Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabriel C Rau, Lecturer in Hydrogeology, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle

Under your feet lies the world’s biggest reservoir. Groundwater makes up a whopping 97% of all usable freshwater. Where is it? In the voids between grains and cracks within rocks. We see it when it rises to the surface in springs, in caves, or when we pump it up for use.

While groundwater is often hidden, it underpins ecosystems around the world and is a vital resource for people.

You might think groundwater would be protected from climate change, given it’s underground. But this is no longer the case. As the atmosphere continues to heat up, more and more heat is penetrating underground. There is already considerable evidence that the subsurface is warming. The heat shows up in temperature measurements taken in boreholes around the world.

Our team of international scientists have combined our knowledge to model how groundwater will heat up in the future. Under a realistic middle of the road greenhouse gas emission scenario, with a projected mean global atmospheric temperature rise of 2.7°C, groundwater will warm by an average of 2.1°C by 2100, compared to 2000.

This warming varies by region and is delayed by decades compared to the surface, because it takes time to heat up the underground mass. Our results can be accessed by everyone globally.

Why does it matter?

You might wonder what the consequences of hotter groundwater will be.

First, the good news. Warming beneath the land’s surface is trapping 25 times less energy than the ocean, but it is still significant. This heat is stored in layers down to tens of metres deep, making it easier to access. We could use this extra heat to sustainably warm our homes by tapping into it just a few meters below the surface.

The heat can be extracted using heat pumps, powered by electricity from renewable energies. Geothermal heat pumps are surging in popularity for space heating across Europe.

Unfortunately, the bad news is likely to far outweigh the good. Warmer groundwater is harmful for the rich array of life found underground – and for the many plants and animals who depend on groundwater for their survival. Any changes in temperature can seriously disrupt the niche they have adapted to.

To date, the highest groundwater temperature increases are in parts of Russia, where surface temperatures have risen by more than 1.5°C since 2000. In Australia, significant variations in groundwater temperatures are expected within the shallowest layers.

Groundwater regularly flows out to feed lakes and rivers around the world, as well as the ocean, supporting a range of groundwater dependent ecosystems.

If warmer groundwater flows into your favourite river or lake, it will add to the extra heat from the sun. This could mean fish and other species will find it too warm to survive. Warm waters also hold less oxygen. Lack of oxygen in rivers and lakes have already become a major cause of mass fish deaths, as we’ve seen recently in Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin.

Cold water species such as Atlantic salmon have adapted to a water temperature window provided by continuous cool groundwater discharge. As these thermal refuges heat up, it will upend their breeding cycle.

Groundwater is vital

In many parts of the world, people rely on groundwater as their main source of drinking water. But groundwater warming can worsen the quality of the water we drink. Temperature influences everything from chemical reactions to microbial activity. Warmer water could, for instance, trigger more harmful reactions, where metals leach out into the water. This is especially concerning in areas where access to clean drinking water is already limited.

Industries such as farming, manufacturing and energy production often rely on groundwater for their operations. If the groundwater they depend on becomes too warm or more contaminated, it can disrupt their activities.

Our study is global, but we have to find out more about how groundwater is warming and what impact this could have locally. By studying how groundwater temperatures are changing over time and across different regions, we can better predict future trends and find strategies to adapt or reduce the effects.

Global groundwater warming is a hidden but very significant consequence of climate change. While the impacts will be delayed, they stretch far and wide. They will affect ecosystems, drinking water supplies and industries around the world.

Gabriel Rau receives funding from the German Research Council (DFG) for research on subsurface heat transport, though not related to this article.

Barret Kurylyk receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Canada Research Chairs Program for research related to this article.

Dylan Irvine receives funding from the Australian Research Council, The National Environmental Science Program and the Cooperative Research Centre for Developing Northern Australia, although the research in the research discussed here is independent of these research programs.

Susanne Benz was supported through a Banting postdoctoral fellowship, administered by the Government of Canada and since October 2022 as a Freigeist Fellow of the Volkswagen foundation

– ref. Groundwater is heating up, threatening life below and above the surface – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/229177

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stuart Murray, Bond University

Writing of the unique place of sport in Australian society, the celebrated US travel writer Bill Bryson once wrote “truly, never has there been a more sporting nation … it is a wonder in such a vigorous and active society that there is anyone left to form an audience”.

Sport is a vital part of who we are, how others see us, and – these days – a low-risk, low-cost and high-profile diplomatic tool in an increasingly divisive geopolitical landscape.

Countries such as China, Saudi Arabia and Russia are investing in the sports diplomacy game and, arguably, Australia’s edge in this niche area of international relations has dulled a little.

Earlier this week, however, Australia’s foreign and sports ministers announced it was time to sharpen that edge, freshen up the team and make Australia stronger and more influential through sport.

Why Australia needs a new strategy

In response to the first periodic review of the Sports Diplomacy 2030 Strategy, the Albanese government announced it will update the strategy, form a new Sports Diplomacy Consultative Group – coordinated by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) – and hold an annual round-table discussion that brings the worlds of sport and diplomacy together.

These initiatives provide a forum to discuss strategic and economic opportunities, risks in international sport, upcoming sports events in Australia and offshore, and ways in which government and the sport sector can work together to advance shared priorities.

Team Australia, in other words, has a new game plan, a bigger squad and an annual strategic retreat.

The announcement is timely. Arguably, Australia is slipping behind while other countries forge ahead.

For example, China spent A$74 million on a new stadium in the Solomon Islands for last year’s Pacific Games and also invited Pacific athletes to train in China.

China has also poached high-profile “diplomats in tracksuits” such as Eileen Gu – a brilliant Chinese-American downhill skier brought up in California who chose to represent China at the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.

While most sports fans can list assets and teams bought by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund – such as the 2021 takeover of English Premier League team Newcastle United and the controversial LIV Golf Tour set up to rival the PGA Tour – they would know less about Riyadh’s training in sports diplomacy.

In February 2024, The United Nations Institute for Training and Research ran a five-day executive diploma in sports diplomacy program for participants from the Ministry of Sport of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi Olympic and Paralympic Committee in Geneva.

Russia has also weaponised sport, from using mega events to deflect attention from its invasion of other countries to Gazprom – the state-owned multinational energy corporation – proposing a Russian version of the Champions League.

What does sports diplomacy offer?

Sport, when allied to diplomacy, offers western liberal democracies like Australia an authentic, comparative and meaningful advantage over our rivals.

In addition to a bulging trophy cabinet, Australia possesses world class facilities, infrastructure, expertise and sports people.

Programs like PacificAus Sports – responsible for the men’s and women’s Fijian Drua Super Rugby teams, and the PNG Hunters Rugby League teams – are world class.

Australians value integrity, fair play and equality in sport. Some of our current and former athletes such as Curtis McGrath, Sam Kerr, David Pocock, Adam Goodes, Kim Brennan and Marissa Williamson-Pohlman (who will be the first Indigenous woman to represent Australia in boxing at the Olympics this year) are as powerful, genuine and effective off the pitch as they are on it.

Sports diplomacy, when done well, can break down stereotypes, transcend acrimony and bring people closer together via a shared affinity for physical pursuits.

Meetings between, for example, sports administrators, government officials, and business people on the sidelines of a game create informal relationships that complement formal diplomatic initiatives, such as Australia’s desire to better engage Southeast Asia via a new $2 billion push.

International sport generates public diplomacy opportunities, builds relationships and can amplify a state’s message, culture and values.

Raising the game

The Albanese government’s new approach to sports diplomacy provides a chance to challenge our rivals but only if we think like our sportspeople. We need to work and train hard, innovate and try even harder.

Let’s hope other government agencies continue to get behind DFAT as the ongoing team captain, too. The Australian Federal Police, Australian Defence Force, Sports Integrity Australia and many other government agencies are also now using sports diplomacy.

Finally, there’s also no point investing in the practice of sports diplomacy if it isn’t analysed, measured, studied and researched by the next generation of academics and universities.

While countries like Israel, Hungary and Saudi Arabia are developing research centres and university courses on sports diplomacy, the same cannot be said of Australia.

Diplomatic practice, it should be remembered, is only as good as the theory it is built upon.

Bill Bryson was right. For a relatively small population, there are few countries that are as good, or as addicted, to sport as Australia.

Games, sport and physical pursuits play a massive role in our culture, society and identity. These things deserve to be front and centre of our diplomacy.

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

– ref. Why ‘Team Australia’ needs a new sports diplomacy game plan as other countries gain an edge – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231494

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Haslam, Professor of Psychology, The University of Melbourne

We talk about mental health more than ever, but the language we should use remains a vexed issue.

Should we call people who seek help patients, clients or consumers? Should we use “person-first” expressions such as person with autism or “identity-first” expressions like autistic person? Should we apply or avoid diagnostic labels?

These questions often stir up strong feelings. Some people feel that patient implies being passive and subordinate. Others think consumer is too transactional, as if seeking help is like buying a new refrigerator.

Advocates of person-first language argue people shouldn’t be defined by their conditions. Proponents of identity-first language counter that these conditions can be sources of meaning and belonging.

Avid users of diagnostic terms see them as useful descriptors. Critics worry that diagnostic labels can box people in and misrepresent their problems as pathologies.

Underlying many of these disagreements are concerns about stigma and the medicalisation of suffering. Ideally the language we use should not cast people who experience distress as defective or shameful, or frame everyday problems of living in psychiatric terms.

Our new research, published in the journal PLOS Mental Health, examines how the language of distress has evolved over nearly 80 years. Here’s what we found.

Generic terms for the class of conditions

Generic terms – such as mental illness, psychiatric disorder or psychological problem – have largely escaped attention in debates about the language of mental ill health. These terms refer to mental health conditions as a class.

