Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vinod Balasubramaniam, Associate Professor (Molecular Virology), Monash University

A man in his 50s has died from lyssavirus in New South Wales after being bitten by a bat several months ago.

This is Australia’s fourth human case of bat lyssavirus and the first confirmed case in NSW since the virus was first identified in 1996 in a black flying fox in Queensland.

So what is lyssavirus? And how can you protect yourself if you come into contact with a bat?

A close relative of rabies

Australian bat lyssavirus belongs to the Rhabdoviridae family, the same group of viruses that causes rabies.

It primarily infects bats. Active monitoring suggests fewer than 1% of healthy bats carry the virus, though prevalence rises to 5–10% in sick or injured bats.

In bats, the virus often causes no obvious symptoms, though some show neurological signs such as disorientation, aggression, muscle spasms and paralysis. Some will die.

The virus has been confirmed in all four mainland flying fox species (Pteropus alecto, P. poliocephalus, P. scapulatus and P. conspicillatus) as well as the yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris), a species of microbat.

However, serological evidence – where scientists test for antibodies in bats’ blood – suggests other microbats could be susceptible too. So we should be cautious with all Australian bat species when it comes to lyssavirus.

Rare, but potentially deadly

Unlike rabies, which causes roughly 59,000 human deaths annually, predominantly in Africa and Asia, human infection with bat lyssavirus is extremely rare.

Australian bat lyssavirus, as the name suggests, is unique to Australia. But other bat lyssaviruses, such as European bat lyssavirus, have similarly caused rare human infections.

Human infection with bat lyssavirus occurs through direct contact with infected bat saliva via bites, scratches or open skin. It can also occur if our mucous membranes (eyes, nose, mouth) are exposed to bat saliva.

There’s no risk associated with bat faeces, urine, blood, or casual proximity to roosts.

If someone has been exposed, there’s an incubation period which can range from weeks to more than two years. During this time the virus slowly moves through the body’s nerves to the brain, staying hidden and symptom-free.

Treating the virus during the incubation period can prevent the illness. But if it’s not treated, symptoms are serious and it’s invariably fatal.

The nature of the illness in humans mirrors rabies, beginning with flu-like symptoms (fever, headache, fatigue), then quickly progressing to severe neurological disease, including paralysis, delirium, convulsions, and loss of consciousness. Death generally occurs within 1–2 weeks of symptom onset.

All four recorded human cases in Australia – three in Queensland (in 1996, 1998 and 2013) and the recent NSW case – have been fatal.

There’s no effective treatment once symptoms develop

If someone is potentially exposed to bat lyssavirus and seeks medical attention, they can be treated with post-exposure prophylaxis, consisting of rabies antibodies and the rabies vaccine.

This intervention is highly effective if initiated promptly – preferably within 48 hours, and no later than seven days post-exposure – before the virus enters the central nervous system.

But no effective treatment exists for Australian bat lyssavirus once symptoms develop. Emerging research on monoclonal antibodies offers potential future therapies, however these are not yet available.

So what’s the best protection? And what if a bat bites you?

Pre-exposure rabies vaccination, involving three doses over one month, is recommended for high-risk groups. This includes veterinarians, animal handlers, wildlife rehabilitators, and laboratory workers handling lyssaviruses.

It’s important for members of the public to avoid all direct contact with bats. Only vaccinated, trained professionals, such as wildlife carers or veterinarians, should handle bats.

Public education campaigns are essential to reduce risky interactions, especially in bat-populated areas.

If you get bitten or scratched by a bat, it’s vital to act immediately. Wash the wound thoroughly with soap and water for at least 15 minutes, apply an antiseptic (such as betadine), and seek urgent medical attention.

This tragic case in NSW underscores that while extremely rare, bat lyssavirus is an important public health threat. We need to see enhanced public awareness and ensure vaccination for high-risk groups, alongside ongoing bat monitoring and research into new treatments.

Vinod Balasubramaniam 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. Lyssavirus is rare, but deadly. What should you do if a bat bites you? – https://theconversation.com/lyssavirus-is-rare-but-deadly-what-should-you-do-if-a-bat-bites-you-260495

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Clift, Lecturer in Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney

The demise of one of Hong Kong’s last major pro-democracy parties, the League of Social Democrats, is the latest blow to the city’s crumbling democratic credentials.

The league is the third major opposition party to disband this year. The announcement coincides with the fifth anniversary this week of the national security law, which was imposed by Beijing to suppress pro-democracy activity.

The loss of this grassroots party, historically populated by bold and colourful characters, vividly illustrates the dying of the light in once-sparkling Hong Kong.

The city is now greyed and labouring under a repressive internal security regime that has crushed civil society’s freedoms and democratic ambitions.

Authoritarian crackdown

The world witnessed Hong Kong at its brightest during the 2014 Umbrella Movement, when hundreds of thousands of pro-democracy protesters camped out on city streets for several months.

We also saw the brutal sequel in 2019, when paramilitarised police sought to put down further civil unrest and protesters fought back.

Since then, “lawfare” has been the preferred strategy of China’s national government and its Hong Kong satellite. The new approach has included a vast security apparatus and aggressive prosecutions.

When Beijing intervened in July 2020, it was nominally about national security. In reality, the new law was designed and used to bring Hongkongers to heel.

Civil freedoms were further curtailed by a home-grown security law, introduced last year to fill the gaps.

International standards such as the Johannesburg Principles, endorsed by the United Nations, require national security laws to be compatible with democratic principles, not to be used to eliminate democratic activity.

Prison or exile

The League of Social Democrats occupied the populist left of the pro-democracy spectrum. It stood apart from contemporaries such as the Democratic Party and the Civic Party, which were dominated by professionals and elites, and have since been disbanded.

The League was most notably represented by the likes of “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung– known for his Che Guevara t-shirts and banana-throwing – and broadcaster and journalism academic Raymond Wong Yuk-man, also known as “Mad Dog”.

Despite their rambunctious styles, these men had real political credentials and were repeatedly elected to legislative office. But Leung is now imprisoned for subversion, while Wong has left for Taiwan.

Party leaders such as Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit and Figo Chan Ho-wun were also prominent within the Civil Human Rights Front. It was responsible for the annual July 1 protest march that attracted hundreds of thousands of people every year. The front is yet another pro-democracy organisation that has dissolved.

Sham and Chan have been jailed for subversion and unlawful assembly under the colonial-era Public Order Ordinance, which has been used to prosecute hundreds of activists.

Zero tolerance

The demise of these diverse organisations are not natural occurrences, but the result of a deliberate authoritarian programme.

Under China, Hong Kong’s political system has been half democratic at best. But it now resembles something from the darkest days of colonialism, with pre-approved candidates, appointed legislators and zero tolerance for critical voices.

The effort to eliminate opposition has seen the pro-independence National Party formally banned and scores of pro-democracy figures jailed after mass trials.

Activists and watchdogs are stymied by the national security law. It criminalises – among other things – engagement and lobbying with international organisations and foreign governments.

Distinctive voices such as law professor Benny Tai Yiu-ting, media mogul Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and firebrand politician Edward Leung Tin-kei have been jailed and silenced, as have many moderates and lesser-known figures.

Shattered dreams

Then there are the millions of ordinary Hongkongers whose dreams of a liberal and self-governing region under mainland China’s umbrella – as promised in the lead up to the 1997 handover – have been shattered.

Some activists have fled overseas. The more outspoken are the subjects of Hong Kong arrest warrants.

But countless ex-protesters remain in the city, where it is impermissible to speak critically of power, and where mandatory patriotic education may ensure new generations will never even think to speak up.

Much blame lies with the British, who failed to institute democratic elections until the last gasp of their rule in Hong Kong. This was despite the colony tolerating liberalism and habit-forming democratic activity over a longer period.

Now China, after almost three decades in charge, has responded to democratic challenges by defaulting to authoritarian control. Hong Kong can only be grateful it has been spared a Tiananmen-style incident. Nor has it experienced the full genocidal extent of the so-called “peripheries playbook” Beijing has used in Tibet and Xinjiang.

Turmoil and authoritarian swings in the United States and elsewhere give China an opportunity to present as a voice of reason on the international stage.

But we should not forget its commitment to repressive politics at home, nor what its support of belligerent regimes such as Putin’s Russia might mean for Taiwan, the region and the world.

Above all, we should not forget the people, in Hong Kong and elsewhere, who made it their life’s work to achieve democracy only to be rewarded with prison or exile.

Brendan Clift 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. Hong Kong’s light fades as another pro-democracy party folds – https://theconversation.com/hong-kongs-light-fades-as-another-pro-democracy-party-folds-260186

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kirsten Banks, Lecturer, School of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology

This week, astronomers spotted the third known interstellar visitor to our Solar System.

First detected by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) on July 1, the cosmic interloper was given the temporary name A11pl3Z. Experts at NASA’s Center for Near Earth Object Studies and the International Astronomical Union (IAU) have confirmed the find, and the object now has an official designation: I3/ATLAS.

There are a few strong clues that suggest 3I/ATLAS came from outside the Solar System.

First, it’s moving really fast. Current observations show it speeding through space at around 245,000km per hour. That’s more than enough to escape the Sun’s gravity.

An object near Earth’s orbit would only need to be travelling at just over 150,000km/h to break free from the Solar System.

Second, 3I/ATLAS has a wildly eccentric orbit around the Sun. Eccentricity measures how “stretched” an orbit is: 0 eccentricity is a perfect circle, and anything up to 1 is an increasingly strung-out ellipse. Above 1 is an orbit that is not bound to the Sun.

3I/ATLAS has an estimated eccentricity of 6.3, by far the highest ever recorded for any object in the Solar System.

Has anything like this happened before?

The first interstellar object spotted in our Solar System was the cigar-shaped ‘Oumuamua, discovered in 2017 by the Pan-STARRS1 telescope in Hawaii. Scientists tracked it for 80 days before eventually confirming it came from interstellar space.

The second interstellar visitor, comet 2I/Borisov, was discovered two years later by amateur astronomer Gennadiy Borisov. This time it only took astronomers a few weeks to confirm it came from outside the Solar System.

This time, the interstellar origin of I3/ATLAS has been confirmed in a matter of days.

How did it get here?

We have only ever seen three interstellar visitors (including I3/ATLAS), so it’s hard to know exactly how they made their way here.

However, recent research published in The Planetary Science Journal suggests these objects might be more common than we once thought. In particular, they may come from relatively nearby star systems such as Alpha Centauri (our nearest interstellar neighbour, a mere 4.4 light years away).

Alpha Centauri is slowly moving closer to us, with its closest approach expected in about 28,000 years. If it flings out material in the same way our Solar System does, scientists estimate around a million objects from Alpha Centauri larger than 100 metres in diameter could already be in the outer reaches of our Solar System. That number could increase tenfold as Alpha Centauri gets closer.

