaining and reconstructing the existing buildings, culture and social fabric of the enclave.

The plan was developed by a consortium of international experts together with professionals and academics from Gaza, the West Bank and the Palestinian diaspora, and suggests a reconstruction and development phase of at least five years.

Other plans from the Arab world take a more technocratic view of reconstruction, but still have a short timescale for reconstruction. These include a five-year plan by the United Arab Emirates-based Al Habtoor Group, which promises to grant 70% of ownership in the holding company that will manage Gaza’s reconstruction to the Palestinians.

Feasibility of rebuilding Gaza

So, how feasible are these different visions and how inclusive are they for the people of Gaza? Rebuilding cities after war takes time and money, and also requires local resources. Even in China, a country with plentiful resources and abundant skilled labour, major new cities are rarely completed in less than 20 years.

And in Gaza rebuilding will be complicated by the fact that there are now 61 million tonnes of rubble there, as well as other hazardous debris such as unexploded munitions and human remains. This will need to be removed before any reconstruction can commence, with the UN estimating that clearing the rubble alone could take as long as 20 years.

For comparison, the Polish capital of Warsaw experienced a similar level of destruction during the second world war and it took four decades to rebuild and reconstruct the city’s historic centre. The time frames for reconstruction outlined in all of the plans for Gaza are far shorter than this and, even with modern construction methods, are unlikely to be feasible.

The US and Israeli visions also fail to include Palestinians in the planning of Gaza’s future, overlooking any need to consult with Gazan residents and community groups. This has led critics to argue that the plans amount to “urbicide”, the obliteration of existing cultures through war and reconstruction.

Reports that suggest Gazan residents will be offered cash payments of US$5,000 (£3,650) to leave Gaza “voluntarily” under the US plan, as well as subsidies covering four years of rent outside Gaza, will not have alleviated these concerns.

At the same time, the US plan does not propose a conventional land compensation programme for Gazan residents who lost their homes and businesses during the war. These people will instead be offered digital tokens in exchange for the rights to redevelop their land.

The tokens could eventually be redeemed for an apartment in one of Gaza’s new cities. But the plan also envisages the sale of tokens to investors being used to fund reconstruction. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organisation in the US, says the “mass theft” of Palestinian land through the token scheme would amount to a war crime.

With their emphasis on community engagement and the repair and renewal of existing structures, the Phoenix plan and the other Arab-led visions are at least a step forward. But without a fully democratic consensus on how to rebuild Gaza, it is difficult to see how the voices of the Gazan people can be heard.

Whichever vision wins out, history shows that post-war reconstruction succeeds when it involves those whose lives have been destroyed. This is evidenced somewhat ironically by the US Marshall Plan, which funded the reconstruction of many European economies and cities after the second world war, and involved close engagement with civil society and local communities to achieve success.

Timothy J. Dixon 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. What will a rebuilt Gaza look like? The competing visions for the Strip’s future – https://theconversation.com/what-will-a-rebuilt-gaza-look-like-the-competing-visions-for-the-strips-future-274591

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duygu Yengin, Associate Professor of Economics, Adelaide University

Australia is an energy superpower. We have abundant natural resources, high average incomes and one of the highest per-capita rates of rooftop solar uptake in the world.

Yet every summer, many households across the country skimp on cooling, fear their next energy bill, or risk disconnection during extreme heat. Economists call this phenomenon “summer energy poverty” which can force households to make impossible choices between staying cool or putting food on the table.

Australia’s January heatwave broke multiple temperature records and led to significant spikes in emergency room visits. Climate change means such extreme weather events are likely to become more common in future.

Energy stress is often framed as an affordability problem, driven by electricity prices that are too high or incomes that are too low. But it both reflects and drives wider social and economic inequality, extending well beyond the simple cost of power bills.

Our research shows key drivers of energy stress are differences in wealth, a lack of emergency savings and whether people are renters. This is the case even comparing people with similar income.