Many terms are currently in circulation, each an adjective followed by a noun. Popular adjectives include mental, mental health, psychiatric and psychological, and common nouns include condition, disease, disorder, disturbance, illness, and problem. Readers can encounter every combination.

These terms and their components differ in their connotations. Disease and illness sound the most medical, whereas condition, disturbance and problem need not relate to health. Mental implies a direct contrast with physical, whereas psychiatric implicates a medical specialty.

Mental health problem, a recently emerging term, is arguably the least pathologising. It implies that something is to be solved rather than treated, makes no direct reference to medicine, and carries the positive connotations of health rather than the negative connotation of illness or disease.

Arguably, this development points to what cognitive scientist Steven Pinker calls the “euphemism treadmill”, the tendency for language to evolve new terms to escape (at least temporarily) the offensive connotations of those they replace.

English linguist Hazel Price argues that mental health has increasingly come to replace mental illness to avoid the stigma associated with that term.

How has usage changed over time?

In the PLOS Mental Health paper, we examine historical changes in the popularity of 24 generic terms: every combination of the nouns and adjectives listed above.

We explore the frequency with which each term appears from 1940 to 2019 in two massive text data sets representing books in English and diverse American English sources, respectively. The findings are very similar in both data sets.

The figure presents the relative popularity of the top ten terms in the larger data set (Google Books). The 14 least popular terms are combined into the remainder.

Several trends appear. Mental has consistently been the most popular adjective component of the generic terms. Mental health has become more popular in recent years but is still rarely used.

Among nouns, disease has become less widely used while illness has become dominant. Although disorder is the official term in psychiatric classifications, it has not been broadly adopted in public discourse.

Since 1940, mental illness has clearly become the preferred generic term. Although an assortment of alternatives have emerged, it has steadily risen in popularity.

Does it matter?

Our study documents striking shifts in the popularity of generic terms, but do these changes matter? The answer may be: not much.

One study found people think mental disorder, mental illness and mental health problem refer to essentially identical phenomena.

Other studies indicate that labelling a person as having a mental disease, mental disorder, mental health problem, mental illness or psychological disorder makes no difference to people’s attitudes toward them.

We don’t yet know if there are other implications of using different generic terms, but the evidence to date suggests they are minimal.

Is ‘distress’ any better?

Recently, some writers have promoted distress as an alternative to traditional generic terms. It lacks medical connotations and emphasises the person’s subjective experience rather than whether they fit an official diagnosis.

Distress appears 65 times in the 2022 Victorian Mental Health and Wellbeing Act, usually in the expression “mental illness or psychological distress”. By implication, distress is a broad concept akin to but not synonymous with mental ill health.

But is distress destigmatising, as it was intended to be? Apparently not. According to one study, it was more stigmatising than its alternatives. The term may turn us away from other people’s suffering by amplifying it.

So what should we call it?

Mental illness is easily the most popular generic term and its popularity has been rising. Research indicates different terms have little or no effect on stigma and some terms intended to destigmatise may backfire.

We suggest that mental illness should be embraced and the proliferation of alternative terms such as mental health problem, which breed confusion, should end.

Critics might argue mental illness imposes a medical frame. Philosopher Zsuzsanna Chappell disagrees. Illness, she argues, refers to subjective first-person experience, not to an objective, third-person pathology, like disease.

Properly understood, the concept of illness centres the individual and their connections. “When I identify my suffering as illness-like,” Chappell writes, “I wish to lay claim to a caring interpersonal relationship.”

As generic terms go, mental illness is a healthy option.

Nick Haslam receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Naomi Baes receives funding from the Australian Government (Research Training Program Scholarship).

– ref. Mental illness, psychiatric disorder or psychological problem. What should we call mental distress? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/226748

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Bradley, Professor Emeritus (Psychology), Charles Sturt University

When parents are starting their babies in daycare, a common concern is whether it is good for little ones to be away from their primary carers for long periods of time.

But as our recent book Babies in Groups shows, babies as young as six months respond to and enjoy being in groups with other babies.

This can reassure parents their child will gain something at daycare they are mostly missing at home: opportunities to enjoy supervised time in small groups of their peers – eating, learning and playing together.

Our prehistoric ancestors lived, foraged, hunted, defended themselves, and brought up their young in groups. So, it makes sense today’s babies are born with a capacity to enjoy spending time together.

Previous research

Nearly all previous research about babies’ social and emotional development focuses on their relations with adults (typically their mothers) and almost always studied in pairs.

But as we explain in our book, this is because researchers’ assumptions mostly reflect ideas entrenched in Western cultures that make the stay-at-home mother the be-all and end-all for a baby’s healthy development.

Anyone who watches how babies act in larger families, playgrounds, or parent groups, soon sees how attuned they are to group dynamics, especially when around infants like themselves.

Our research

For 25 years we have been researching whether babies are born already adapted to life in groups. Or whether this capacity only develops after they form their first infant-to-adult bond (as existing theory predicts).

Over several studies included in our book, we invited 51 six- to nine-month-olds – previously unknown to each other – into our recording studios. Here we arranged stationary baby chairs into triangles for groups of three or squares for groups of four.

Once parents had fastened their babies into a chair, all adults left the studio and the cameras rolled.

In previous research psychologists found strapping a babies of this age into a chair in a sterile recording studio with just their mum to talk to usually produced a frustrated baby within a minute or two – unless mum entertained her baby with games or toys.

But we found if you introduce babies to two or three other unfamiliar babies the group can run happily for anything up to 25 minutes, even though there are no toys to play with.

Our films show how babies in these groups use many types of communication at once: touching, vocalising, gesturing, changing postures, imitating each other, looking both directly at one another or out of the corners of their eyes, sharing rhythms vocally or by making noises with their hands, plus making a great variety of facial expressions.

This means babies can communicate with several other babies simultaneously. An eight-month-old may start a tentative game of footsie with one while looking at another and banging on the table in time with a third.

Over several minutes quite complex interactions develop. Babies invent games and create forms of music together. If two babies are getting friendly, a third may butt in by making a loud noise to distract them from linking with each other.

Alternatively, if a baby cries, its fellow group-members will likely try to comfort her or him, often successfully – by looking and vocalising, or waving towards, or leaning over and reaching towards, or touching the distressed baby.

This shows us babies have a competence in groups well before they have worked out how to maintain one-to-one attachments to adults. These first appear around eight months of age and continue to develop throughout the second year of life.

What does this mean for daycare centres?

This finding has important implications for babies going to daycare and other early childhood services.

We have seen how centres which organise babies into groups can be less stressful for infants – and educators – than when the top priority is to forge one-to-one bonds between infants and educators.

For example, when several babies are lined up to be fed one-to-one by an educator, mealtimes soon end in tears. Put highchairs in small circles and mealtimes last for up to forty minutes of conversation, imitation and laughter.

So, for parents thinking about how to develop and care for their young child, look for centres which acknowledge and promote babies’ normal interest, pleasure and capacity to engage with others of their own age.

And don’t be worried that you are doing something “bad” for your baby by sending them to be with other children of the same age.

And for all those raising babies at home, the more infants involved in your baby’s life – whether they be cousins or friends made in playgroups – the better for your baby and the better for you.

Ben Bradley has received funding from Charles Sturt University, The British Academy, Centre Support and the Australian Research Council.

Jane Margot Selby receives funding from Charles Sturt University, Centre Support, The British Academy and the Australian Reseach Council.

– ref. Worried about sending your baby to daycare? Our research shows they like being in groups – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/220658

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Konstantine Panegyres, McKenzie Postdoctoral Fellow, The University of Melbourne

Many people today worry about how to find time to keep fit and healthy in the midst of their busy lives. Believe it or not, but this was also a problem in ancient times.

So, how did ancient people deal with it?

A universal problem

The physician Galen, who lived from around 129 to 216 AD, dealt with thousands of patients in the city of Rome.

He used to complain some people didn’t devote enough time to keeping fit. In his treatise, Hygiene, Galen wrote one of his patients, a philosopher called Premigenes, was such a workaholic he stayed inside all the time writing books. Because of this bad lifestyle, Premigenes got sick.

Galen said Premigenes needed to work less, and devote more time to getting exercise and some sun.

Some 2,000 years later, most of us will be able to relate to this. The World Health Organization has a number of recommendations for the amount of exercise one should do each week. But it can be difficult to balance work and other commitments with our health and fitness.

The trade-offs of a busy life

People in the Greco-Roman period recognised that being busy has an effect on health.

The writer Lucian of Samosata, from the 2nd century AD, talks in his essay On Salaried Posts in Great Houses about how certain jobs offered workers no time to maintain their health. A bad diet, endless labour and a lack of sleep all contributed to making them unhealthy:

the sleeplessness, the sweating, and the weariness gradually undermine you, giving rise to consumption, pneumonia, indigestion, or that noble complaint, the gout. You stick it out, however, and often you ought to be in bed, but this is not permitted. They think illness a pretext, and a way of shirking your duties. The general consequences are that you are always pale and look as if you were going to die any minute.

The doctors of the time also noticed this problem. Galen said, in his opinion, one of the determinants of whether we are able to be healthy or not is the amount of free time we have.

He recognised some people had no choice but to be “bound up with the circumstances of their activities” – such as those taken into slavery – but noted others seemed to have

chosen a life caught up in the circumstances of their activities, either through ambition or whatever kind of desire, so they are least able to spend time on the care of their bodies.

Galen was also affected by this problem. As a doctor he had little free time, and his normal routine was often interrupted by patients’ problems. Nonetheless, he explains how, in his 20s, he started adhering to a daily health routine:

after I reached the age of 28, having persuaded myself that there is an art of hygiene, I followed its precepts for the whole of my subsequent life, and was never sick with any disease apart from the occasional ephemeral fever in some degree.