Most of this material would have been ejected at relatively low speeds, less than 2km/s, making it more likely to drift into our cosmic neighbourhood over time and not dramatically zoom in and out of the Solar System like I3/ATLAS appears to be doing. While the chance of one of these objects coming close to the Sun is extremely small, the study suggests a few tiny meteors from Alpha Centauri, likely no bigger than grains of sand, may already hit Earth’s atmosphere every year.

Why is this interesting?

Discovering new interstellar visitors like 3I/ATLAS is thrilling, not just because they’re rare, but because each one offers a unique glimpse into the wider galaxy. Every confirmed interstellar object expands our catalogue and helps scientists better understand the nature of these visitors, how they travel through space, and where they might have come from.

Thanks to powerful new observatories such as the NSF–DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory, our ability to detect these elusive objects is rapidly improving. In fact, during its first 10 hours of test imaging, Rubin revealed 2,104 previously unknown asteroids.

This is an astonishing preview of what’s to come. With its wide field of view and constant sky coverage, Rubin is expected to revolutionise our search for interstellar objects, potentially turning rare discoveries into routine ones.

What now?

There’s still plenty left to uncover about 3I/ATLAS. Right now, it’s officially classified as a comet by the IAU Minor Planet Center.

But some scientists argue it might actually be an asteroid, roughly 20km across, based on the lack of typical comet-like features such as a glowing coma or a tail. More observations will be needed to confirm its nature.

Currently, 3I/ATLAS is inbound, just inside Jupiter’s orbit. It’s expected to reach its closest point to the Sun, slightly closer than the planet Mars, on October 29. After that, it will swing back out towards deep space, making its closest approach to Earth in December. (It will pose no threat to our planet.)

Whether it’s a comet or an asteroid, 3I/ATLAS is a messenger from another star system. For now, these sightings are rare – though as next-generation observatories such as Rubin swing into operation, we may discover interstellar companions all around.

Kirsten Banks 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. Astronomers have spied an interstellar object zooming through the Solar System – https://theconversation.com/astronomers-have-spied-an-interstellar-object-zooming-through-the-solar-system-260422

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Konstantine Panegyres, Lecturer in Classics and Ancient History, The University of Western Australia

To love and be loved is something most people want in their lives.

In the modern world, we often see stories about the difficulties of finding love and the trials of dating and marriage. Sometimes, the person we love doesn’t love us. Sometimes, we don’t love the person who loves us.

Ancient Greeks and Romans also had a lot to say about this subject. In fact, most of the issues people face today in their search for love are already mentioned in ancient Greek and Roman literature.

So, what did they say? And is the advice they put forward still relevant for modern people?

Advice for finding a lover

The Roman poet Ovid (43BCE–17CE) wrote a poem called The Art of Love (Ars Amatoria). In it, he offered advice for those who are still single.

First, Ovid says, you should make an effort to find someone you’re interested in. Your lover “will not come floating down to you through the tenuous air, she must be sought”.

As suitable places to find a lover, Ovid recommends walking in porticos and gardens, attending the theatre, or (surprisingly enough) lingering near law courts.

You need to catch someone’s eye and then invent an excuse to talk with them, he says.

Seek your lover in the daytime, says Ovid. Be careful of the night. You won’t choose the right person if you’re drunk. And you can’t see their face properly if it’s too dark – they might be uglier than you think.

Second, Ovid says you need to look presentable. Make sure your clothes are clean and you have a good haircut. Moreover, keep yourself groomed properly at all times:

Do not let your nails project, and let them be free of dirt; nor let any hair be in the hollow of your nostrils. Let not the breath of your mouth be sour and unpleasing.

Ovid’s The Art of Love may be regarded as a kind of love manual. But aside from making personal efforts to find a lover, people could also use matchmakers.

However, matchmaking was a difficult process. Sometimes matchmakers didn’t tell the truth about the situations of the parties involved. So the Athenian writer Xenophon (430–353 BCE) says people were sometimes “victims of deception” in the matchmaking process.

What if you’re not in love?

The ancients recognised that not being in love can be a problem. They thought it bad for your mental and physical health, but also for society more broadly.

For example, the Roman writer Claudius Aelian (2nd–3rd century CE) in his Historical Miscellany says soldiers who are in love will fight better than soldiers who are not in love:

In the heat of battle when war brings men into combat, a man who is not in love could not match one who is. The man untouched by love avoids and runs away from the man who loves, as if he were an outsider uninitiated into the god’s rites, and his bravery depends on his character and physical strength.

According to Aelian, the Spartans had a punishment for men who did not fall in love:

Any man of good appearance and character who did not fall in love with someone well-bred was also fined, because despite his excellence he did not love anyone […] lovers’ affection for their beloved has a remarkable power of stimulating the virtues.

So, when two people are in love, they can inspire each other and bring out the best in one another. Being in love can help a person become better and achieve more.

Fighting for and keeping a lover

If we are lucky, the person we love will also love us back, and we won’t have any love rivals.

But what happens when the person we love is also loved by someone else? We may need to put in more effort to win the affection of that person, but sometimes this brings us into conflicts.

For example, the Roman orator and politician Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE), in his On the Orator, tells how Gaius Memmius, Roman tribune of the year 111 BCE, apparently took a bite out of his love rival’s arm, “when he had a quarrel with him at Tarracina over a girlfriend”.

Some ways to keep one’s lover interested that are mentioned in ancient sources include showing off one’s wealth.

For example, in one of the plays of the poet Alexis (375–275 BCE) a young man who is in love puts on a large banquet to impress his girlfriend with a display of wealth. Engagements were at that time sometimes cancelled if it turned out the husband was too poor.

Of course, things did not always work out, and people had grievances against former lovers. One particularly famous invective was from the poet Martial (38–104 CE) to a woman called Manneia:

Manneia, your little dog licks your face and lips. Small wonder that a dog likes eating dung!

Timeless concerns

Today, we often see debates about whether it’s better to stay single or get into a relationship.

The same goes for antiquity. In the 4th-century BCE play Arrephoros or The Pipe Girl by poet Menander, one character says:

If you’ve got any sense, you won’t get married […] I’m married myself – which is why I’m advising you not to do it.

Others lamented that they missed their opportunity for love. So the poet Pindar (6th–5th century BCE) wrote a poem regretting that he could not make the much younger Theoxenus his boyfriend:

You should have picked love’s flowers at the right time, my heart, when you were young. But as for the sparkling rays from Theoxenus’ eyes, whoever looks on them and is not roiled with longing has a black heart forged with cold fire out of steel or iron.

Clearly, finding a lover was as difficult then as it is now.

Konstantine Panegyres 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. Avoid bad breath, don’t pick partners when drunk: ancient dating tips to find modern love – https://theconversation.com/avoid-bad-breath-dont-pick-partners-when-drunk-ancient-dating-tips-to-find-modern-love-250792

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Hunter, Senior Lecturer in Art and Performance, Deakin University

Back to Back Theatre is one of Australia’s national treasures. Over 30 years this dynamic Geelong-based company – an ensemble of actors who are perceived to have intellectual disabilities – has built a dynamic body of innovative work renowned for its formal experimentation.

Led by director Bruce Gladwin, the company is internationally acclaimed, including winning the International Ibsen Award in 2022 and the Venice Biennale Golden Lion for Lifetime Achievement in Theatre in 2024.

Commissioned by ACMI, Back to Back’s latest offering is a screen project that reenacts a section of Shakespeare’s Henry V: the battle of Agincourt.

Back to Back’s Agincourt draws from iconic film performances such as Laurence Olivier’s Henry V, but places the action in a factory in North Geelong. This industrial re-imagining is replete with hi-viz vests, concrete floors, and a very idiosyncratic costume design consisting of coats of armour made entirely out of cardboard.

Agincourt begins with the desperate English monarch Henry V (Sarah Mainwaring) calling to his exhausted troops to take up arms against the marauding French, who are marching determinedly down the suburban street towards them.

The English prepare for war, fortifying the factory space and gathering themselves for an inevitable onslaught, and a heinous confrontation ensues.

Language and time

More than 100 community members contributed to this work. A key aim was to ensure North Geelong residents and factory workers were given the opportunity to work as an artist, either in front of the camera or behind the scenes. The audition process included the proviso that every person made their own costume.

Gladwin works closely with cinematographer/editor Rhian Hinkley and the actors to employ the elements of language and time in very specific ways.

The performers’ natural speech patterns bring a real spaciousness in the vocal delivery to Shakespeare’s lines. There are also subtitles throughout the work.

At times a split screen is used which repeats action at slightly differing angles, often in extreme closeup.

These elements crystallise the audience’s focus, bringing a particular attention to the rich language of Shakespeare. We slow down, we read, we listen. We have time to let the words land, and to see the actors in their own unguarded, vulnerable moments.

The performances are strong. In particular, Mainwaring as a set-upon Prince Hal is compelling. Her laser stare is juxtaposed with a slightly wavering physicality which brings the first soliloquy into monumental, rousing proportion as she rallies the troops with the ominous pronouncement “We shall be remembered”.

Do-it-yourself aesthetic

Design and sound are front and centre in this 23-minute film. The actors worked with local company Boxwars to make their costumes and props, and Agincourt’s factory setting provides the background for the do-it-yourself aesthetic which features an impressive array of ornately decorated cardboard costumes.

Props are also made from cardboard and we see swirling maces, pointed lances, bows and arrows, and fearfully brandished swords. The detail is brilliant.

It is hard to describe the satisfaction of viewing a violent battle staged with cardboard – an inherently theatrical material which has the capacity to be firm and resilient but also to disintegrate spectacularly over time.

(If you aren’t aware of the delightful cardboard community that is Boxwars, I highly recommend checking out their numerous YouTube videos: you won’t be disappointed.)

A mythic, epic conflict

The idea of staging an epic conflict in such a playful way seems outrageous, but there is a mythic quality to the work – the call to arms, the messy scrabbling, the physicality – that transcends the silliness. In the end, there is a kind of gravitas to the action.

Over the course of the film, Agincourt moves from a grand and heroic sensibility to a sweaty, bloody depiction of war.

Helmeted riders on horses (made from old mattresses) are pushed into the fray amid forklifts, trolleys and pallets of yarn. Beautiful woven fabrics play backdrop to regal pronouncements as the bricked walls of this industrial space are transformed into a chaotic battlefield.

Gladwin uses his cast of thousands (and stunt directors) to great effect, creating phalanxes of archers raising bows in unison, or lines of soldiers in rows, swords at the ready.

These orderly patterns are juxtaposed with fight scenes which become more and more volatile as soldiers wade through pulped paper-mud and drag bodies across the concrete floor.

The sound design is suitably battle worn, accompanying the slow motion death scenes and bloodied faces with war cries, horses galloping and whinnying and the squelch of bodily disembowelment.

Towards the end of the film, the factory becomes, once again, a work space.

As the workers in this supported employment service go about their tasks – stripping mattresses, recycling materials, packaging kindling, objects deconstructed and re-purposed – a discussion ensues about how the workers want to be treated: as individuals … or as soldiers.

Agincourt can be read as a contemporary comment on the viciousness and futility of war. But it is also a charge to action for those whose influence has been underestimated.