More than an affordability issue

First, it’s important to understand the difference between income and wealth, which are related but not the same thing. Broadly speaking, income is the money you earn from work, benefits or investments. Wealth is the total value of what you own – your savings, property or other assets – minus any debts.

Importantly, income fluctuates. Wealth reflects a household’s ability to absorb shocks.

Our research suggests wealth matters more than income in energy hardship. Households without savings or emergency funds of a few thousand dollars are far more exposed to energy stress.

Even small shocks, such as hotter summers, rent increases and unexpected expenses can lock households into repeated bill arrears. Those who previously struggled to pay bills were 47% more likely to face similar struggles next year.

Energy stress can be less a temporary setback and more a poverty trap.

A system built for households with buffers

Energy systems work best for households with secure housing, financial buffers and control over their energy choices. Time-of-use pricing is one example. It charges more for electricity during peak hours and less when demand is lower.

This is designed to shift demand away from peak periods, improving efficiency. But peaks often coincide with essential needs: cooling during heatwaves, cooking after work or running medical equipment.

For households with caring responsibilities, chronic illness or inflexible work hours, it can be very difficult to move their power use without real harm.

What is often presented as “smart” market design can impose higher costs on those with the least flexibility and higher needs for cooling or heating.

In Australia, dynamic tariffs are being rolled out, particularly in states with high solar uptake, because electricity is cheapest when the sun is shining and more expensive at other times.

However, wealthier households can much more easily respond to dynamic tariffs, by investing in rooftop solar, battery storage, electric vehicles and automated energy management systems.

Owners and renters

A further divide appears between those who own their own homes and those who rent.

Solar panels and batteries mostly benefit households that can afford upfront investment and own their homes. Government incentives
have boosted uptake, but mainly help those who are already wealthy.

This leaves renters, lower-income households and those in public housing behind.

Housing quality matters too. Poor insulation and inefficient appliances increase energy vulnerability. Renters, particularly in social housing and Indigenous households are most exposed.

The problem of prepaid power

Our research also found Indigenous households are at least 14% more likely to experience energy stress through being unable to pay bills on time.

Energy stress is even worse in remote Australia. Around 65,000 Indigenous Australians rely on prepayment systems and experience an average of 49 disconnections a year. These systems, meant to help households budget better by requiring payment in advance, often worsen energy insecurity because power is automatically cut off when credit runs out.

As heatwaves become the norm, is energy a basic right?

Affordable energy for everyday needs is central to health and wellbeing. However, what looks efficient for the energy system can leave some households worse off – with the benefits flowing mostly to those who are already well-off.

An energy-just system treats energy as essential infrastructure, not a market luxury. Equity will not emerge automatically from markets or technology.

Recent electricity rebates went to all households, but arguably would have helped more if targeted to those in greatest need. Our research suggests policy responses need to go beyond short-term fixes.

As parts of Australia may become “unliveable” under extreme heat, improving housing standards is a must. Seven-star energy efficiency standards and large-scale retrofits in low-income housing can reduce energy stress for all households, including renters.

Access to clean energy should also expand beyond the reach of wealth and homeowners, through subsidised solar in public housing and shared programs such as community solar banks, which let renters and apartment residents benefit from solar power and battery storage.

Ultimately, policy should tackle the deeper drivers of energy stress, inequalities in wealth and housing, while helping households build financial resilience, for example through access to emergency funds for bills.

Duygu Yengin is affiliated with the Economic Society of Australia as its South Australia branch president and serves as deputy chair of the Women in Economics Network.

Andrew Taylor, Maneka Jayasinghe, and Rohan Best 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. Why cheaper power alone isn’t enough to end energy poverty in summer – https://theconversation.com/why-cheaper-power-alone-isnt-enough-to-end-energy-poverty-in-summer-274963

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emery Schubert, Professor, Empirical Musicology Laboratory, School of the Arts and Media, UNSW Sydney

Phil is in prep for surgery. As the anaesthetic is about to be administered, the anaesthetist says: “Oh, and by the way, during the procedure the surgical team will be listening to the hard rock classic, You Shook Me All Night Long.”