This routine involved eating one full meal each evening, and doing some sort of exercise every day. One of these exercises may have been wrestling, as he also mentions dislocating his shoulder while wrestling at the gym at the age of 35.

One advantage of Galen’s routine was its flexibility. He just had to find some time each day to eat a meal and move his body.

He said many other doctors of his time didn’t keep healthy. They overworked, ate and drank too much, and didn’t exercise enough.

Galen wasn’t saying everyone should take up his routine, however. He noted everyone has a different nature, and people should take up routines that best suit their bodies.

How the ancients kept fit

One wealthy Athenian citizen named Ischomachus, who lived in the 5th century BC, used to keep fit by exercising on his daily commute.

When he had to go into the city, he would run or walk, or alternate between the two. He’d do the same when visiting his farm. Even the famous philosopher Socrates praised Ischomachus for keeping healthy in this efficient way, in spite of always being busy with commitments.

Galen recommended all people should play ball games involving running and throwing to keep fit. Ball games, he thought, were a good option because they exercised the whole body and didn’t require much money or equipment.

For his overweight patients, he would recommend a routine of fast running and a slimming diet – one meal a day, comprised of foods that would fill the patient, but which were “poorly nourishing”.

One doctor from the 7th century AD, Paul of Aegina, also identified how some people let their busy schedules get in the way of their health.

He describes the sort of person who used to have a healthy routine, but no longer follows it due to being busy:

He who spends his time in business ought to consider whether, in the former period of life, he had been in the habit of taking exercise, or whether, though not taking exercise, he bears that habit well, and escapes from diseases by having free perspiration.

Paul recommended busy people lighten their commitments and resume as much of their old routine as possible. If they can’t exercise as they did before, then at least they could eat healthily, he said. The worst thing would be to abandon both healthy eating and exercise.

Developing healthy habits

The philosopher Aristotle said health is partly a matter of personal responsibility. If someone lives an unhealthy lifestyle and doesn’t follow the advice of doctors, it’s no surprise, Aristotle thought, if he or she ends up unhealthy.

Generally speaking, the ancients seem to have believed it is up to each person to find flexible habits that can help them stay fit. And while this can be difficult, they thought it was imperative to a life well-lived – much as we do today.

It seems some things about being human don’t change.

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. How can busy people also keep fit and healthy? Here’s what the ancient Greeks and Romans did – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/230005

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Brook, Associate Professor of Applied Geology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

When Resources Minister Shane Jones recently unveiled his draft strategy for mineral mining, it was quickly criticised by the Labour opposition as “taking New Zealand backwards”. One environmental group even called it a “love letter to mining companies”.

But the government’s ambition to double the sector’s export value to NZ$2 billion by 2035, with flow-on effects for local employment and regional economies, deserves a broader debate.

In particular, New Zealanders opposed to mineral mining must ask whether it is ethically fair and reasonable to effectively outsource the risks of mining to other countries, while benefiting from the modern technologies those minerals make possible.

The government’s mining strategy aims to produce a list of “critical minerals” for exploration. The International Energy Agency identifies minerals such as copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt and rare earth elements as essential components in many of today’s rapidly growing clean energy technologies – from wind turbines and electricity networks to electric vehicles.

Indeed, according to the United Nations Environment Programme, these critical minerals are increasingly necessary for decarbonising energy systems. One of the three pillars of the draft minerals strategy is the delivery of minerals “for a clean energy transition”. How we source those minerals is an important question.

Environmental impacts of mining

New Zealand has a rich mining history, with a wide variety of resources still extracted from underground and opencast mines. There is also a long history of opposition to mining, especially in national parks and on conservation land, as well as on privately owned hill country.

And there are legitimate concerns about the environmental, social and governance implications of mining. First, it can have devastating environmental effects, especially the extraction of high-value critical minerals that often require enormous “strip ratios” and generate huge volumes of waste rock tailings that must be stored.

Put simply, the strip ratio represents the amount of waste material (also known as overburden) that must be moved to extract a given amount of ore. For example, an overburden thickness of 100 metres and an ore thickness of 50 metres would yield a strip ratio of 2:1.

The actual concentration (known as the “grade”) of the target metal within the ore is the other factor to consider. For example, copper ore usually contains about 0.5% to 2% copper. A high-grade ore may be extracted from a mine with a high strip ratio, potentially generating enormous volumes of waste rock.

The waste is crushed, liquidised into slurry and pumped behind tailings dams, where it desiccates over time. Tailings dams are constructed to grow in height over decades as the mine progresses.

Effective management is integral to the safety of a mine and any downstream population. Tailings dam failures can lead to high-velocity flood disasters. But the well managed and stable tailings storage facility at OceanaGold’s Martha mine at Waihi shows what can be achieved with sufficient engineering and environmental regulation.

Offshoring our environmental footprint

Second, mineral extraction has caused and fuelled decades of unrest and civil war in some countries. The minerals most associated with funding conflict – the “three Ts” of tin, tungsten and tantalum – are present in many everyday products such as smartphones and laptops. Tantalum in particular is listed as a “conflict mineral” by the European Union.

According to the US Geological Survey, the source of tantalum has dramatically changed in recent years. In 2000, Australia produced 45% of global tantalum concentrates, but by 2014 this had dropped to 4%, offset by extraction in the mineral-rich but war-torn Katanga province of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

New Zealand is hardly in the same category. But the country’s mineral deposits are often found in mountainous areas, formed by the heat and pressure associated with tectonic processes over millions of years. Often these upland areas are beautiful national parks.

At the same time, New Zealand will need to use extracted minerals – either from its own mining operations or those of other countries – to make the transition to green energy and maintain present standards of living.

By not exploring the mineral mining potential in its own backyard, while simultaneously consuming those minerals from other sources, New Zealand is conveniently offshoring its own environmental footprint.

To assume foreign landscapes and environments are more expendable raises serious ethical and moral questions that need to be addressed within the current debate over the government’s draft mining strategy.

Reciprocity and obligation

One response might be for New Zealand, where it can, to look at extracting and exporting minerals within its own strict safety and environmental regulations. This would help share the global environmental burden of mineral extraction in a more sustainable way.

Such an approach (which might also be applied to the countries from which we source minerals) also fits with the Māori ethic of reciprocity, tauutuutu. This has been applied to modern economic and environmental thinking, and defined as:

an indigenous concept that places an ethical obligation on communities and enterprises to emphasise balance, reciprocity, and symbiosis in their social and environmental relationships.

Behavioural economics has shown that reciprocal behaviour builds trust, which is crucial for long-term relationships. Countries that embrace reciprocity are better positioned to navigate complex global challenges, achieve UN sustainable development goals, build resilient supply chains, and work toward a green future that energy transition will allow.

In anticipation of the critical minerals list the government has requested, New Zealand needs to consider how it can meet the demands of a new economy, practically as well as morally and ethically.

Martin Brook receives funding from MBIE.

– ref. By not mining vital minerals, NZ is ‘offshoring its own environmental footprint’ – is that fair? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231166

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC L3 Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney

Australia appears to be experiencing a re-emergence of the infectious disease mpox, formerly called monkeypox.

Some 40 cases have been recorded so far in 2024, already surpassing the total number recorded for 2023 (26). Victoria has reported 24 cases this year, while Queensland saw ten cases reported in May.

There was previously a significant mpox outbreak in 2022, with a total of 144 cases across Australia. All cases since 2022 have been in males, most commonly those aged 30 to 39. Mpox cases are on the rise elsewhere, too.

So what is mpox? And is there a vaccine available? Here’s what to know about this virus.

What is mpox?

Mpox belongs to the orthopoxvirus family, which is also responsible for smallpox.

Symptoms include fever and rash, typically starting on the hands, feet and face. The genitals may also be affected. The rash is infectious until the lesions have scabbed over.

There are two clades, or varieties, of mpox: clade I and clade II. Up to 10% of people infected with clade I may die, compared to 1% or less of those infected with clade II.

Traditionally, both clades of mpox have been endemic in countries in central and western Africa, where it transmits from animals to humans, and has occasionally caused human outbreaks.

Mpox outbreaks began occurring outside Africa in 2018, with cases detected in the United Kingdom, Israel and Singapore in people travelling from Nigeria, which began experiencing outbreaks in 2017.

The 2022 epidemic spread to non-endemic regions such as Europe, the Americas, and Australia, with more than 97,000 cases confirmed globally to date.

These outbreaks were caused by clade IIb, a variant of clade II, with case fatality below 1%. Clade IIb is also behind the current cases in Australia.

How does mpox spread?

Recent research indicates both clades of mpox are undergoing rapid mutations, with genetic changes in clade I that may enhance its transmissibility among humans.

These mutations suggest a shift from its historical zoonotic transmission patterns toward sustained human-to-human spread.

Mpox spreads between people primarily through close contact with infected lesions or bodily fluids. Sexual transmission accounts for most of clade IIb’s spread, especially among high-risk groups like gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men.

The pattern of spread appears different for the two clades. Like smallpox, mpox is a respiratory virus and has been found in ambient air, so respiratory transmission is possible.

Clade I is causing large epidemics in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), with more than 20,000 suspected cases since 2023.

The estimated fatality rate in DRC is 4.6%, with 70% of cases and close to 90% of deaths in children under 15.

This suggests respiratory and close-contact transmission are the primary modes of spread in DRC. However, sexual transmission of clade I has also been reported.

Vaccination is our best bet

The primary strategy for preventing further outbreaks of mpox in Australia is vaccination. The recommended shot is the JYNNEOS vaccine, which was developed as a smallpox vaccine.

Older smallpox vaccines are made from a live virus called vaccinia, a related orthopoxvirus that protects against smallpox and mpox. The older vaccines have fully replicating vaccinia virus in them, which can be risky for people with weakened immune systems. The JYNNEOS vaccine is modified so the vaccinia virus doesn’t replicate in the body and is safer for people with conditions such as HIV.