Agincourt is at ACMI, Melbourne, until February 1 2026.

Kate Hunter 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. Back to Back Theatre tackles an epic Shakespearian conflict – set in a factory, with cardboard props – https://theconversation.com/back-to-back-theatre-tackles-an-epic-shakespearian-conflict-set-in-a-factory-with-cardboard-props-257545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Rattenbury, Associate Professor in Physics, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

This week’s announcement of the loss of a methane-detecting satellite, just days before New Zealand was meant to take over mission control, is a blow to the country’s space research sector.

New Zealand invested NZ$29 million in the MethaneSat mission, built and operated by the US nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, with a goal of growing the nation’s space industry.

This would have been accomplished through gaining experience in operating a satellite at the University of Auckland’s Te Pūnaha Ātea Space Institute, and through research led by a team at Earth Sciences New Zealand to use the satellite to measure agricultural sources of methane.

But on June 20, the satellite lost power and contact with the ground, and appears to be irrecoverable. This is disappointing for everyone on the mission development and operations teams.

Having been in that position personally when my team lost a miniature satellite after a successful launch, I sympathise. But the benefits New Zealand hoped to gain from the MethaneSat mission will now be limited, at best, and questions need to be asked to learn from the failure.

Early issues and delays

The MethaneSat satellite launched in March 2024. New Zealand was meant to take over mission control by the end of last year, but problems with the satellite’s thrusters meant this was delayed to June this year.

The satellite’s main mission was to detect methane leaks from oil and gas production, but it was also used to track methane sources from agriculture.

New Zealand was not likely involved in the chain of events leading to the under-performance and delays, nor the eventual loss of the satellite. But as investors in the project, we are entitled to an explanation.

That a spacecraft fails in orbit is not surprising. The space environment is unforgiving. But there is a question about whether New Zealand should have taken a closer look “under the hood” before investing in MethaneSat.

The principle of caveat emptor (buyer beware) applies to spacecraft as much as to purchasing a car. While we were not involved in the MethaneSat mission design, satellite construction and testing, we were certainly entitled to relevant information to make a fully informed decision on whether or not to invest.

Questions remain. During the MethaneSat post-mortem, one could reasonably ask to what extent experts were consulted during the decision-making process to invest in the satellite mission, and who was applying due diligence on behalf of New Zealand taxpayers.

When earlier issues emerged, to what extent should New Zealand taxpayers, as investors, have been happy with explanations veiled in reported obligations of confidentiality or commercial sensitivity?

Lessons for future space missions

New Zealand has scientists and engineers working at publicly-funded universities who can contribute to future decision-making processes for the next taxpayer-funded space mission.

New Zealand scientists working in the space sector do so knowing full well that the nation’s capacity to fund space missions is limited. Apart from being hard, frustrating, rewarding and unforgiving, working in space is expensive – and there are often delays and setbacks.

Some of us working in New Zealand space research have been trying to work through how best to advise government on where to spend limited public funding. This will not be an easy task.

The Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) is an international organisation established in 1958 to promote global cooperation in space research. It provides a forum for the exchange of scientific results, sets standards for space data sharing, and advises on space policy and planetary protection.

New Zealand participates in COSPAR as a national member and its committee comprises space science researchers from across the country. As chair of the New Zealand COSPAR committee, I sent a letter to Minister of Space Judith Collins last year offering our services:

I believe closer collaboration between COSPAR’s initiatives and New Zealand’s aerospace goals would enhance our mutual objectives and strengthen our contribution to the global aerospace community. Specifically, we are uniquely placed to advise on the range of scientific endeavours currently underway […] that could be at the heart of a national space mission.

Close scrutiny needed

New Zealand has more talent and good research ideas than funding to support them. So there has to be a way of choosing between competing ideas.

Crucially, that selection process has to be fully transparent so the investors – New Zealand taxpayers – can have confidence their investment is being safely bestowed.

My vision is for a funding process for future space missions that addresses scientific goals relevant to New Zealand and takes advantage of the talent we have.
There will be applicants who miss out, as there always are in any competitive process. But I would like to see support given to unsuccessful applicants to improve their chances in subsequent attempts.

I work towards fostering the New Zealand space sector, especially in the areas where we can push back the boundaries of human knowledge via the safe, peaceful and sustainable use of space. This is the excitement I see reflected in the students I teach.

For a nation with ambitions to utilise space for science, technological development and commercial gain, we also have to acknowledge that failure is a part of that journey. To make the best use of our very limited resources, we must examine our processes in the fullest light of disclosure – regardless of whether the failure was technological or in our decision-making processes.

Nicholas James Rattenbury works for The University of Auckland. He has received funding from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and Royal Society Te Apārangi. He is affiliated with Te Pūnaha Ātea Space Institute. He is the current Chair of the New Zealand Committee of COSPAR.

None of the viewpoints expressed in this article necessarily reflect those held by any of the abovementioned organisations or any other organisation or entity mentioned in the article.

– ref. Lost in space: MethaneSat failed just as NZ was to take over mission control – here’s what we need to know now – https://theconversation.com/lost-in-space-methanesat-failed-just-as-nz-was-to-take-over-mission-control-heres-what-we-need-to-know-now-260407

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

Political and news cycles often work in a certain and predictable way. Issues flare like bushfires, then rage for weeks or even months, until they are finally extinguished by action or fade by being overtaken by the next big thing.

On two very different fronts this week, we’re reminded how these cycles work.

During the last term, the opposition constantly hammered the government over its handling of the former immigration detainees released after the High Court found they couldn’t be held indefinitely. These included people who had committed murder, child sex offences and violent assaults.

On Sunday, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke admitted in a television interview that the legislation the government passed to re-detain some of these people was, in effect, impossible to use. Burke’s comments attracted only limited attention.

The other reminder of an old story came when the Federal Court ordered a militant Muslim preacher to remove inflammatory lectures from the internet. He had lost a case brought by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry under Section 18C for the Racial Discrimination Act. More than a decade ago, political passions ran high in conservative circles about the alleged evils of 18C.

First to the Burke admission. Burke told Sky he had “a lot of resources” dedicated to trying to get applications to court for preventative detention orders. But “no one has come close to reaching the threshold that is in that legislation”. Burke insisted he was “not giving up”, but there is little reason to believe things will change. The opposition has suggested amending the preventative detention legislation, but Burke says that would hit a constitutional obstacle.

For a long time, the government had kept saying it was working up cases to put to the court (and given the impression action was close). But, realising the difficulty, it also passed legislation facilitating the deportation of these people to third countries. There are now three former detainees due to be deported to Nauru, following a financial agreement with that country. But there’s a hitch: their deportations are tied up in court appeals. (They are, however, able to be held in detention while the cases proceed.)

The challenge still presented by the former detainees in the community is no small matter, despite the political storm having calmed and the media interest dissipating.

In evidence in Senate estimates in March, the Department of Home Affairs said 300 people had been released from immigration detention as at the end of February. Of these, 104 had offended since release, and 30 were incarcerated (including on remand). Some 83 had only a state or territory criminal charge; seven only a Migration Act charge; 14 people had both a Migration Act charge and a state or territory charge. In recent weeks, one former detainee is alleged to have murdered a photographer in Melbourne.

The political context can be very relevant to whether the embers of an old issue re-spark into something major.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s decision last year to put Burke into home affairs was something of a political masterstroke. If Clare O’Neil and Andrew Giles had still been in their former respective portfolios of home affairs and immigration, the present failure to deal more successfully with the former detainees would have been a much bigger issue. Burke is skilled at throwing a blanket over contentious areas.

On the other side of politics, James Paterson was moved out of home affairs to become shadow finance minister in Sussan Ley’s reshuffle. Paterson pursued the former immigration detainees relentlessly. The new spokesmen, Andrew Hastie (home affairs) and Paul Scarr (immigration) haven’t hit their strides yet, and what they have said on the issue hasn’t grabbed much attention.

The government would have been under more pressure on the issue if parliament were sitting. But the new parliament doesn’t meet until July 22.

When it does, one of the new arrivals will be a former face, Liberal MP Tim Wilson. Way back when, Wilson was a player in the story of 18C. For him, the way 18C resurfaced this week contains more than a little irony.

In February 2014, Wilson took up his post of Human Rights Commissioner, appointed by the Abbott government with the special brief of promoting freedom of speech. (He was even dubbed the “freedom commissioner”.)

The Abbott government was strongly opposed to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which made it unlawful to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” a person or group because of their race or ethnicity.

The assault on 18C ran into vigorous opposition from ethnic and other groups, including the Executive Council of Australian Jewry. In the end, then prime minister Tony Abbott retreated. Wilson was disappointed, tweeting: “Disturbed to hear the government has backed down on 18c and will keep offensive speech illegal. Very disturbed.”

In his 2025 bid for election, Wilson – who had been member for Goldstein from 2016-2022 – was helped by the Jewish vote, after the rise of antisemitism.

The debate about free speech has moved on a great deal since the days of the Abbott government, when conservatives were particularly agitated about 18C following a court judgement against journalist Andrew Bolt relating what he has written about some fair-skinned Indigenous people.

Today’s debate is in the context of “hate speech” associated with the Middle East conflict. Hate-crime laws have provoked another fierce round of controversy about the appropriate limits to put on “free speech”.

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry brought its case under the 18C civil law against preacher William Haddad, from Western Sydney, after no action was taken by the authorities under the criminal law.

Haddad described Jews as “a treacherous people, a vile people”, among other offensive remarks, that included saying: “The majority of banks are owned by the Jews, who are happy to give people loans, knowing that it’s almost impossible to pay it back”. Haddad argued in his defence his lectures drew on religious writings, relating them to contemporary events, and were delivered for educational purposes.

Finding against Haddad, Judge Angus Stewart said the lectures conveyed “disparaging imputations about Jewish people and that in all the circumstances were reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate and intimidate Jews in Australia”.

Reflecting on this week’s decision, George Brandis – who was attorney-general during the 18C furore – says, “My view hasn’t changed. It should not in a free country be either criminally or civilly actionable to say something that merely offends. However, in this case the conduct went far beyond mere offence, to intimidation. It did not require 18C to get the redress that was sought in the case.”

Wilson does not wish to re-enter the debate. The new opposition industrial relations spokesman says his focus is “my portfolio responsibilities”.

It’s likely many of those who fought 18C years ago hold to their original view, while having to applaud the judgement made under it this week. That’s another irony.

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. Grattan on Friday: how two once hot-button issues this week barely sparked media and political interest – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-how-two-once-hot-button-issues-this-week-barely-sparked-media-and-political-interest-259686

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Harper, Lecturer, School of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney

This week, a Melbourne childcare worker was charged over alleged sexual abuse of young children in his care. Families are justifiably appalled and furious – with 1,200 children urged to be tested for a sexually transmitted infection.

This is the latest in a string of serious safety concerns this year alone, exposing systemic issues in our early childhood sector.