Does Phil say, “STOP! I’m getting out of here”?

Perhaps he shouldn’t. According to one study, by listening to AC/DC during surgery, doctors can improve their performance. Use of music in operating theatres has had mixed results but the study – which looked at young surgeons working on laparoscopic procedures at a hospital in Dresden while listening to various different kinds of background music – found background music reduced surgeons’ anxiety. And who wants an anxious surgery team, right?

Particularly for boring, repetitive jobs, music can help. Locking into the beat (psychologists call this “rhythmic entrainment” means your actions sync with the beat of the music, which can make routine tasks feel smoother and faster.

Put melody and beat together and, after a bit of practice, you too might be working like this postal officer – who even supplies his own melody.

When else does music help you at work?

Background music often doesn’t help with memory and language tasks, such as reading comprehension and reading speed, especially when the music contains lyrics. When you’re processing words, extra words supplied by the song are competing for attention.

Difficult, complex tasks are also hindered by music.

But what about that surgery team? Aren’t they performing among the highest-stakes tasks of all? The key is expertise. An experienced medical professional typically carries a lower “cognitive load” for familiar procedures, leaving mental bandwidth to spare. In those circumstances, a bit of music might steady the nerves without crowding out attention.

But personality matters: people on the shy or introverted side are more likely to find background music distracting than extroverts who thrive on stimulation.

The music genre matters, too. Jazz standards might help one person focus, and drive another around the bend, while the latest K-pop hits might do no more than help you procrastinate from that already overdue task.

And volume matters. Not too soft, and the music can cover up or “mask” unwanted, unpredictable, distracting noise like office chatter, café clatter, library whispers, or (heaven help you), shopping centre din. The goal isn’t loudness; it’s control over your soundscape.

Why is music such a popular work companion?

Music occupies your ears. That leaves your eyes – and your hands – free to get on with the job.

Music can sometimes support tactile and kinaesthetic work, such as our postal worker cancelling stamps with a beat and a ditty. He was able to watch what he was doing, while singing and stomping away.

Intriguingly, even though music is a sound signal, the ear can deal with the auditory airwaves containing other sounds more gracefully than the eye can with visuals. Trying to work while listening to music is very different than trying to work while watching television. This holds true even when you need to be listening to something as part of your work.

Our brains are surprisingly good at separating simultaneous sound sources. This ability is called “auditory scene analysis”: the brain’s way of separating mixed sounds into distinct sources – like picking out one voice in a noisy room.

So audio tasks – such as listening to instructions or taking dictation – can still be performed with background music, though performance may be somewhat reduced compared with silence. But the ear can juggle streams in a way the eye often can’t.

Music also provides us with joy. Music can spark powerful experiences – belonging, awe, tenderness, thrills – states that can boost mood and motivation. That’s why some people can’t help plugging in.

If music ever starts to get in the way of focused work, another strategy is to take a “music break”: get a quick hit of your favourite tracks to elevate mood, then return to the task refreshed.

Putting it into practice

If you want to experiment, try this quick checklist:

• match the music to the task: embrace rhythm for repetitive or motor tasks; favour instrumentals for reading, writing or anything word heavy

• mind the lyrics: words in your music compete with words in your head

• keep it moderate: play music at a volume enough to mask distractions, not enough to dominate attention

• know thyself: if you’re easily overstimulated, keep sessions short or choose calmer genres such as lo fi, ambient or soft classical

• use breaks strategically: if music distracts while you work, save it for short “fuel up” breaks to restore mood and focus.

But there is no hard and fast rule. Recall our hard rock–loving surgeons? No lo-fi for them. But for the record, the surgery went just fine with the gentler Beatles classic, aptly titled Let It Be. And music’s not for everyone. For some, the surest way to stay tuned in to work is to not tune in at all.