For full protection, two doses are required at least 28 days apart. Two doses given before exposure to the virus is 84% effective in preventing mpox and protection is believed to last for at least a couple of years.

Cases may still occur in people who are vaccinated, but these infections are typically milder.

The vaccine is also effective after exposure to the virus, but less so than if it’s given beforehand.

Who should get vaccinated?

Australian guidelines recommend vaccination in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. They also recommend vaccination for sex workers, and people with HIV who may be at risk of exposure to mpox.

Health-care workers who treat or are likely to treat patients with mpox are advised to consider having the vaccine.

Post-exposure vaccination is recommended for people who public health authorities classify as having had a high-risk mpox contact in the previous 14 days.

Australia’s approach to the 2022 mpox outbreak involved ensuring early access to vaccination and working closely with LGBTQ+ community and health organisations. These organisations raised awareness of mpox symptoms, modes of transmission, and vaccination.

In 2023, 48% of gay and bisexual men in Sydney and Melbourne reported having received at least one dose of mpox vaccine. Rapid uptake of vaccines may have contributed to low rates of mpox in Australia.

Future focus

It appears mpox has become established as a sexually transmitted infection in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. Achieving and maintaining high rates of vaccination in this group will be crucial in long-term prevention efforts.

Ongoing surveillance is also important, while contact tracing will help minimise the size of any clusters, facilitating post-exposure vaccination where warranted. In Australia, state and territory health departments have extensive experience in contact tracing and work with affected communities.

Australia has so far been successful in avoiding a major epidemic, including in early 2023 when Sydney WorldPride brought thousands of gay men from around the world to Sydney.

In the next few years, unequal access to vaccination around the world will likely mean continued introductions of mpox from settings with lower vaccination rates. Ensuring equitable vaccine access is vital to global and local disease control.

A global approach to controlling mpox is essential, as infections in one country can spread rapidly internationally, as the 2022 epidemic showed.

C Raina MacIntyre receives funding from NHMRC and MRFF. She has been on advisory boards for Bavarian Nordic and received funding for a smallpox workshop she conducted in 2019 from Emergent Biosolutions, Bavarian Nordic, Siga technologies and Meridien Medical. She is on the WHO SAGE Smallpox and Monkey Pox Ad Hoc Advisory Group.

Andrew Grulich and Mo Hammoud 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. Mpox is on the rise in Australia. Here’s what to know about the virus – and who should get vaccinated – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231289

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samara McPhedran, Principal Research Fellow, Griffith University

After last week’s tragic double murder suicide in the Perth suburb of Floreat, questions have been raised about why police did not remove the killer’s legally owned firearms. Allegedly, his daughter alerted police multiple times that she and her mother believed they were at imminent risk of harm, but no action was taken.

Under current firearms laws, Western Australia’s police have very broad powers to seize firearms if they believe there is a risk of harm being suffered by any person. We do not know why those powers were not used.

However, the WA government has announced it is going to change the law to make it mandatory for police to remove firearms from anyone who is the subject of a domestic violence complaint.

Will this really protect domestic violence victims, or is it just a political ploy to deflect attention from how police respond to domestic violence incidents in the state?

How do police assess risk in domestic violence cases?

There are many different ways for police to deal with domestic violence incidents. This includes, for example, issuing a protection order, taking a perpetrator into custody, or referring the victim to other services.

Risk-assessment processes help police decide what type of response is most appropriate. Generally, when police conduct risk assessments they use a combination of interviews with the victim (and sometimes the perpetrator), professional judgement, and structured “tick box” tools.

These tools consider indicators such as whether:

• the victim is fearful
• the perpetrator has ever threatened to kill them
• the perpetrator has ever physically assaulted them
• the perpetrator has ever threatened them with a weapon of any kind.

Whether the perpetrator has access to firearms is included as part of the risk assessment.

Risk assessment is imperfect and not always able to detect “subtle” or “hidden” forms of abuse. How accurate risk assessment is also depends on things like the experience of the police officer and what information is disclosed to them.

How police respond to domestic violence can also be affected by their perceptions of the victim and/or perpetrator, as well as by their own beliefs and knowledge about domestic violence.

Is domestic abuse with firearms common?

Homicide statistics are held by different agencies and it is difficult to get exact breakdowns of method by homicide type.

According to the most recent figures from the Australian government’s National Homicide Monitoring Program, in 2022–23, there were 75 female homicide victims nationally. Of those, eight were killed by a gunshot wound.

We do not know how many of those firearm deaths were domestic and family violence related, but a different source, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, says in 2022 (the most recent data) there were 71 female domestic and family violence related homicide victims nationwide, none of whom were killed with a firearm.

Australian Bureau of Statistics data also shows Western Australia has very few domestic and family violence related homicide deaths involving firearms.

Will mandatory gun removal make a practical difference?

It is hard to say whether mandatory firearm removal will make a difference to domestic and family violence homicides. On the surface, it looks like it should, but domestic violence is complex.

WA has so few firearm-related domestic and family violence fatalities that it is unlikely we will ever be able to determine whether anything has changed. We also do not know how many homicides may occur in cases where firearms have been removed using existing police powers, but where another method was used.

Moving past the numbers, there is a concern the proposed laws may create a false sense of security for victims, as well as lead to police complacency. Just because guns have been removed does not mean a victim is safe.

What should the next steps be?

Sadly, we see many cases where victims of lethal domestic and family violence tried repeatedly to get help in the lead up to their deaths. Too often, the systems that are meant to protect them did not listen and did not hold the perpetrator accountable.

Lawyers, advocates and families in WA are coming forward and saying things need to change. Yet the government has been silent on how it plans to better protect domestic and family violence victims where there is no firearm present.

In Queensland, after a series of high-profile domestic and family violence related deaths, the government convened an independent commission of inquiry into Queensland police service responses to domestic and family violence. That inquiry revealed a need for better risk assessment practices, improved police training and education, and system-wide reforms so that victims are taken seriously.

If the WA government genuinely wants to protect people from domestic and family violence, it must stop trying to sweep difficult questions under the rug. The reality is that headline-grabbing laws cannot fix systemic problems.

Dr Samara McPhedran does not does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that might benefit from this article. She has been appointed to a number of firearms advisory panels and committees, most recently as a member of the Queensland Ministerial Advisory Panel on Firearms, and as a previous member of the Commonwealth Firearms Advisory Council. She does not receive any financial remuneration or other reward for these activities. She has held past memberships with/volunteered for a range of not-for-profit firearm-related organisations, women’s advocacy groups, and victim support charities. She is not, and has never been, a member of any political party. The views expressed are those of the author alone.

– ref. New laws in WA would take guns away from people accused of domestic violence. Will they protect women? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231476

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan McConnell, Senior Research Associate, Renewable Energy & Energy Systems Analyst, UNSW Sydney

In Australia’s electricity system, more and more energy from sunlight and wind is being “spilled” – or not converted to electricity.

In the last year, the amount of renewable energy spilled was roughly equivalent to the annual consumption of 750,000 typical households, or three months of consumption for the state of South Australia. Some have attributed these dynamics as being driven by a “solar power glut”.

At face value, this seems like a terrible waste of renewable energy, even more so in the face of a slump in rate of renewable energy growth and the pressing need to reduce emissions.

But the story is more complex. Such spillage, also known as curtailment, is also an expected and efficient feature of renewable energy systems.

What is ‘spilled energy’?

The energy market operator defines spilled energy as “energy from variable renewable energy resources that could be generated but is unable to be delivered”.

It represents energy that could have been converted to electricity, but wasn’t. The unconverted energy simply remains in the environment.

It is typically broken down into two categories, based on the cause of the spillage. Firstly, there is curtailment based on the operation of the transmission network. Power generation can be constrained due to operation limits or congestion in the network, resulting in spilled energy. This can occur when there are too many generators in the same area, trying to send power through the same transmission line. Secondly, a generator may reduce output due to low market prices, which the operator calls “economic spill” also known as “economic curtailment”.

The amount of this curtailment has been growing in recent years. In the last 12 months this curtailed energy represents more than 8.5% of the total potential. This varies considerably by region, with as much 12% spilled in Victoria in the last year.

Why is spillage efficient?

It doesn’t make economic sense to try and utilise every renewable electron. The cost to store, transmit and utilise every single watt of power from a renewable energy source would be exorbitant.

For example, we don’t build additional highway lanes to accommodate traffic for the busiest single hour on an Easter weekend. In a similar way, it doesn’t make sense to build transmission to ensure every single watt is transferred. This would be expensive and result in severely underused infrastucture. For the more common weather conditions – when it isn’t blowing a gale or in the middle of a sunny day – the network would be considerably oversized.

Studies that model energy systems primarily powered by renewables commonly find it is more economically efficient to build additional renewable capacity, and spill some generation when there is an abundance of supply above demand.

The Integrated System Plan, a roadmap for the electricity system prepared by Australia’s energy market operator, projects an increase of renewable energy curtailment in the best case scenario. Approximately 20% of renewable generation is expected to be spilled by 2050. This is roughly equivalent to the current consumption of the state of New South Wales.

On one level, this shouldn’t be surprising.

Households often buy larger solar PV system relative to their consumption.

And it’s now common practice to install solar panels in excess of the capacity of the inverter to convert the power and send it to the home or grid. This is usually done to maximise use of the inverter and exports across a limited connection.

These two examples are broadly analogous to what happens on the grid, with economic curtailment and transmission-based curtailment.

Are current levels efficient?

At a system-wide level, current levels of spillage are above what was expected. The integrated system plan suggests curtailment rates of around 5% might be considered appropriate for today’s penetration of renewable energy, compared with the today’s level of around 8.5%. This difference relates to how things are working in the real world, including how rules around accessing transmission capacity currently work.