Recent investigations have exposed reports of neglect, with inadequate food, unhygienic nappy changes, and physical and sexual abuse at daycare services.

Unfortunately, there are too many incidents to be seen as “one-offs”.

But how widespread are unsafe or abusive practices in Australian childcare centres? The short answer is, we don’t actually know.

The number of ‘serious incidents’ in childcare

The national childcare quality authority reports on the number of “serious incidents” in childcare services.

This includes the death of a child, and serious injury, illness, or trauma requiring urgent medical attention. It also includes a child going missing or unknowingly being locked in or out of the service. But it doesn’t technically include child abuse. Unless, for example, the abuse resulted in a situation where the child required urgent medical attention.

The national childcare quality authority’s data shows there has been a slow but steady increase in the rate of serious incidents in the eight years to 2023–24.

For example, the rate of reported serious incidents in 2023–24 was 148 per 100 approved services. This is higher than the 139 reported in 2022–23, and 124 in 2021–22.

Higher-quality services have been found to have higher rates of reporting for serious incidents. This may be because they have clearer processes, more experienced or qualified educators, or higher ratios of educators to children. We also know larger services tend to report more serious incidents than smaller ones.

For-profit services have been found to have higher breach rates than not-for-profits. A breach is any instance where a regulation or law was not followed.

What about under-reporting?

Some incidents may not even be reported in the first place. Under-reporting could occur unintentionally. For example, the service is unaware of an incident, or educators do not recognise what constitutes a reportable incident, or they are not sure how to report the different kinds of reportable incidents.

But unfortunately, under-reporting may happen intentionally. When a service reports an incident to their state or territory regulatory authority, they may be subject to an investigation and/or heightened scrutiny in future. This could be a deterrent for some services to report incidents.

What about child abuse?

At the moment, if physical or sexual abuse of a child is suspected at a service, incidents and allegations should be reported through a national online portal within seven days.

The federal government has just announced from September 1 this year, the window will come down to 24 hours.

The portal is provided by the national childcare quality authority, but it can be accessed by state and territory regulatory authorities.

But childcare services are also subject to state and territory child protection legislation. The definitions and reporting requirements for different child abuse situations vary across states and territories.

This makes the data messy and difficult to track.

There are other reporting requirements

Services also need to lodge other kinds of notifications relating to children’s health and safety. Examples might include incidents of broken glass in a centre, a severe infection outbreak, a damaged fence, or the presence of someone who was not authorised to be there.

Again, some of these incidents go through a national online portal, whereas others might go to state or territory child protection authorities, departments of education, or departments of health.

As the national quality authority noted in its 2023 report into childcare safety, this means different organisations are collecting information and may not always use the same terminology or reporting timeframes. They don’t necessarily share the information they have.

This lack of coordination also means we do not have consistent national data collection on child abuse and other aspects of child welfare in daycare centres.

What now?

We need a national, consistent approach to collecting and sharing data about safety in all childcare services. This would require a committed collaboration between state and federal agencies.

At the moment, crucial information about what is happening in services is not shared between jurisdictions. Just as we do not have good information about high-risk potential employees (in part, due to issues with the working with children checks system).

Read more:
What are working with children checks? Why aren’t they keeping kids safe at daycare?

But on top of fixing how data is collected and shared, we also need to look at how it is reported in the first place.

All early childhood educators should have child protection training, to increase understanding across the sector. We also need simpler and nationally consistent procedures for services, so it is easier for educators to recognise and report child safety incidents.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, you can call 1800 Respect on 1800 737 732, Lifeline on 131 114, Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800, or Bravehearts (counselling and support for survivors of child sexual abuse) on 1800 272 831.

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

– ref. How many serious incidents are happening in Australian childcare centres? We don’t really know – https://theconversation.com/how-many-serious-incidents-are-happening-in-australian-childcare-centres-we-dont-really-know-260410

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nial Wheate, Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University

Side effects from taking too much vitamin B6 – including nerve damage – may be more widespread than we think, Australia’s medicines regulator says.

In an ABC report earlier this week, a spokesperson for the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) says it may have underestimated the extent of the side effects from vitamin B6 supplements.

However, there are proposals to limit sales of high-dose versions due to safety concerns.

A pathologist who runs a clinic that tests vitamin B6 in blood samples from across Australia also appeared on the program. He told the ABC that data from May suggests 4.5% of samples tested had returned results “very likely” indicating nerve damage.

So what are vitamin B6 supplements? How can they be toxic? And which symptoms do you need to watch out for?

What is vitamin B6?

Vitamin B6, also known as pyridoxine, plays an important role in keeping the body healthy. It is involved in the metabolism of proteins, carbohydrates and fats in food. It is also important for the production of neurotransmitters – chemical messengers in the brain that maintain its function and regulate your mood.

Vitamin B6 also supports the immune system by helping to make antibodies, which fight off infections. And it is needed to produce haemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen around the body.

Some women take a vitamin B6 supplement when pregnant. It is thought this helps reduce the nausea associated with the early stages of pregnancy. Some women also take it to help with premenstrual syndrome.

However, most people don’t need, and won’t benefit from, a vitamin B6 supplement. That’s because you get enough vitamin B6 from your diet through meat, breakfast cereal, fruit and vegetables.

You don’t need much. A dose of 1.3–1.7 milligrams a day is enough for most adults.

Currently, vitamin B6 supplements with a daily dose of 5–200mg can be sold over the counter at health food stores, supermarkets and pharmacies.

Because of safety concerns, the TGA is proposing limiting their sale to pharmacies, and only after consultation with a pharmacist.

Daily doses higher than 200mg already need a doctor’s prescription. So under the proposal that would stay the same.

What happens if you take too much?

If you take too much vitamin B6, in most cases the excess will be excreted in your urine and most people won’t experience side effects. But there is a growing concern about long-time, high-dose use.

A side effect the medical community is worried about is peripheral neuropathy – where there is damage to the nerves outside the brain and spinal cord. This results in pain, numbness or weakness, usually in your hands and feet. We don’t yet know exactly how this happens.

In most reported cases, these symptoms disappear once you stop taking the supplement. But for some people it may take three months to two years before they feel completely better.

There is growing, but sometimes contradictory, evidence that high doses (more than 50mg a day) for extended periods can result in serious side effects.

A study from the 1990s followed 70 patients for five years who took a dose of 100 to 150mg a day. There were no reported cases of neuropathy.

But more recent studies show high rates of side effects.

A 2023 case report provides details of a man who was taking multiple supplements. This resulted in a daily combined 95mg dose of vitamin B6, and he experienced neuropathy.

Another report describes seven cases of neuropathy linked to drinking energy drinks containing vitamin B6.

Reports to the TGA’s database of adverse events notifications (a record of reported side effects) shows 174 cases of neuropathy linked with vitamin B6 use since 2023.

What should I do if I take vitamin B6?

The current advice is that someone who takes a dose of 50mg a day or more, for more than six months, should be monitored by a health-care professional. So if you regularly take vitamin B6 supplements you should discuss continued use with your doctor or pharmacist.

There are three side effects to watch out for, the first two related to neuropathy:

1. numbness or pain in the feet and hands

2. difficulty with balance and coordination as a result of muscle weakness

3. heartburn and nausea.

If you have worrying side effects after taking vitamin B6 supplements, contact your state’s poison information centre on 13 11 26 for advice.

Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and was previously a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. He is a member of the Haleon Australia Pty Ltd Pain Advisory Board. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design and testing.

Slade Matthews provides scientific evaluations to the Therapeutic Goods Administration as a member of the Therapeutic Goods Assessment and Advisory Panel. Slade serves on the NSW Poisons Advisory Committee for NSW Health as the minister-nominated pharmacologist appointed by the Governor of NSW.

– ref. Too much vitamin B6 can be toxic. 3 symptoms to watch out for – https://theconversation.com/too-much-vitamin-b6-can-be-toxic-3-symptoms-to-watch-out-for-260400

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charlotte Gupta, Senior Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Appleton Institute, HealthWise Research Group, CQUniversity Australia

Have you heard people say eating cheese before bed will cause you to have vivid dreams or nightmares?

It’s a relatively common idea. And this week, a new study has landed this suggestion back in the spotlight.

But is it true? Let’s unpack the evidence.

A gouda night’s sleep?

Canadian researchers recently investigated this idea in a sample of 1,082 undergraduate psychology students. The students completed a survey, which included questions about how they perceived their diet influenced their sleep and dreams.

Some 40% of participants reported certain foods impacted their sleep, with 25% of the whole sample claiming certain foods worsened their sleep, and 20% reporting certain foods improved their sleep.

Only 5.5% of respondents believed what they ate affected the nature of their dreams. But many of these people thought sweets or dairy products (such as cheese) made their dreams more strange or disturbing and worsened their sleep.

In contrast, participants reported fruits, vegetables and herbal teas led to better sleep.

This study used self-reporting, meaning the results rely on the participants recalling and reporting information about their sleep and dreams accurately. This could have affected the results.

It’s also possible participants were already familiar with the notion that cheese causes nightmares, especially given they were psychology students, many of whom may have studied sleep and dreaming.

This awareness could have made them more likely to notice or perceive their sleep was disrupted after eating dairy. In other words, the idea cheese leads to nightmares may have acted like a self-fulfilling prophecy and results may overestimate the actual likelihood of strange dreams.

Nonetheless, these findings show some people perceive a connection between what they eat and how they dream.

While there’s no evidence to prove cheese causes nightmares, there is evidence that does explain a link.

The science behind cheese and nightmares

Humans are diurnal creatures, meaning our body is primed to be asleep at night and awake during the day. Eating cheese before bed means we’re challenging the body with food at a time when it really doesn’t want to be eating.

At night, our physiological systems are not primed to digest food. For example, it takes longer for food to move through our digestive tract at night compared with during the day.

If we eat close to going to sleep, our body has to process and digest the food while we’re sleeping. This is a bit like running through mud – we can do it, but it’s slow and inefficient.

Cheese can be particularly challenging to digest at night because of high concentrations of fat and protein, which slows down our digestion.

If your body is processing and digesting food instead of focusing all its resources on sleep, this can affect your shut-eye. Research has shown eating close to bedtime reduces our sleep quality, particularly our time spent in rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, which is the stage of sleep associated with vivid dreams.

People will have an even harder time digesting cheese at night if they’re lactose intolerant, which might mean they experience even greater impacts on their sleep. This follows what the Canadian researchers found in their study, with lactose intolerant participants reporting poorer sleep quality and more nightmares.

It’s important to note we might actually have vivid dreams or nightmares every night – what could change is whether we’re aware of the dreams and can remember them when we wake up.

Poor sleep quality often means we wake up more during the night. If we wake up during REM sleep, research shows we’re more likely to report vivid dreams or nightmares that we mightn’t even remember if we hadn’t woken up during them.

This is very relevant for the cheese and nightmares question. Put simply, eating before bed impacts our sleep quality, so we’re more likely to wake up during our nightmares and remember them.

Can I still have brie before bedtime?