Emery Schubert 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. AC/DC in surgery and lo-fi beats in the office: what the science says about working to music – https://theconversation.com/ac-dc-in-surgery-and-lo-fi-beats-in-the-office-what-the-science-says-about-working-to-music-273237

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

Barnaby Joyce’s political career has hit the highest of highs and the lowest of lows.

He’s been Nationals leader and deputy prime minister twice. As a senator, he was a maverick, often crossing the floor. As party leader, he had a dramatic falling out then prime minister Malcolm Turnbull. Later he delivered vital Nationals support for net zero emissions to then prime minister Scott Morrison, even while personally disagreeing strongly with the policy.

Just two months ago, he decamped to the reinvigorated One Nation as the minor party’s popularity has soared, with some polls even putting it ahead of the Liberals and Nationals.

Joyce joins us to talk about how he sees One Nation’s future and his own.

On his defection to One Nation, Joyce says One Nation’s “strength” and “clarity of policy” attracted to him to the party, at the same time as his working relationship with Nationals leader David Littleproud became “completely dysfunctional”.

It was discordant. I was becoming bitter, and that’s not the mind space that I want to be in. Obviously, Mr Littleproud has talked about generational change, which was afoot in regards me, which was a case of “I want you out of here” […] And at 58 […] I thought I had more to offer my nation. And so those two factors coming together brought about my defection to One Nation, where I believe […] I have purpose and I’m not just withering on the vine in the corner of oblivion.

Joyce says his community in New England has been “overwhelmingly supportive” of his move:

People don’t believe that, but I had another media outlet up the other day and they said, “can we go down the street and can you find people for us to talk to about this?”. I said that won’t be too hard […] We couldn’t get 150 metres up the street […] Their words were “it’s like going for a walk down the street with the Pope”.

While saying his current intention is to run for a New South Wales Senate seat, Joyce says “it’s not impossible” he could still recontest his lower house seat of New England if that’s what One Nation wants.

You have to have a discussion with the party and the party also determines what is good for them. You can’t run for anything unless the party agrees to it and that’s the same with all political parties […] So the plan is to stand for the Senate for New South Wales, but I don’t want to rule things out, because if that circumstance changed you’d be a liar.

[…] As we get closer people will […] make a decision about what’s best. At this point in time, it is my wish – and other people have agreed – that it would be standing for the Senate.

One Nation has had big problems with some candidates and parliamentarians in the past. But Joyce says it’s becoming better at vetting:

What you have to appreciate is the growth of the party and where Pauline started. You remember the party was basically gone, finished. And Pauline Hanson, who had been put in jail by the Coalition, let’s be frank […] she’s had to build it up. And of course as you build a party up, you get more resources, so you get more capacity to have the sort of a closer oversight of what’s going on […] So the process of selecting a candidate will be more forensic, and it has to be.

On fears their big personalities might clash, Joyce says he gets on well with Pauline Hanson.

I did not go into this relationship on a flight of fancy or a fit of pique. I considered it over a year. I had multiple meetings with Pauline and [… others in the party]. I’ve known them for a long period of time […] I feel that I get along well with Pauline […] I respect what she has done and what she has created for Australia.

Asked about Hanson’s burqa wearing stunt in the Senate late last year, Joyce says “obviously, I’m not going to be wearing a burqa” – but also said “that’s theatre, really, isn’t it?”.

On whether he ever has nightmares that he could “blow” this latest phase of his political life, Joyce says:

I think everybody can blow it […] I’m a human being and I’ve certainly made my mistakes. And I don’t resign from them. I apologise for them, but I think people have been accepting and forgiving of them to be quite frank. And I thank people for that […] We’re a lot more sanitised in this building [Parliament House] than when I first got elected in 2004.

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Barnaby Joyce on getting on with Pauline Hanson and One Nation’s rise – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-barnaby-joyce-on-getting-on-with-pauline-hanson-and-one-nations-rise-275072