A recent discussion paper from the Australian Energy Market Commission highlights this mismatch, and suggest that “in the absence of reform, actual levels of curtailment are likely to exceed the levels forecast in the ISP”, pointing to issues with the current arrangements for generators accessing transmission capacity.

They imply the current system is resulting in higher than expected congestion, leading to increased costs for consumers and potentially unnecessary transmission builds. Managing transmission access remains a challenge for developers building new renewables projects.

Australia’s fleet of coal-fired power generators is another key driver of economic curtailment. While coal generators are more flexible than commonly understood, they have their limits. Specifically, they can only reduce operation down so far, to so-called minimum generation levels. Below these levels, they have to turn off completely, which is a costly exercise.

Coal generators therefore prefer to continue to generate, even at negative prices, rather than completely shut down. As a consequence, and to avoid paying to generate, renewable energy is spilled, rather than coal shutdown. In the context of the energy transition and the need to reduce emissions we actually have a glut of coal, rather than renewables.

Where to next?

The curtailment story is complex. On the one hand it is an expected phenomenon, and one we should get used to as we transition more toward a renewable-dominated electricity system. We should, however, be encouraging consumers to make use of this abundance of renewable generation where possible, such as by shifting their useage to the middle of the day.

On the other hand, some of these levels of curtailment are beyond what is expected. That’s in part because we still have an excess of coal power. We separately need to ensure grid congestion is properly managed, and access arrangements are reformed, to prevent unnecessary costs to consumers and renewable developers alike.

Dylan McConnell’s current position is supported by the ‘Race for 2030’ Cooperative Research Centre.

– ref. Should we worry about wasting renewable energy? Here’s why ‘spilling’ excess power is expected – and efficient – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/229489

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maria Vieira, Lecturer, University of South Australia

Last week, Science and Industry Minister Ed Husic announced with little fanfare that the position of Australia’s Women in STEM Ambassador would be discontinued, effective three days later.

The role was created in October 2018 “to encourage girls and women to study and work in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields”. Astrophysicist Lisa Harvey-Smith held the job for its entire existence.

Was the ambassador a success? It’s hard to quantify exactly, but Department of Industry figures show the number of women in STEM-qualified occupations increased by 38% during the ambassador’s tenure, compared with a 10% rise for men. University enrolments for women in STEM courses also grew by 18%, compared with a 9% increase for men.

So does that mean the end of the ambassador position is a setback for gender equity in Australia? Well, not necessarily.

Reasons for discontinuing

The decision came a few months after the publication of a major independent report on diversity in STEM commissioned by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources.

The report indicates more effort is needed to remove cultural and systemic barriers that hinder individuals from diverse backgrounds from entering and sustaining careers in STEM. It also calls for specific changes to the government’s Women in STEM programs, including that “the current Women in STEM Ambassador program should not be extended”.

So the government’s decision is based on considered, independent advice.

What was the reason for this advice? Over the past decade, Australia has had hundreds of disconnected STEM activities that have not been very effective in addressing gender equity issues.

Although the statistics shared by the ambassador appear promising at first glance, a deeper analysis reveals a less encouraging reality. For instance, the most recent data shows that, between 2021 and 2022, the number of women in STEM-qualified occupations only increased by the same percentage as men (4%).

Also, even though university enrolments for women in STEM courses have increased, this growth is not reflected in completion rates. For example, only 15% of women who had completed their studies by 2016 graduated in STEM fields, compared to 33% of men, indicating issues with retaining women in these courses.

Additionally, this statistic does not account for the significant disparities between different STEM fields. While women make up over half of the student enrolments and completions in fields such as agriculture, natural and environmental sciences, they remain significantly underrepresented in engineering (18% of completions) and technology (23% of completions). These initiatives lacked a strong research background and effective evaluation, failing to analyse each STEM field with its unique characteristics.

The report found “a need for a centralised approach to drive ambitious progress on diversity in STEM across all sectors”.

What it means for the future of equity

If this decision is any guide, the government is likely to implement more of the report’s suggested changes. So what can we anticipate?

One expected change is a broader perspective on equity in STEM. We are likely to see more attention to other kinds of diversity beyond gender, and also recognition of non-binary approaches to gender. This approach may address equity more systematically. Including intersectional factors such as disabilities, race, Indigenous status and socioeconomic background may benefit more disadvantaged communities.

Additionally, equity programs may have a stronger basis in evidence and long-term orientation. The report emphasises the importance of greater coordination across programs to avoid duplication, lack of connection, and missed opportunities.

While the overall approach may have more centralised coordination, the functions now carried out by the ambassador are likely to be split up among multiple people from diverse backgrounds. This would place less weight on a single individual and also broaden the scope of the program’s advice, which is again a positive change.

Monitoring and evaluation too should receive more attention, becoming more focused with clear indicators of success or failure.

We can also expect more reporting of what has been learned from past programs, so that funders and organisations can make future efforts more effective.

Potential drawbacks

While the changes proposed in the report are positive overall, they could also have drawbacks.

One example is the risk that national centralisation may make states and regions less able to address their own specific needs. In primary and secondary education, for instance, each state operates independently, which might affect the effectiveness of national initiatives.

Another concern is that a long-term orientation and more stringent requirements for data and record-keeping may make for more bureaucracy. This could be time-consuming and affect innovation.

The report also calls for other action to promote diversity via migration, education, grant allocation and workplace changes. However, not everything can be a high priority.

The success of efforts to increased diversity in STEM will depend on the government’s ability to demonstrate a strong commitment and maintain transparency. This involves setting clear priorities and focusing on key areas that can create the most significant impact.

Maria Vieira 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. Australia’s key program for gender equity in STEM was scrapped last week. This could actually be good news – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231321

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julia J Rucklidge, Professor of Psychology, University of Canterbury

Antenatal depression affects 15% to 21% of pregnant women worldwide. It can influence birth outcomes and children’s development, as well as increase the risk of post-natal depression.

Current treatments like therapy can be inaccessible and antidepressants can carry risks for developing infants.

Over the past two decades, research has highlighted that poor nutrition is a contributing risk factor to mental health challenges. Most pregnant women in New Zealand aren’t adhering to nutritional guidelines, according to a longitudinal study. Only 3% met the recommendations for all food groups.

Another cohort study carried out in Brazil shows that ultra-processed foods (UPF) accounted for at least 30% of daily dietary energy during pregnancy, displacing healthier options.

UPFs are chemically manufactured and contain additives to improve shelf life, as well as added sugar and salt. Importantly, they are low in essential micronutrients (vitamins and minerals).

The consumption of these foods is concerning because a nutrient-poor diet during pregnancy has been linked to poorer mental health outcomes in children. This includes depression, anxiety, hyperactivity, and inattention.

Increasing nutrients in maternal diets and reducing consumption of UPFs could improve the mental health of the mother and the next generation. Good nutrition can have lifelong benefits for the offspring.

However, there are multiple factors that mean diet change alone may not in itself be sufficient to address mental health challenges. Supplementing with additional nutrients may also be important to address nutritional needs during pregnancy.

Micronutrients as treatment for depression

Our earlier research suggests micronutrient supplements for depression have benefits outside pregnancy.

But until now there have been no published randomised controlled trials specifically designed to assess the efficacy and safety of broad-spectrum micronutrients on antenatal depression and overall functioning.

The NUTRIMUM trial, which ran between 2017 and 2022, recruited 88 women in their second trimester of pregnancy who reported moderate depressive symptoms. They were randomly allocated to receive either 12 capsules (four pills, three times a day) of a broad-spectrum micronutrient supplement or an active placebo containing iodine and riboflavin for a 12-week period.

Micronutrient doses were generally between the recommended dietary allowance and the tolerable upper level.

Based on clinician ratings, micronutrients significantly improved overall psychological functioning compared to the placebo. The findings took into account all noted changes based on self-assessment and clinician observations. This includes sleep, mood regulation, coping, anxiety and side effects.

Both groups reported similar reductions in symptoms of depression. More than three quarters of participants were in remission at the end of the trial. But 69% of participants in the micronutrient group rated themselves as “much” or “very much” improved, compared to 39% in the placebo group.

Participants taking the micronutrients also experienced significantly greater improvements in sleep and overall day-to-day functioning, compared to participants taking the placebo. There were no group differences on measures of stress, anxiety and quality of life.

Importantly, there were no group differences in reported side effects, and reports of suicidal thoughts dropped over the course of the study for both groups. Blood tests confirmed increased vitamin levels (vitamin C, D, B12) and fewer deficiencies in the micronutrient group.

Micronutrients were particularly helpful for women with chronic mental health challenges and those who had taken psychiatric medications in the past. Those with milder symptoms improved with or without the micronutrients, suggesting general care and monitoring might suffice for some women.

The benefits of micronutrients were comparable to psychotherapy but with less contact. There are no randomised controlled trials of antidepressant medication to compare these results.

Retention in the study was good (81%) and compliance excellent (90%).

Beyond maternal mental health

We followed the infants of mothers enrolled in the NUTRIMUM trial (who were therefore exposed to micronutrients during pregnancy) for 12 months, alongside infants from the general population of Aotearoa New Zealand.

This second group of infants from the general population contained a smaller sub-group who were exposed to antidepressant medication for the treatment of antenatal depression.

We assessed the neuro-behavioural development of each infant within the first four weeks of life, and temperament up to one year after birth.

These observational follow-ups showed positive effects of micronutrients on the infants’ ability to regulate their behaviour. These results were on par with or better than typical pregnancies, and better than treatments with antidepressants.

Infants exposed to micronutrients during pregnancy were significantly better at attending to external stimuli. They were also better able to block out external stimuli during sleep. They showed fewer signs of stress and had better muscle tone compared to infants not exposed to micronutrients.