Don’t panic – I’m not here to tell you to give up your cheesy evenings. But what we eat before bed can make a real difference to how well we sleep, so timing matters.

General sleep hygiene guidelines suggest avoiding meals at least two hours before bed. So even if you’re eating a very cheese-heavy meal, you have a window of time before bed to digest the meal and drift off to a nice peaceful sleep.

How about other dairy products?

Cheese isn’t the only dairy product which may influence our sleep. Most of us have heard about the benefits of having a warm glass of milk before bed.

Milk can be easier to digest than cheese. In fact, milk is a good choice in the evening, as it contains tryptophan, an amino acid that helps promote sleep.

Nonetheless, we still don’t want to be challenging our body with too much dairy before bed. Participants in the Canadian study did report nightmares after dairy, and milk close to bed might have contributed to this.

While it’s wise to steer clear of food (especially cheese) in the two hours before lights out, there’s no need to avoid cheese altogether. Enjoy that cheesy pasta or cheese board, just give your body time to digest before heading off to sleep. If you’re having a late night cheese craving, opt for something small. Your sleep (and your dreams) will thank you.

Charlotte Gupta 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. Does eating cheese before bed really give you nightmares? Here’s what the science says – https://theconversation.com/does-eating-cheese-before-bed-really-give-you-nightmares-heres-what-the-science-says-260205

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Omid Ghasemi, Research Associate in Behavioural Science at the Institute for Climate Risk & Response, UNSW Sydney

Climate change has made extreme weather events such as bushfires and floods more frequent and more likely in recent years, and the trend is expected to continue. These events have led to human and animal deaths, harmed physical and mental health, and damaged properties and infrastructure.

Will firsthand experience of these events change how people think and act about climate change, making it seem immediate and local rather than a distant or future problem?

Research so far has offered a mixed picture. Some studies suggest going through extreme weather can make people more likely to believe in climate change, worry about it, support climate policies, and vote for Green parties. But other studies have found no such effects on people’s beliefs, concern, or behaviour.

New research led by Viktoria Cologna at ETH Zurich in Switzerland may help to explain what’s going on. Using data from around the world, the study suggests simple exposure to extreme weather events does not affect people’s view of climate action – but linking those events to climate change can make a big difference.

Global opinion, global weather

The new study, published in Nature Climate Change, looked at the question of extreme weather and climate opinion using two global datasets.

The first is the Trust in Science and Science-related Populism (TISP) survey, which includes responses from more than 70,000 people in 68 countries. It measures public support for climate policies and the extent that people think climate change is behind increases in extreme weather.

The second dataset estimates how much of each country’s population has been affected each year by events such as droughts, floods, heatwaves and storms. These estimates are based on detailed models and historical climate records.

Public support for climate policies

The survey measured public support for climate policy by asking people how much they supported five specific actions to cut carbon emissions. These included raising carbon taxes, improving public transport, using more renewable energy, protecting forests and land, and taxing carbon-heavy foods.

Responses ranged from 1 (not at all) to 3 (very much). On average, support was fairly strong, with an average rating of 2.37 across the five policies. Support was especially high in parts of South Asia, Africa, the Americas and Oceania, but lower in countries such as Russia, Czechia and Ethiopia.

Exposure to extreme weather events

The study found most people around the world have experienced heatwaves and heavy rainfall in recent decades. Wildfires affected fewer people in many European and North American countries, but were more common in parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Cyclones mostly impacted North America and Asia, while droughts affected large populations in Asia, Latin America and Africa. River flooding was widespread across most regions, except Oceania.

Do people in countries with higher exposure to extreme weather events show greater support for climate policies? This study found they don’t.

In most cases, living in a country where more people are exposed to disasters was not reflected in stronger support for climate action.

Wildfires were the only exception. Countries with more wildfire exposure showed slightly higher support, but this link disappeared once factors such as land size and overall climate belief were considered.

In short, just experiencing more disasters does not seem to translate into increased support for mitigation efforts.

Seeing the link between weather and climate change

In the global survey, people were asked how much they think climate change has increased the impact of extreme weather over recent decades. On average, responses were moderately high (3.8 out of 5) suggesting that many people do link recent weather events to climate change.

Such an attribution was especially strong in Latin America, but lower in parts of Africa (such as Congo and Ethiopia) and Northern Europe (such as Finland and Norway).

Crucially, people who more strongly believed climate change had worsened these events were also more likely to support climate policies. In fact, this belief mattered more for policy support than whether they had actually experienced the events firsthand.

What does this study tell us?

While public support for climate policies is relatively high around the world, even more support is needed to introduce stronger, more ambitious measures. It might seem reasonable to expect that feeling the effects of climate change would push people to act, but this study suggests that doesn’t always happen.

Prior research shows less dramatic and chronic events like rainfall or temperature anomalies have less influence on public views than more acute hazards like floods or bushfires. Even then, the influence on beliefs and behaviour tends to be slow and limited.

This study shows climate impacts alone may not change minds. However, it also highlights what may affect public thinking: helping people recognise the link between climate change and extreme weather events.

In countries such as Australia, climate change makes up only about 1% of media coverage. What’s more, most of the coverage focuses on social or political aspects rather than scientific, ecological, or economic impacts.

Many stories about disasters linked to climate change also fail to mention the link, or indeed mention climate change at all. Making these connections clearer may encourage stronger public support for climate action.

Omid Ghasemi receives funding from the Australian Academy of Science. He was a member of the TISP consortium and a co-author of the dataset used in this study.

– ref. Experiencing extreme weather and disasters is not enough to change views on climate action, study shows – https://theconversation.com/experiencing-extreme-weather-and-disasters-is-not-enough-to-change-views-on-climate-action-study-shows-260308

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Kerry, Lecturer in Sociology, Charles Darwin University

Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, turns 90 this week – a milestone that’s reigniting speculation over his eventual successor.

While the Dalai Lama is the face of Buddhism to many people across the world, he is actually the head of just one tradition within Tibetan Buddhism known as the Gelug school.

Tibetans believe the Dalai Lama to be the manifestation of Avalokiteśvara, the bodhisattva of compassion, and the “one who hears the cries of the world”.

Read more:
What is a bodhisattva? A scholar of Buddhism explains

Avalokiteśvara is prayed to across Asia, and is known as Chenrezig in Tibet, Guanyin in China, and Kannon or Kanzeon in Japan.

In Buddhism, a bodhisattva is a person, or a mythic representation of a person, who denies themselves enlightenment until all beings can achieve enlightenment. Avalokiteśvara appears to living beings in whatever form could best save them.

Although Avalokiteśvara originated in India as a man, they can be depicted as either a man, woman, or non-binary being. This gender fluidity has led to them being revered as a trans icon in the West.

I have spent the past five years investigating the lives of queer Buddhists in Australia. As part of this research, I have surveyed and interviewed 109 LGBTQIA+ Buddhist Australians.

The words of these individuals, and my own experience as a genderqueer Buddhist person, reveal how the Dalai Lama emerges an an unlikely inspiration for individuals sharing a trans and Buddhist identity.

Letting go of binaries

Through my work I have found LGBTQIA+ Buddhist Australians are generally reluctant to disclose their queer identities to their Buddhist communities, and may be told to remain silent about their identities.

For some, Avalokiteśvara’s gender fluidity has been important for reaffirming both their queer and Buddhist selves.

One Buddhist trans woman, Annie*, told me Guanyin had special significance for her. Annie spoke about Avalokiteśvara travelling from India to China as a male, before “transitioning” to the mainly female presentation of Guanyin over centuries. Annie said:

I pray to her regularly and often find I get a response. Of course the enlightened state is beyond all manner of worldly binaries, including gender, and is immensely important in letting go of binaries in my journey towards enlightenment.

Walter* has had a long fascination with depictions of Avalokiteśvara that “showed ‘him’ looking effeminate and handsome, with a cute moustache […] A little bit homoerotic, a little bit provocatively gender fluid, as seen through my eyes”.

Walter adds:

A great many people in different cultures, across history, worship these figures. Clever how this figure can morph into a radical trans! We all want to feel comforted, safe and saved from suffering.

As queer Buddhists, we turn to to Avalokitesvara to feel “comforted, safe and saved”.

Another interviewee, Brian*, told me about a Tibetan invocation practice he did with a senior Tibetan monk, in which he encountered Guanyin:

[She] took my right hand and passed some sort of power into it. She never spoke to me but just returned the way she had come. I was given some sort of gift, that’s all I know.

Since this experience, Brian has “always felt a strong connection to the feminine through her”. He has a special Guanyin altar on his farm.

You can’t be what you can’t see

Some Buddhists deny Avalokiteśvara’s queerness.

Asher*, a genderqueer Buddhist I interviewed, told me about a teacher who said to them, “there was absolutely no way a gay person could be enlightened”.

Asher retorted:

What about Kanzeon, the bodhisattva of compassion, who has manifested as both male and female and, in the stories from Japan, has had erotic relationships with monks?

The teacher dismissed this, replying, “those are just stories”.

In her 1996 book Transgender Warriors, trans activist Leslie Feinberg writes: “I couldn’t find myself in history. No one like me seemed to have ever existed.”

Similarly, Annie evoked the statement: “You can’t be what you can’t see.”

I, too, experience this need to see myself as a genderqueer, non-binary practitioner of Zen Buddhism. It was only through doing these interviews with other queer Buddhists that I came to realise Guanyin, a trans icon, is a statuette which adorns the altar of the Buddhist group I belong to.

Knowing Avalokitesvara may be depicted as a man, woman, or non-binary being lets us queer Buddhists know we exist – and have always existed – within Buddhism.

Despite being a cisgender man who has been somewhat inconsistent in his support of queer people, the Dalai Lama, as the manifestation of the bodhisattva of compassion, is a possible spiritual link between today’s queer Buddhists and centuries-long traditions of gender transition and fluidity.

*Names have been changed.

Stephen Kerry 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 Dalai Lama is a cisgender man – yet he has an unexpected connection to the trans community – https://theconversation.com/the-dalai-lama-is-a-cisgender-man-yet-he-has-an-unexpected-connection-to-the-trans-community-260106

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Delanie Woodlock, Senior research fellow, UNSW Sydney

Australians are reeling from the news that Victorian childcare worker Joshua Dale Brown has been charged with more than 70 offences against children, including rape.

As 1,200 children await results for sexually transmitted infections, a horror no parent should ever face, media commentary has begun to focus on how this case might have implications for male childcare workers.

Early childhood education is a heavily female-dominated field, and past inquiries into child sexual abuse by male educators have found that, in efforts to avoid appearing discriminatory, male workers are often subject to less scrutiny. This dynamic is compounded by efforts for gender balance in childcare, particularly for the perceived benefits of male role models.

Ironically, this fear of seeming biased can create the very conditions that offenders exploit – grooming colleagues, parents and children to commit abuse while hidden in plain sight.

While it is an uncomfortable fact to confront, research shows men with a sexual interest in children are disproportionately more likely to work with children, including in early education and care. Recent data show that one in 20 men in the Australian community are motivated offenders (individuals who reported both sexual interest in and offending against children). However, they are almost three times more likely to work with children compared to other men.

Unfortunately, systematic data on child sexual abuse in childcare settings are limited. However, existing findings align with the only comprehensive study conducted on this issue, which followed the highly publicised McMartin Preschool trial in the United States.

This study examined cases from 1983 to 1985, and identified 270 daycare centres where 1,639 children were found to have experienced substantiated sexual abuse. Although men made up only about 5% of childcare staff, they were responsible for 60% of the offences. The abuse was often severe, with 93% of victims subjected to some form of penetrative sexual violence.

Those who deliberately pursue employment with children to abuse them are often referred to as “professional perpetrators”. These individuals typically have multiple victims and pose a high risk of repeated harm.

In our current research on serial child sex offenders in childcare settings in Australia and internationally, we identified six cases involving between seven and 87 confirmed victims under the age of five. Five of the offenders were male and one was female. Together, they sexually abused at least 245 children.

There were striking similarities across these cases. Offenders primarily targeted pre-verbal children, evaded detection for long periods, and were only exposed through external investigations, most often related to the possession and distribution of child sexual abuse material.

Much like the details emerging from the case of Joshua Dale Brown in Victoria, none of these offenders was uncovered through internal safeguarding systems.

As is also alleged in the case of Brown, the perpetrators in our case studies were not isolated offenders. They were operating within online communities that normalise and reinforce abusive behaviour and the sharing of child sex abuse material of children who were in their care.

If, as some suggest, male workers are subject to close and sometimes unfair scrutiny, these cases highlight a troubling contradiction. Despite this purported scrutiny, child sexual abuse by male staff can and does occur over extended periods without detection in childcare settings. In fact, evidence from another case suggests staff are often hesitant to raise concerns about male colleagues for fear of being perceived as discriminatory.

It is important to highlight that although women comprise a small minority of child sexual abuse offenders, the reluctance to view women, particularly mothers, as potential perpetrators can also contribute to such abuse going undetected.

There also needs to be greater awareness of how these offenders infiltrate and groom institutions. In the case studies we analysed, offenders were seen as kind and competent workers. They were often friendly with management or held senior positions themselves, and would socialise outside of work with families whose children they cared for. Even when whistleblowers raised an alarm about the offenders, these concerns were often dismissed, with some offenders even being promoted.

While most child sexual abuse occurs within families, institutional abuse is no less serious. Unlike families, institutions that work with children can be effectively regulated, making such abuse entirely preventable through robust and consistently enforced safeguarding measures.

Since children under five may not be developmentally capable of reporting abuse, safeguards must be proactive and preventative. Childcare centres should implement surveillance measures in most areas and observe the “four eyes” rule, requiring at least two adults to be present during nappy changes and other care tasks. A strict no-phone policy could also reduce the risk of image-based offences.

Moreover, we must confront the uncomfortable truth that some men are drawn to work with children because of a sexual interest in them. Truly centring child protection in early education means prioritising children’s safety above profit, reputational concerns, and fears of appearing biased against men. Preventing child sexual abuse in childcare is not only possible, it is a collective responsibility we must all uphold.

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. Childcare sexual abuse is mostly committed by men. Failing to recognise that puts children at risk – https://theconversation.com/childcare-sexual-abuse-is-mostly-committed-by-men-failing-to-recognise-that-puts-children-at-risk-260292

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Freya Higgins-Desbiolles, Adjunct professor and adjunct senior lecturer in tourism management, University of South Australia

A media frenzy erupted over the recent Jeff Bezos “wedding of the century” in Venice.

Also notable were the public protests that showed tensions around tourism, especially mass tourism, are increasing. Leading the action was the activist collective No space for Bezos, which declared:

[This wedding] is at the expense of those who live, work, and study in this city [and who are] already faced with countless difficulties after years of mass tourism.

They complained Venice had been turned into a “private amusement park” for the rich. Locals were fighting for what they describe as a “living Venice”, not a tourism playground.

The backlash against overtourism is sparking protests across several countries. It has even prompted the US State Department to urge travellers to be cautious when heading to Europe this summer.

Growth at all costs

Local residents feel their communities are being reshaped to cater for visitors, and are pushing back against what they call the “touristification” of place.

Touristification describes a situation where locals fear their home towns and cities are being developed, designed and managed to attract and accommodate tourists.

This touristification process benefits commerce and industries that profit from catering to visitors. Everyone else misses out, or is literally pushed out by rising housing costs.

At the heart of this polarising issue are some key questions. Are such places “tourism destinations” or do they belong to the local people who live there? Whose interests should prevail when tourism growth exacerbates tensions?

These issues are being thoroughly investigated, including through a project I am involved in – Chronic Emergencies and Ecosocial Transformations in Touristified Coastal Spaces. Such research is focused on understanding the problems of tourism and co-designing solutions with communities.

Continual growth in tourism is one of the guiding principles the industry promotes. It is this “growth fetish” that is catalysing overtourism and unsustainability. This is when tourism exceeds the local social and ecological carrying capacity of a place.

It means there are simply too many tourists, and the impact is poorly managed.

Aussie hotspots

The dynamics of overtourism are emerging in some Australian locations. This includes popular coastal destinations such as Byron Bay and small towns along the scenic Great Ocean Road.

Some places are overwhelmed by short-term overtourism. This may be the result of mega cruise ship visits or viral postings on social media, such as images of Western Australia’s popular pink lakes.

Byron Bay offers a telling example. It has evolved from a place attractive for alternative lifestyles, to a magnet for social media influencers and the location for the Netflix series Byron Baes.

As a result, Byron Bay is the epitome of overtourism in Australia. Local housing, for instance, is being sacrificed for holiday rentals, facilitated by agencies such as Airbnb.

Not surprisingly, there is growing local resistance to tourism overwhelming the sense of place.

Is Australia in danger of touristification?

If we aren’t careful, popular opposition to mass tourism will continue to grow here in Australia.

But whether we see the European phenomenon of touristification is harder to discern.

It may already be evident when environmental and social regulations are overturned to make development processes more friendly to the tourism industry.

Projects can be fast tracked if they are declared a high-priority “major development”, which allows governments to override restrictive regulations. Anti-red-tape rhetoric is clear in Queensland’s tourism strategy harnessing the growth power of the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Another example of touristification may be when taxpayer-funded events are run for branding presence on a national or international stage rather, than for the benefit of the surrounding community.

For example, the South Australian government found itself in hot water when its tourism commission held a marketing event featuring a Sam Smith concert at d’Arenberg winery. Social media influencers were invited to attend – many from interstate with all expenses paid – but locals weren’t welcome.

It also occurs when public commons are appropriated for tourism purposes, including national parks and protected areas, public spaces and beaches.

Another example – again from South Australia – involves the decision to move the annual LIV Golf tournament to the Adelaide Parklands from 2028. The state government is being accused of a public land grab. The Adelaide community loves these heritage listed parklands and has resisted attempts to co-opt their use for private interests for decades.

Reclaimining a sense of place

Ultimately, in places like Venice, Bali and even in Byron Bay, local communities do not feel heard or empowered by tourism models which are focused on growth.

Their protest actions are designed to ensure their quality of life is not undermined in the process of catering to tourists. It is a struggle for reclaiming places as local people’s homes, rather than as tourist destinations.

While locations can be shared, tourism must be better managed so locals don’t find their homes unrecognisable – or even worse, find themselves displaced.

Freya Higgins-Desbiolles is a collaborator on a project led by colleagues at the University of the Balearic Islands entitled ‘Chronic Emergencies and Ecosocial Transformations in Touristified Coastal Spaces’. This article is part of the R+D+i PID2022-137648OB-C21 financed by MICIU/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and by “ERDF, EU”.

– ref. Overtourism is reshaping communities in Europe – could Australia be next? – https://theconversation.com/overtourism-is-reshaping-communities-in-europe-could-australia-be-next-260173

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Westrupp, Associate Professor in Psychology, Deakin University

Hearing about child abuse in trusted places such as childcare centres is every parent’s worst nightmare.

So, how can we talk to our kids about it and help them stay safe?

While it’s not always possible to prevent abuse – and it’s never the victim’s responsibility – there are practical, age-appropriate ways to help children trust their instincts and feel confident to speak up.

These conversations don’t have to be frightening. They’re about teaching kids body safety, boundaries and trust in a calm, shame-free way.

Here’s what parents and carers can do right now and some resources that might help.

Use real names for body parts

Many of us grew up in families where private parts were given nicknames or not mentioned at all. Basic body functions were treated as embarrassing or joked about. But when we flinch or make jokes, we teach our children these topics shouldn’t be spoken about.

Instead, we need to speak about bodies in a clear, matter-of-fact way.

Research shows one of the simplest and most effective protective factors for children is teaching them correct names for their genitals – penis, vulva, vagina, anus, bottom – without shame or secrecy.

Using the right words gives children the language to ask questions and tell a trusted adult if something feels wrong.

We can use everyday moments, such as bath time or getting dressed, to weave these words in. While your child is in the bath you might say: “Have you cleaned your vulva/penis? This is your special area and it’s up to you to look after it.”

It’s also important to explain, in simple terms, that some things are just for adults. This isn’t about making the topic scary, but about setting safe boundaries: “Sex is for grown-ups. It’s not for children, and it’s never OK for an adult or another child to involve you in anything like that.”

If you’re unsure how to begin, children’s books about bodies and private parts can help start the conversation. Here are some of my favourites, for toddlers up to late primary school:

• My Underpants Rule (for toddlers and preschoolers)

• The Amazing True Story of How Babies Are Made (for toddlers and preschoolers)

• Respect, Consent, Boundaries and Being in Charge of You (for primary school children)

• Welcome to Consent (for primary school children)

• Let’s Talk About Body Boundaries Consent & Respect (for preschoolers and primary school children)

• Welcome to Your Period (for pre-adolescent children).

Respect their ‘no’

Children are often taught to be polite and do as they’re told. While manners matter, this can sometimes teach children not to trust their own instincts.

It’s vital for children to know they are in charge of their own bodies: they get to decide what happens to them.

This means they never have to hug, kiss or touch anyone if they don’t want to, not even close family members. As parents, this can feel socially awkward. But we can help by offering alternatives, such as high five, a wave or just saying hello.

When we respect children saying “no” to safe adults, we reinforce that their boundaries matter and they always have a right to speak up.

Trusting our children helps them learn to trust themselves.

Encourage them to listen to their in-built sense when something isn’t right – an “uh-oh” feeling in their tummy. Let them know: “If someone ever makes you feel weird or yucky inside, you can always tell me, even if someone tells you not to. I’ll always listen and believe you.”

This helps build the confidence to speak up if something doesn’t feel right, whether it’s with another child on a play date, an adult at school, or even a date when they’re older.

Most importantly, it sends the message that adults will listen, believe and protect them.

Secrets vs surprises

From a young age, children can understand safe grown-ups don’t ask them to keep secrets.

It’s helpful to explain the difference between a secret and a surprise.