They also displayed greater ability to interact with their environment. They were better at regulating their emotional state and had fewer abnormal muscle reflexes than infants exposed to antidepressant medication in pregnancy.

Reassuringly, micronutrients had no negative impact on infant temperament.

These findings highlight the potential of micronutrients as a safe and effective alternative to traditional medication treatments for antenatal depression.

The prenatal environment sets the foundation for a child’s future. Further investigation into the benefits of micronutrient supplementation would gives us more confidence in their use for other perinatal (from the start of pregnancy to a year after birth) mental health issues. This could provide future generations with a better start to life.

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Dr Hayley Bradley to this research project.

Julia J Rucklidge receives or has received funding from Health Research Council of NZ, University of Canterbury Foundation, Waterloo Foundation, GAMA Foundation, Foundation for Excellence in Mental Health Care, and Canterbury Medical Research Foundation.

Elena Moltchanova, Roger Mulder, and Siobhan A Campbell 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. For women with antenatal depression, micronutrients might help them and their babies – new study – https://theconversation.com/for-women-with-antenatal-depression-micronutrients-might-help-them-and-their-babies-new-study-228097

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Falconer, Lecturer, T.C. Beirne School of Law, The University of Queensland

In recent weeks, Southern Cryonics – the southern hemisphere’s only cryopreservation facility, located in rural New South Wales – announced it had successfully cryopreserved its first patient.

There are only a handful of cryopreservation facilities across the globe – two in the United States, and one each in Russia, China, Australia and Switzerland. If the claims made on their websites and in the press are accurate, these facilities likely have no more than 600 patients in cryonic storage in total.

Media reports however suggest interest in cryopreservation has risen since the onset of the COVID pandemic, and thousands of people around the world have signed up to be cryopreserved after their death.

So, what is cryopreservation and what are its legal ramifications?

What is cryopreservation?

Cryopreservation is the process of using extreme cold to preserve biological material (such as semen, blood and tissue samples) for an extended time. The first living thing to be cryopreserved was a fowl sperm in the 1940s; the first person was cryopreserved in 1967.

To cryopreserve a person, the most important step is a process called “vitrification”. First, the blood is pumped out of the body. It is replaced with a chemical protectant designed to partially replace the water in the body’s cells with a chemical mixture that prevents the formation of ice (not unlike the antifreeze found in car engines).

The body of the “patient” is then placed in something akin to a sleeping bag and sealed in a dewar – a large vat of liquid nitrogen – and maintained at a temperature of -196°C until the time for resurrection comes.

The ultimate aim is for the cryopreserved patient to be reanimated at a future time when medical science has advanced sufficiently to cure them of whatever caused their initial “death”. However, there’s no evidence to suggest it will ever happen in the future.

A possible legal minefield

While its proponents describe cryopreservation as “a second chance at life”, scientists are quick to point out the chances of a successful reanimation are slim.

A person has to be declared legally dead before their body can be cryopreserved, meaning a successful reanimation would truly be a second (legal) life for the revived patient.

It could also be a legal minefield.

Questions that arise include:

• are you the same person in your second life as you were in your first, or are you a new legal person entirely?

• what happens to the legal obligations you undertook in your first life when you reawaken in your second?

• are you still bound by the phone contract you entered into?

• do you have to restart your mortgage repayments, and is your property even still your property?

The answer to the last question is likely to be “no”. A dead person cannot own property so when they die, their estate – their money and material possessions – is distributed to others according to their will (or, if they die without a will in place, according to the rules of intestacy).

This means, short of radically rewriting our succession laws, if someone is successfully reanimated, none of the wealth or belongings they previously enjoyed will be available to them.

This creates the possibility of “cryonic refugees” – people who wake from cryopreservation in a future time with no social or community ties to rely on and no funds to live off.

In the US, one cryonics facility has attempted to get around this issue by encouraging patients to place their assets in long-term trusts.

A trust is a legal structure whereby Person A becomes the legal owner of a property, but can only use it for the benefit of Person B. There are particular rules about who Person B can be – they have to be legally identifiable, for example, and must be able to claim the trust property within a set time period (80 years in many Australian jurisdictions).

In the case of the cryonics trust, Person B is the reanimated patient – someone of uncertain legal identity (remember, we don’t know if the reanimated patient is the same legal person across their two lives or not) with no guarantee of claiming the trust property within the necessary time period.

These are certainly reasons for lawyers to be sceptical. And of course, even if the trusts are upheld, there is no guarantee the assets they contain will retain their value in an unknown future world.

Other legal grey areas

Even prior to reanimation, however, a cryopreserved patient’s finances can present legal difficulties.

While the upfront costs of the initial cryopreservation procedure – which can come in at more than A$150,000 – are often covered by life insurance policies or a one-off payment in a will, the fact that cryonic storage is intended to last for the very long term raises questions about how ongoing bills will be paid far into the future.

There are even historic examples of cryonics facilities threatening to remove patients from suspension unless outstanding storage bills are paid.

Would such an action constitute murder? Can you kill someone who is already dead?

To reach an answer, the law will likely require a test case.

Kate Falconer 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. You can now be frozen after death in Australia. If you get revived in the future, will you still legally be the same person? – https://theconversation.com/you-can-now-be-frozen-after-death-in-australia-if-you-get-revived-in-the-future-will-you-still-legally-be-the-same-person-230876

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Smart, Lecturer and Researcher (Speech Pathology) – School of Allied Health, Curtin University

There is increasing media interest about surgical procedures on new babies for tongue tie. Some hail it as a miracle cure, others view it as barbaric treatment, though adverse outcomes are rare.

Tongue tie occurs when the tissue under the tongue is attached to the lower gum or floor of the mouth in a way that can restrict the movement or range of the tongue. This can impact early breastfeeding in babies. It affects an estimated 8% of children under one year of age.

While there has been an increase in tongue tie releases (also called division or frenotomy), it’s important to keep this in perspective relative to the increase in breastfeeding rates.

The World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life, with breastfeeding recommended into the second year of life and beyond for the health of mother and baby as well as optimal growth. Global rates of breastfeeding infants for the first six months have increased from 38% to 48% over the past decade. So, it is not surprising there is also an increase in the number of babies being referred globally with breastfeeding challenges and potential tongue tie.

An Australian study published in 2023 showed that despite a 25% increase in referrals for tongue tie division between 2014 and 2018, there was no increase in the number of tongue tie divisions performed. Tongue tie surgery rates increased in Australia in the decade from 2006 to 2016 (from 1.22 per 1,000 population to 6.35) for 0 to 4 year olds. There is no data on surgery rates in Australia over the last eight years.

Tongue tie division isn’t always appropriate but it can make a big difference to the babies who need it. More referrals doesn’t necessarily mean more procedures are performed.

How tongue tie can affect babies

When tongue tie (ankyloglossia) restricts the movement of the tongue, it can make it more difficult for a baby to latch onto the mother’s breast and painlessly breastfeed.

Earlier this month, the International Consortium of Oral Ankylofrenula Professionals released a tongue tie position statement and practice guideline. Written by a range of health professionals, the guidelines define tongue tie as a functional diagnosis that can impact breastfeeding, eating, drinking and speech. The guidelines provide health professionals and families with information on the assessment and management of tongue tie.

Tongue tie release has been shown to improve latch during breastfeeding, reduce nipple pain and improve breast and bottle feeding. Early assessment and treatment are important to help mothers breastfeed for longer and address any potential functional problems.

Where to get advice

If feeding isn’t going well, it may cause pain for the mother or there may be signs the baby isn’t attaching properly to the breast or not getting enough milk. Parents can seek skilled help and assessment from a certified lactation consultant or International Board-Certified Lactation Consultant who can be found via online registry.

Alternatively, a health professional with training and skills in tongue tie assessment and division can assist families. This may include a doctor, midwife, speech pathologist or dentist with extended skills, training and experience in treating babies with tongue tie.

When access to advice or treatment is delayed, it can lead to unnecessary supplementation with bottle feeds, early weaning from breastfeeding and increased parental anxiety.

Getting a tongue tie assessment

During assessment, a qualified health professional will collect a thorough case history, including pregnancy and birth details, do a structural and functional assessment, and conduct a comprehensive breastfeeding or feeding assessment.

They will view and thoroughly examine the mouth, including the tongue’s movement and lift. The appearance of where the tissue attaches to the underside of the tongue, the ability of the tongue to move and how the baby can suck also needs to be properly assessed.

Treatment decisions should focus on the concerns of the mother and baby and the impact of current feeding issues. Tongue tie division as a baby is not recommended for the sole purpose of avoiding speech problems in later life if there are no feeding concerns for the baby.

Treatment options

The Australian Dental Association’s 2020 guidelines provide a management pathway for babies diagnosed with tongue tie.

Once feeding issues are identified and if a tongue tie is diagnosed, non-surgical management to optimise positioning, latch and education for parents should be the first-line approach.

If feeding issues persist during follow-up assessment after non-surgical management, a tongue tie division may be considered. Tongue tie release may be one option to address functional challenges associated with breastfeeding problems in babies.

There are risks associated with any procedure, including tongue tie release, such as bleeding. These risks should be discussed with the treating practitioner before conducting any laser, scissor or scalpel tongue tie procedure.

Post-release support by a certified lactation consultant or feeding specialist is necessary after a tongue tie division. A post-release treatment plan should be developed by a team of health professionals including advice and support for breastfeeding to address both the mother and baby’s individual needs.

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Raymond J. Tseng in the writing of this article.

Sharon Smart is Vice Chair for the International Consortium of oral Ankylofrenula Professionals and Treasurer for the Australasian Society of Tethered Oral Tissues. These are volunteer roles.

David Todd is chair for the Australasian Society for Tethered Oral Tissue. This is a voluntary role.

Monica J Hogan has a small private practice where she sees mothers and babies for tongue tie assessment, treatment and review.

– ref. Debate over tongue tie procedures in babies continues. Here’s why it can be beneficial for some infants – https://theconversation.com/debate-over-tongue-tie-procedures-in-babies-continues-heres-why-it-can-be-beneficial-for-some-infants-230008

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachael Sharman, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, University of the Sunshine Coast

Family meetings are often touted as an effective way to resolve conflicts, work out some shared goals and bring the family together.

They seem to wax and wane in popularity. But as Google Trends shows, there has been a steady growth in people searching for information about family meetings over the past decade, with a spike during 2021, at the height of the pandemic.

I’m a psychology researcher interested family dynamics and how they affect children’s development. Here are some of the potential benefits – and risks – of holding regular family meetings.

Do you need family meetings?

Well, it depends.

People sometimes question the difference between a family meeting and, say, dinner.

If you all get together at mealtimes and engage constructively with plenty of conversation, it may well be redundant (and a waste of your kids’ valuable play time) to throw in an extra meeting just for the sake of it.

However, some families (including situations where parents are shift workers or FIFO workers) may find getting everyone together around the table on a regular basis quite challenging.

How to hold a productive family meeting

Regular family meetings certainly can have some value – especially if everyone gets a voice, feels heard and feels they can speak freely.

These type of meetings could be framed as an opportunity to:

• catch up with what everyone is doing and feeling

• inform each other about upcoming events or challenges

• genuinely canvass different opinions on how best to move forward.

A positive family meeting ensures everyone (even the quiet kid) is asked their opinion, and can speak their mind without interruption or criticism.

Consider the children’s ages and what issues are actually not up for them to decide. Children don’t get to vote on having ice cream every night for dinner.

At the end of the day, families are not pure democracies. While a child’s brain is still developing, they aren’t ready to forecast outcomes or hypothesise solutions. They rely on their parents to help them do that.

Meetings at different stages of family life

The pre-adolescent child lives in the here and now. What is right in front of them is what they can understand.

The idea of moving house, for example, may seem catastrophic; they might feel they’re being taken away from their school, sports and friends. Using a family meeting to hear their concerns or fears and work together on solutions or compromises might prove useful.

Teenagers are typically quite capable, but it’s developmentally normal for them to feel their emotions very keenly. Their reactions may appear, to adult eyes, a little overwhelming in the moment. Give them time at family meetings to think and process, and articulate their position.

While there are few peer-reviewed studies on family meetings, research does show they can work where there are serious issues to discuss.

For example, family meetings involving adult siblings in the case of elder care or palliative care have been trialled with moderate success.

In general, keeping lines of communication open and ensuring even the family wallflower has a regular contribution sounds positive. But there’s also a wrong way to hold family meetings.

What not to do

There’s a notable lack of actual research around family meetings involving children, even though they are prominently recommended in pop psychology.

Given the paucity of research in this field, I had a quick trawl through some threads on Quora and Reddit, where adults discussed whether their family meetings as children were useful. Many responses revealed some less-than-helpful experiences.

Some described family meetings as being dominated – usually by one parent – to dictate to everyone else in the family what was happening (from their point of view only).

A dictator parent might, for example, use a family meeting to issue orders about what they expected of everyone else (without allowing any feedback on their own performance).

People spoke about:

• having chores assigned to them (with no negotiation)

• parental decisions (such as moving house or schools) being imposed with zero input or feedback allowed from those affected

• a sense that not everyone could speak freely or safely.

Research tells us authoritarian parenting (where communication goes one way only, parents are inflexible and don’t listen) leads to a range of negative impacts on children. These can include anxiety, poor self esteem and feelings of failure.

A weaponised family meeting from the family dictator may well prove extremely detrimental.

It may even go as far as inducing learned helplessness. This is where people “learn” their voice is unimportant, and just give up even trying to have a say.

Others remembered a family meeting was only ever called when divorce or death was about to ensue.

This associates family meetings with a sense of impending doom. Unsurprisingly, this left some adults with a very strong aversion to the idea.

All in all, it seems the concept of a family meeting is a reasonable one. But like most things in life, the devil is in the detail.

As one US study put it:

Just holding meetings does not matter, but inclusiveness of those meetings does matter.

Rachael Sharman 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. Could family meetings help you get on better with your kids? Yes – but they can also go horribly wrong – https://theconversation.com/could-family-meetings-help-you-get-on-better-with-your-kids-yes-but-they-can-also-go-horribly-wrong-231274

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dr Imran Ali, Senior Lecturer in Operations and Innovation Management, CQUniversity Australia

Oranges – and all the things we can make from them – are big business. But the industry is facing a severe crisis.

About 50 million tonnes of oranges are grown each year, 34% of them in Brazil. Brazil is also the world’s biggest exporter of orange juice by far, producing about 70% of global supply.

But Brazil’s orange-growing regions have recently endured extreme drought and heat stress in the crop’s flowering period, as well as alarming rates of citrus greening disease – an incurable bacterial infection.

As a result, Brazil’s orange production is now forecast to fall by more than 24% in the 2024–25 season, which would be the country’s smallest harvest since the late 1980s.

The situation in Brazil has been exacerbated by declining production in other major orange-growing regions such as Florida, Israel, Spain and Argentina.

Combined, these pressures saw the futures price of frozen concentrated orange juice – which represents a contract for future delivery – hit an all time high last week.

So how might these global pressures impact Australia – and the breakfast rituals of so many?

Where does Australia get its juice?

Australia certainly grows a lot of oranges itself, with major plantations in the Riverina, Murray Valley and Riverland. We’re the world’s 12th-biggest producer of the fruit.

Despite this, strong demand means we still rely heavily on imports of frozen orange juice concentrate for about half of what is consumed here. About 80% of these imports come from Brazil, followed by Israel at about 10%.

Australian consumers have not yet been as severely affected as those in Europe and the US, as local orange growers have been able to somewhat fill the supply gap in the domestic market. However, it’s likely our over-reliance on orange concentrate from Brazil will eventually lead to a supply crunch here.

At this stage, it’s hard to know exactly what the full effect on consumers will be. Frozen concentrated orange juice is typically used for cheaper retail orange juice, but the shortage will put upward pressure on the price of orange juice more broadly.

Orange juice concentrate has also been used for a wide range of commercial uses, including cosmetics, cleaning products, vitamin supplements and beverage blends. Many of these products rely on orange concentrate as a key ingredient. Therefore, we could also see significant supply disruptions and price spikes across a range of other products.

The situation could prompt consumers and producers to choose alternatives.
In the breakfast beverage market, products blending orange juice with apple, mango or pineapple may become increasingly attractive to consumers on cost alone.

Mandarins may be a particularly promising alternative given how closely their taste and nutritional value aligns with orange juice.

Will the crisis benefit Australia’s orange industry?

In theory, the global shortage could be a boon for Australia’s local industry, given our favourable climate and well-established orange production regions.

Increasing our domestic production of oranges would not only help meet domestic demand, but could also help capitalise on the current shortage by increasing exports.

Australian producers will probably enjoy higher prices for orange juice in the short term, but our local citrus industry isn’t in the best shape. Some orange growers have been leaving the business due to rising production costs, poor supermarket prices and competition from imported products.

Rising input costs and a stubborn shortage of farm workers have intensified financial pressures, making profits elusive. On top of this, the market dominance of Australia’s two major supermarket chains has limited growers’ bargaining power, leading to unfavourable contract terms for many producers.

How could our growers become more resilient?

There’s no quick fix for the current supply shortage of orange juice. But there are a number of steps that could at least make Australia’s citrus industry more resilient to this and any future supply shocks.

In Australia, labour accounts for a substantial amount of total production costs. More investment in automation could decrease the industry’s reliance on labour and ultimately push prices down.

Recognising these technologies may be out of reach for many small and medium-sized growers, governments may need to investigate subsidising them.

Growers could increase their bargaining power against the big supermarkets by further diversifying who they sell to. This could include through direct-to-consumer sales, increasing their presence at farmer markets and engaging in collaborative marketing.

Establishing more fruit-processing facilities and getting better access to the international markets should also be priorities.

And lastly, Australia is highly vulnerable to the severe disruption that climate change poses to the agri-food sector, including orange production. We should prepare for this by conducting more comprehensive research into climate-resilient varieties, renewable energy sources, and offering education programs to growers.

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

– ref. What’s the global orange juice supply crisis – and should Australians be worried? – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-global-orange-juice-supply-crisis-and-should-australians-be-worried-231290

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Yule, Professor of Ecology, University of the Sunshine Coast

When I lived in Kalimantan in Indonesia in the 1990s and later in Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia, I would often wake to toxic, smoke-filled skies. The air would be filled with the distinctive smell of burning peat, as farmers cleared tropical peat swamp forests to make way for oil palm plantations.

Airports and schools would close, and hospitals would fill with people in respiratory distress – myself included. Global greenhouse gas emissions would spike because peatlands are the planet’s most carbon rich ecosystems.

Throughout the world – from the subarctic peat bogs to the tropical peat swamp forests – drainage and rising temperatures are driving increasingly frequent and intense fires, releasing emissions from millions of hectares of peatlands and destroying irreplaceable biodiversity.

Uniquely, an Australian subtropical peatland ecosystem exists that is not only resilient to the frequent bushfires, but actually needs fire to survive.

What are peatlands and why do they matter?

Peat is poorly decomposed plant matter that builds up over millennia in waterlogged environments.

When wet, which is the natural condition, peat can only burn under the most intense fires. As the precursor to coal, however, dried peat is highly flammable. Peat fires can smoulder underground for years until all the peat has burnt away.

We’ve been researching Australian subtropical peatland ecosystems which need fire to survive.