Surprises are fun and temporary, like hiding a birthday present, and are always revealed.

Secrets are about hiding something for a long time, and can make people feel scared or sad. You might say: “You can tell me anything. You won’t get in trouble, even if an adult says it’s a secret.”

How to listen and what to look for

Sometimes children can’t find the words or feel too scared to speak up. They might not fully understand what happened until they’re older.

One of the most protective things you can do is remind your child it’s never too late to tell you if something’s worrying them. If they raise something from the past, stay calm, listen and thank them for trusting you.

If your child ever discloses something distressing:

• take a deep breath before you respond

• let them know you believe them

• avoid asking lots of detailed questions and just listen.

Seek professional help if needed. This might mean talking to your GP, calling a child protection helpline or speaking to a trusted mental health professional.

Not all children will disclose abuse directly. Look for sudden changes in behaviouror language that seems too mature, fear of certain people or places, regression such as bedwetting or nightmares.

These signs don’t automatically mean abuse has occurred. But they are cues to gently check in, ask open questions and get help if needed.

You don’t have to do this perfectly. Small conversations, repeated over time, help protect children and show them you’re always there to listen.

If this story has raised any issues for you, please contact one of the services below:

• 1800RESPECT, national counselling helpline: 1800 737 732
• Bravehearts, counselling and support for survivors of child sexual abuse: 1800 272 831
• Australian Childhood Foundation, counselling provider: 1800 991 099
• Lifeline, 24-hour crisis support and suicide prevention: 13 11 14
• Care Leavers Australia Network: 1800 008 774
• PartnerSPEAK, peer support for non-offending partners: (03) 9018 7872.

Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is affiliated with the Parenting and Family Research Alliance, Editor-in-Chief of Mental Health & Prevention, and is a registered clinical psychologist.

– ref. How should I talk to my kids about abuse and body safety? – https://theconversation.com/how-should-i-talk-to-my-kids-about-abuse-and-body-safety-260309

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cairnduff, Lecturer in Media and Communications, The University of Melbourne

The reinstatement of artist Khaled Sabsabi and curator Michael Dagostino as Australia’s representatives for the 2026 Venice Biennale closes a bruising recent cultural episode and exposes the fragility of the systems meant to protect artistic freedom in Australia.

An independent review released this week confirms this was not simply a communications misstep.

It was a full-scale institutional failure inside Australia’s peak cultural agency, Creative Australia, marked by poor risk management, inadequate escalation protocols, and a fundamental confusion about how to respond when artistic expression meets political controversy.

What triggered the collapse

The crisis began in February, just six days after Sabsabi and Dagostino were announced as Australia’s representatives.

In a sudden reversal, Creative Australia’s board rescinded their appointment.

At the centre of the backlash were two of Sabsabi’s earlier works – one referencing Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, the other depicting a view of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

Coalition senator Claire Chandler raised the issue in Parliament. That evening the board held an emergency meeting. The artists were removed, with Creative Australia citing concerns about “a prolonged and divisive debate” that posed “an unacceptable risk to public support for Australia’s artistic community”.

The decision triggered resignations, protests and widespread condemnation.

Mikala Tai, Head of Visual Arts, and program manager Tahmina Maskinyar both resigned. Artist and board member Lindy Lee stepped down. Major donor Simon Mordant withdrew support, calling the move “unprecedented”. More than 4,300 people signed petitions demanding reinstatement.

In May, chair Robert Morgan resigned from the board, after telling a February senate hearing he would not step down.

What the review found

This week’s review, conducted by governance consultancy Blackhall & Pearl, offers a damning but restrained post-mortem.

It finds no evidence of political interference but reveals Creative Australia lacked basic tools to respond to controversy.

The agency lacked formal risk assessment processes, a crisis plan, and a clear mechanism for escalating or containing reputational issues.

More troublingly, the report found the board and staff misunderstood risk itself, believing that identifying risks meant avoiding them.

In other words, Creative Australia treated controversy as something to flee, not manage. The result was paralysis and ultimately capitulation.

A fragile funding model

The episode also exposes the fragility of Australia’s arms-length funding model. As cultural policy expert Jo Caust has noted, this model relies on two key elements: peer review and operational independence from political direction. Both were tested by these events.

Read more:
Creative Australia’s decisions should be peer reviewed and at arm’s length. Where did things go wrong?

Arts Minister Tony Burke’s public expression of “shock” at Sabsabi’s appointment and his suggestion he should have been briefed sent a troubling signal about government oversight.

In a message released with the review, Creative Australia CEO Adrian Collette acknowledged the damage done:

The decision the Board took in February has weighed heavily on many people, most particularly the artistic team – and for that we are sorry […] We are also sorry that this has caused concern and uncertainty for many in the broader arts community and we are committed to rebuilding trust in our processes for the commissioning of the Venice Biennale.

What must change

The report makes nine recommendations, including clearer governance frameworks, stronger risk protocols and better board training. But the deeper issue is cultural.

Institutions must find the courage to support artists under pressure, not retreat.

This means rejecting the false binary between risk management and artistic freedom. Effective risk planning should equip institutions to defend challenging work, not discourage it.

It also requires cultural leaders to accept that controversy is not a failure to be avoided, but often a by-product of meaningful expression.

A global warning

The sector has been here before. The 2015 “Brandis affair”, when then-arts minister George Brandis redirected A$105 million from the Australia Council (predecessor to Creative Australia) into a minister-controlled fund, sparked similar alarm about political influence.

But this crisis is more revealing. The pressure came not through overt interference but through internal uncertainty and a lack of institutional resolve.

Globally, cultural institutions face similar strains. Book bans in the United States, museum purges in Hungary, and artistic blacklists in Russia all point to a global narrowing of space for free expression.

What happened here is not the same, but it warns that institutions can fail without censorship, simply by lacking the will to stand firm.

A turning point – or not?

Sabsabi and Dagostino’s reinstatement is not just a symbolic correction. It is a test.

Can Creative Australia rebuild trust with a community that saw it falter? Will future risk processes be used to support bold programming or suppress it? And will this moment mark the beginning of a stronger, more principled approach to cultural leadership, or a drift into safer, smaller territory?

As Sabsabi and Dagostino prepare for Venice, they carry more than artistic hopes. They carry a test of whether this moment marks a turning point in Australian cultural governance.

Their reinstatement is not simply a symbolic reversal. It is a chance to restore trust and demonstrate that institutions can learn from failure.

Whether this becomes a real shift or missed opportunity depends not only on Creative Australia, but on whether institutions across the country defend artistic integrity and rebuild the leadership culture this moment demands.

Samuel Cairnduff 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. Creative Australia’s backflip on Venice Biennale representatives exposes deep governance failures – https://theconversation.com/creative-australias-backflip-on-venice-biennale-representatives-exposes-deep-governance-failures-260402

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Leane, Professor of Antarctic Studies, School of Humanities, University of Tasmania

Ice loss in Antarctica and its impact on the planet – sea level rise, changes to ocean currents and disturbance of wildlife and food webs – has been in the news a lot lately. All of these threats were likely on the minds of the delegates to the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, which finishes up today in Milan, Italy.

This meeting is where decisions are made about the continent’s future. These decisions rely on evidence from scientific research. Moreover, only countries that produce significant Antarctic research – as well as being parties to the treaty – get to have a final say in these decisions.

Our new report – published as a preprint through the University of the Arctic – shows the rate of research on the Antarctic and Southern Ocean is falling at exactly the time when it should be increasing. Moreover, research leadership is changing, with China taking the lead for the first time.

This points to a dangerous disinvestment in Antarctic research just when it is needed, alongside a changing of the guard in national influence. Antarctica and the research done there are key to everyone’s future, so it’s vital to understand what this change might lead to.

Why is Antarctic research so important?

With the Antarctic region rapidly warming, its ice shelves destabilising and sea ice shrinking, understanding the South Polar environment is more crucial than ever.

Ice loss in Antarctica not only contributes to sea level rise, but impacts wildlife habitats and local food chains. It also changes the dynamics of ocean currents, which could interfere with global food webs, including international fisheries that supply a growing amount of food.

Research to understand these impacts is vital. First, knowing the impact of our actions – particularly carbon emissions – gives us an increased drive to make changes and lobby governments to do so.

Second, even when changes are already locked in, to prepare ourselves we need to know what these changes will look like.

And third, we need to understand the threats to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean environment to govern it properly. This is where the treaty comes in.

What is the Antarctic Treaty?

The region below 60 degrees south is governed by the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, along with subsequent agreements. Together they are known as the Antarctic Treaty System.

Fifty-eight countries are parties to the treaty, but only 29 of them – called consultative parties – can make binding decisions about the region. They comprise the 12 original signatories from 1959, along with 17 more recent signatory nations that produce substantial scientific research relating to Antarctica.

This makes research a key part of a nation’s influence over what happens in Antarctica.

For most of its history, the Antarctic Treaty System has functioned remarkably well. It maintained peace in the region during the Cold War, facilitated scientific cooperation, and put arguments about territorial claims on indefinite hold. It indefinitely forbade mining, and managed fisheries.

Lately, however, there has been growing dysfunction in the treaty system.

Environmental protections that might seem obvious – such as marine protected areas and special protections for threatened emperor penguins – have stalled.

Because decisions are made by consensus, any country can effectively block progress. Russia and China – both long-term actors in the system – have been at the centre of the impasse.

Read more:
Antarctic summer sea ice is at record lows. Here’s how it will harm the planet – and us

What did our report find?

Tracking the amount of Antarctic research being done tells us whether nations as a whole are investing enough in understanding the region and its global impact.

It also tells us which nations are investing the most and are therefore likely to have substantial influence.

Our new report examined the number of papers published on Antarctic and Southern Ocean topics from 2016 to 2024, using the Scopus database. We also looked at other factors, such as the countries affiliated with each paper.

The results show five significant changes are happening in the world of Antarctic research.

• The number of Antarctic and Southern Ocean publications peaked in 2021 and then fell slightly yearly through to 2024.
• While the United States has for decades been the leader in Antarctic research, China overtook them in 2022.
• If we look only at the high-quality publications (those published in the best 25% of journals) China still took over the US, in 2024.
• Of the top six countries in overall publications (China, the US, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany and Russia) all except China have declined in publication numbers since 2016.
• Although collaboration in publications is higher for Antarctic research than in non-Antarctic fields, Russia, India and China have anomalously low rates of co-authorship compared with many other signatory countries.

Why is this research decline a problem?

A recent parliamentary inquiry in Australia emphasised the need for funding certainty. In the UK, a House of Commons committee report considered it “imperative for the UK to significantly expand its research efforts in Antarctica”, in particular in relation to sea level rise.

US commentators have pointed to the inadequacy of the country’s icebreaker infrastructure. The Trump administration’s recent cuts to Antarctic funding are only likely to exacerbate the situation. Meanwhile China has built a fifth station in Antarctica and announced plans for a sixth.

Given the nation’s population and global influence, China’s leadership in Antarctic research is not surprising. If China were to take a lead in Antarctic environmental protection that matched its scientific heft, its move to lead position in the research ranks could be positive. Stronger multi-country collaboration in research could also strengthen overall cooperation.

But the overall drop in global Antarctic research investment is a problem however you look at it. We ignore it at our peril.

Elizabeth Leane receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Dutch Research Council, the Council on Australian and Latin American Relations DFAT and HX (Hurtigruten Expeditions). She has received in-kind support from Hurtigruten Expeditions in the recent past. The University of Tasmania is a member of the UArctic, which has provided support for this project.

Keith Larson is affiliated with the UArctic and European Polar Board. The UArctic paid for the development and publication of this report. The UArctic Thematic Network on Research Analytics and Bibliometrics conducted the analysis and developed the report. The Arctic Centre at Umeå University provided in-kind support for staff time on the report.

– ref. Antarctic research is in decline, and the timing couldn’t be worse – https://theconversation.com/antarctic-research-is-in-decline-and-the-timing-couldnt-be-worse-260197

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giles Gunesekera, PhD Researcher, University of Technology Sydney

Australia is experiencing a housing crisis. But for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the challenge runs deeper than high rents and limited supply. A major problem is that housing in Australia is rarely designed with Indigenous communities in mind.

In 2021, roughly 13% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households faced unmet housing needs. This equated to around 45,700 low-income Indigenous households lacking suitable accommodation.

Overcrowding remains a significant issue, with only 81.4% of Indigenous Australians living in appropriately sized housing in 2021, falling short of the 88% target set for 2031 under Closing The Gap.

Cultural obligations, such as caring for extended family and accommodating kinship networks, are often at odds with standard tenancy agreements that limit guest numbers and occupancy terms.

These mismatches contribute to stress, overcrowding and, in some cases, eviction.

Housing that works

Housing is often described as a human right. In reality, housing policy is shaped by market forces, supply targets and regulatory compliance. While these may meet administrative goals, they frequently fail to reflect the cultural, social and emotional needs of First Nations people.

But there are programs that work.

Our research examines how community-led, culturally safe housing can support long-term improvements in health, stability and inclusion for Indigenous and marginalised communities

One compelling example is the Ngalang Moort Wangkiny project in Western Australia. Led by Aboriginal researchers, this project explored the experiences of Aboriginal families living in social housing. Through yarning circles, tenants shared how housing design and tenancy rules often work against their cultural needs.

Many homes are built for small families and do not accommodate extended kinship networks. Tenancy agreements may limit guests or require the names of all residents.

These arrangements create tension for Aboriginal families who have a strong cultural obligation to care for relatives and host kin. Policies that ignore these responsibilities are stressful and often produce in unsuitable results.

The research demonstrated many of these issues can be avoided through co-design. Aboriginal families who are involved in planning, decision-making and service delivery are more likely to experience positive housing outcomes. They feel a sense of safety, support and community ownership.

With models like these, housing can be a stable foundation, not a point of vulnerability.

The benefits of culturally safe housing extend beyond comfort or cultural fit. Evidence shows strong links between stable housing and improvements in education, employment and health.

People who feel respected and secure in their homes are more likely to access services, remain in school and sustain employment.

Planning with, not planning for

Across Australia, Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organisations (ACCOs) are at the forefront of culturally safe housing.

These organisations are governed by Aboriginal communities and grounded in local knowledge and values. In housing, they provide tenancy support, manage properties, and deliver wraparound services such as mental health care and employment programs.

Some receive government support.

Many of these organisations continue to operate under pressure. Funding is often short-term, rigid and inconsistent, with recent findings showing governments are leaving the financial heavy lifting to under-resourced Aboriginal groups.

But policies are designed remotely with little input from communities. Tenancy frameworks still reflect assumptions based on Western models of home life, which may not align with Indigenous ways of living.

Standard house layouts with separate, enclosed rooms may not support communal living or outdoor gathering spaces that are central to many Indigenous households.

Addressing these gaps requires national policy reform recognising housing as essential social infrastructure. Long-term funding, flexible tenancy arrangements and support for Indigenous-led organisations would all help.

A more inclusive planning system would ensure co-design becomes standard practice rather than the exception.

Doing more to meet goals

We can also draw valuable lessons from international models.

Globally, community land trusts have enabled low-income and racially marginalised communities to secure long-term control of housing and land.

These trusts work by holding land in a nonprofit trust while allowing residents to own or rent homes on it through long-term, renewable leases. This structure removes land from the speculative market, keeps housing costs stable and ensures decisions remain in the hands of the local community.

In Chile, the Half a House model gives families a solid, expandable foundation to grow their homes as their resources allow.

A growing number of Australian policymakers have acknowledged this need for change. The National Agreement on Closing the Gap includes targets for improved housing outcomes and increased community control.

The 2024 Implementation Plan outlines steps toward reducing overcrowding and strengthening Aboriginal-controlled service delivery.

Turning these goals into practice requires sustained effort. Indigenous communities must be seen as partners in decision-making, not simply as service recipients. Their insights and lived experiences should shape every stage of the housing process.

Uniform solutions will not meet diverse local needs. Place-based approaches, developed in collaboration with communities, are essential.

Housing is more than shelter. For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, it is a space to practise culture, strengthen kinship, and pass on knowledge. It is where identity is lived and preserved.

Proven models already exist. Communities across Australia are leading the way. What is required now is a policy environment that listens, invests and follows their lead.

Giles Gunesekera OAM works for Global Impact Initiative, an organisation that constructs impact investments with the dual focus of sustainable financial return and measurable, actionable, social impact.

Dr Allan Teale receives funding from UTS.
In 2023, he received a Churchill Fellowship that enabled him to travel to Canada and the United States to study Indigenous community housing. My report can be found at this link: https://www.churchilltrust.com.au/fellow/allan-teale-nsw-2022/

– ref. Homes are more than walls and a roof, especially for Indigenous people. It’s time housing policy reflects that – https://theconversation.com/homes-are-more-than-walls-and-a-roof-especially-for-indigenous-people-its-time-housing-policy-reflects-that-259147

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darla Hatton MacDonald, Professor of Environmental Economics, University of Tasmania

The number of tourists heading to Antarctica has been skyrocketing. From fewer than 8,000 a year about three decades ago, nearly 125,000 tourists flocked to the icy continent in 2023–24. The trend is likely to continue in the long term.

Unchecked tourism growth in Antarctica risks undermining the very environment that draws visitors. This would be bad for operators and tourists. It would also be bad for Antarctica – and the planet.

Over the past two weeks, the nations that decide what human activities are permitted in Antarctica have convened in Italy. The meeting incorporates discussions by a special working group that aims to address tourism issues.

It’s not easy to manage tourist visitors to a continent beyond any one country’s control. So, how do we stop Antarctica being loved to death? The answer may lie in economics.

Future visitor trends

We recently modelled future visitor trends in Antarctica. A conservative scenario shows by 2033–34, visitor numbers could reach around 285,000. Under the least conservative scenario, numbers could reach 450,000 – however, this figure incorporates pent-up demand from COVID shutdowns that will likely diminish.

The vast majority of the Antarctic tourism industry comprises cruise-ship tourism in the Antarctic Peninsula. A small percentage of visitors travel to the Ross Sea region and parts of the continent’s interior.

Antarctic tourism is managed by an international set of agreements together known as the Antarctic Treaty System, as well as the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO).

The Treaty System is notoriously slow-moving and riven by geopolitics, and IAATO does not have the power to cap visitor numbers.

Pressure on a fragile continent

About two-thirds of Antarctic tourists land on the continent. The visitors can threaten fragile ecosystems by:

• compacting soils
• trampling fragile vegetation
• introducing non-native microbes and plant species
• disturbing breeding colonies of birds and seals.

Even when cruise ships don’t dock, they can cause problems such as air, water and noise pollution – as well as anchoring that can damage the seabed.

Then there’s carbon emissions. Each cruise ship traveller to Antarctica typically produces between 3.2 and 4.1 tonnes of carbon, not including travel to the port of departure. This is similar to the carbon emissions an average person produces in a year.

Global warming caused by carbon emissions is damaging Antarctica. At the Peninsula region, glaciers and ice shelves are retreating and sea ice is shrinking, affecting wildlife and vegetation.

Of course, Antarctic tourism represents only a tiny fraction of overall emissions. However, the industry has a moral obligation to protect the place that maintains it. And tourism in Antarctica can compound damage from climate change, tipping delicate ecosystems into decline.

Some operators use hybrid ships and less polluting fuels, and offset emissions to offer carbon-neutral travel.

IAATO has pledged to halve emissions by 2050 – a positive step, but far short of the net-zero targets set by the International Maritime Organization.

Can economics protect Antarctica?

Market-based tools – such as taxes, cap-and-trade schemes and certification – have been used in environmental management around the world. Research shows these tools could also prevent Antarctic tourist numbers from getting out of control.

One option is requiring visitors to pay a tourism tax. This would help raise revenue to support environmental monitoring and enforcement in Antarctica, as well as fund research.

Such a tax already exists in the small South Asian nation of Bhutan, where each tourist pays a tax of US$100 (A$152) a night. But while a tax might deter the budget-conscious, it probably wouldn’t deter high income, experience-driven tourists.

Alternatively, a cap-and-trade system would create a limited number of Antarctica visitor permits for a fixed period. The initial distribution of permits could be among tourism operators or countries, via negotiation, auction or lottery. Unused permits could then be sold, making them quite valuable.

Caps have been successful at managing tourism impacts elsewhere, such as Lord Howe Island, although there are no trades allowed in that system.

Any cap on tourist numbers in Antarctica, and rules for trading, must be based on evidence about what the environment can handle. But there is a lack of precise data on Antarctica’s carrying capacity. And permit allocations amongst the operators and nations would need to be fair and inclusive.

Alternatively, existing industry standards could be augmented with independent schemes certifying particular practices – for example, reducing carbon footprints. This could be backed by robust monitoring and enforcement to avoid greenwashing.

Looking ahead

Given the complexities of Antarctic governance, our research finds that the most workable solution is a combination of these market-based options, alongside other regulatory measures.

So far, parties to the Antarctic treaty have made very few binding rules for the tourism industry. And some market-based levers will be more acceptable to the parties than others. But doing nothing is not a solution.

The authors would like to acknowledge Valeria Senigaglia, Natalie Stoeckl and Jing Tian and the rest of the team for their contributions to the research upon which this article was based.

Darla Hatton MacDonald receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Forest and Wood Innovations Centre, the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, and the Soils CRC. She has received in-kind support from Antarctic tour operator HX.

Elizabeth Leane receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Dutch Research Council, and DFAT. She also receives in-kind support and occasional funding from Antarctic tourism operator HX and in-kind support from other tour operators.

– ref. More and more tourists are flocking to Antarctica. Let’s stop it from being loved to death – https://theconversation.com/more-and-more-tourists-are-flocking-to-antarctica-lets-stop-it-from-being-loved-to-death-258294