These peatlands were observed by a British scientist flying over K’gari (Fraser Island) in Queensland in 1996, who recognised a characteristic outline suggesting there were peat bogs below.

They were discovered to be peat swamps dominated by the peat-forming plant known as wire rush, Empodisma minus.

Since then, thousands of hectares of these peat swamps have been identified along the ancient sand deposits of the Australian coast from Queensland to New South Wales.

There are many other types of peat swamps and bog in Australia, from the sphagnum bogs of the Australian Alps to the buttongrass moorlands of Tasmania. These are badly affected by fire.

What’s so special about subtropical peat swamps?

These Australian peat swamps hold significant carbon stores in peat deposits up to eight metres deep.

Layers of charcoal are visible throughout peat cores, showing the regular occurrence of fires over many thousands of years.

Their waters shelter rare and endangered fish (including Oxleyan pygmy perch and honey blue-eye), frogs (such as Cooloola and Wallum sedge frogs) and crayfish (such as the sand yabby Cherax robustus), as well as dragonflies, beetles, midges and bugs.

Subtropical wire rush swamps (in places such as K’gari and Cooloola in Southeast Queensland, for example) require fire to suppress other plants – such as dodder, tea trees and banksias – in order to thrive.

Wire rush regrows rapidly after fires from spreading rhizomes (underground roots).

It is a perennial, forming dense masses which eventually die at the centre.

This central detritus is overgrown by foraging roots, forming water filled depressions, eventually creating pools many metres wide.

These wire rush-ringed pools form the distinctive patterns first reported on K’gari.

Intact, long dead, wire rush roots and leaves can be seen deep down in peat cores thousands of years old, along with charcoal and seeds of other plants.

This shows this plant matter doesn’t break down, even after thousands of years. Over many millions of years, peat can form coal – about one metre of peat will turn into about 10cm of coal.

A thick, moist root layer is crucial to fire resistance

Peatland plants are tough and toxic to prevent them being eaten by animals and this slows down microbial decomposition. So instead of completely breaking down, they form the brown mushy substance we call peat.

The plants are rich in carbon-based compounds such as tannins, the chemicals that give black tea its dark colour, creating the distinctive, acidic blackwaters seen in all peatlands.

Wire rush roots have dense hairs that absorb water and nutrients like a microfibre sponge.

These roots grow up, not down, to rapidly scavenge nutrients from leaf litter. They cover the peatland floor, which protects the underlying peat from drying out, and from catching fire.

This thick, moist root layer is crucial to the fire resistance and resilience of the wire rush swamps including the aquatic fauna.

The resident sand yabbies dig multiple burrows through these otherwise almost impenetrable roots to the wet peat below. These wet burrows provide a safe refuge for the fish, frogs and other animals during droughts and fires.

As fires get more intense, we are getting more concerned over the future of these peatlands. The severe 2020 fires on K’Gari resulted in some peat deposits burning down to the sand below.

We still need to know more

Our research group is studying these peat swamps. We want to know how deep and dense the peat is, how animals and plants have adapted to the acidic water, how plants, animals and microbes resist and recover from fires, and whether they can survive hotter and more frequent fires.

The wire rush peat swamps of the subtropical eastern Australian coast are unique and fragile. But they face pressures from urban and agricultural expansion, road construction and climate change. It is important we protect them and the unique ecosystems they harbour.

Catherine Yule receives funding for her peatland research from the Department of Environment and Science, Queensland. Two postdoctoral researchers from Malaysia (previous PhD students of Catherine Yule) received funding for this peatland research from APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) Women in STEM fellowships. The research has also been funded by internal grants from the University of the Sunshine Coast. Catherine Yule is an advisor to the Noosa Biosphere Foundation Board.

– ref. Peat was historically mined overseas because it burns so well. But Australia’s subtropical peat bogs need fire to survive – https://theconversation.com/peat-was-historically-mined-overseas-because-it-burns-so-well-but-australias-subtropical-peat-bogs-need-fire-to-survive-228200

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Currell, Professor of Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering, Griffith University

High-profile legal disputes, such as the current case between coal giant Adani and the Queensland government, show Australia’s approach to managing large mining projects is flawed.

Many projects are allowed to go ahead even though the environmental impacts are uncertain. The idea is any damage to the environment can be managed along the way. This has been the norm for large coal mines and gas developments in Australia since 2013. That’s when legislation known as the Water Trigger came into effect – ironically, to protect water resources from these industries.

But our research shows this approach – known as “adaptive management” – often creates more problems than it solves. This is particularly true when it comes to groundwater, where impacts are difficult to predict in advance, and monitoring may only detect problems when it is too late to act.

These problems include depleting or contaminating groundwater, drying up springs of major cultural and ecological significance, altering river flows and reducing water quality. There are worrying signs the Adani mine is putting the Doongmabulla springs at risk.

What is adaptive management?

Adaptive management seeks to address uncertainty in environmental impact assessments. The approach can be broadly summarised as “learning by doing”.

The original intention was to allow decisions to be made about development proposals without full certainty about the environmental impacts. Ongoing monitoring and continuously updated modelling is then supposed to improve the knowledge base over time. This should help identify new or improved management strategies.

Environmental objectives are supposed to be clearly outlined at the outset. Objectives may include the protection of a key habitat, water resource or region of high ecological significance.

Establishing these objectives is a lengthy process of consultation with groups who have a stake in the project, such as people who live nearby and Traditional Owners with deep connections to the land. These discussions are meant to continue throughout the project as new data and knowledge come to light.

However our research shows adaptive management is often poorly suited to managing impacts on groundwater. This is especially true in cases where:

• there are long lag times between project activity (such as groundwater extraction lowering the water table before pit excavation) and the full effects on the groundwater system

• the impacts could be irreversible, meaning actions taken to address a change in the condition of the environment may come too late to stop permanent damage.

Protecting Doongmabulla Springs

The Adani coal mine was embroiled in many years of controversy about potential impacts on water, climate and endangered animals. When it began operating, scientists warned it was too close to the sacred Doongabulla Springs and risked permanently drying them up.

Our analysis published in 2020 found problems with the miner’s reported understanding of the groundwater system supporting the Doongmabulla Springs. Little effort was made to plan specific actions to protect the springs if monitoring later showed such action was required.

We argue Adani’s use of adaptive management, which the environment minister accepted in approving the mine, was not fit for the agreed purpose of protecting the springs.

The Queensland Department of Environment, Science and Innovation appeared to echo these views in the Supreme Court last month.

The legal action was brought by Adani in 2023, after the Department refused to accept updated groundwater modelling the company had to submit within two years of opening the mine. Instead, the Department issued an Environment Protection Order, which prevents any underground mining until the company:

can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the department that the activity can be conducted in a way that does not exceed the approved impacts

This followed a review by CSIRO and Geoscience Australia. The review found the company’s groundwater model was “unable to support a robust uncertainty analysis and therefore confidence in the range of predicted impacts is low”.

In court, Department staff testified that deficiencies in modelling and gaps in groundwater monitoring mean the “risk of potential impacts (which are potentially irreversible) to the [Doongmabulla] springs is increased while [mining] continues”.

This echoes similar warnings by groundwater researchers prior to the initial approval of the mine.

These springs are vital to the cultural life of the Wangan and Jagalingou people, who testified to the United Nations that the loss of these springs would decimate their culture.

A way forward

Protracted reform of Australia’s environmental laws provides an opportunity to establish clear criteria for when adaptive management can be used.

We argue alternative, more precautionary approaches should be adopted when there is a long interval between the mining activity and potentially irreversible damage.

For example, limits should be placed on the mine’s location, size and water extraction rates. This should be informed by detailed upfront research into the site’s water systems, geology and the ecosystem’s tolerance for changes in water levels and quality.

If adaptive management is to be used in mining projects, there must be a reasonable prospect (and a clear mechanism) to detect and prevent environmental harm. There must also be clarity around when project activities must cease. In line with best practice adaptive management, guidance should be provided to ensure miners clearly outline:

• how monitoring data will be used, in an ongoing process of revising both impact predictions and management strategies
• what specific actions will be taken, and at what point in time if data show unpredicted greater than expected impacts
• how stakeholders will be involved throughout the process of setting and reviewing environmental objectives and monitoring criteria.

Unless these issues are urgently addressed, the “learning by doing” approach will continue to put Australian ecosystems and water resources at risk.

Matthew Currell receives funding from the Australian Research Council through its Linkage Projects scheme to conduct groundwater research with industry partners including the registered charity Coast and Country, Inc.

Adrian Werner receives funding from the Australian Research Council through its Linkage Projects program to conduct groundwater research on the Doongmabulla Springs, including with industry partner Coast and Country, Inc. Adrian was also an expert witness in the Queensland Land Court Case: Adani Mining Pty Ltd v Land Services of Coast and Country Inc & Ors (2015) QLC 48.

– ref. Australia’s ‘learning by doing’ approach to managing large mines is failing the environment – https://theconversation.com/australias-learning-by-doing-approach-to-managing-large-mines-is-failing-the-environment-230857

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugo Olierook, Senior Research Fellow in Geology, Curtin University

We need two ingredients for life to start on a planet: dry land and (fresh) water. Strictly, the water doesn’t have to be fresh, but fresh water can only occur on dry land.

Only with those two conditions met can you convert the building blocks of life, amino acids and nucleic acids into tangible bacterial life that heralds the start of the evolutionary cycle.

The oldest life on Earth left in our fragmented rock record is 3.5 billion years old, with some chemical data showing it may even be as old as 3.8 billion years. Scientists have hypothesised life might be even older, but we have no records of that being the case.

Our new study published in Nature Geoscience provides the first evidence of fresh water and dry land on Earth by 4 billion years ago. Knowing when the cradle of life – water and land – first appeared on Earth ultimately provides clues as to how we came to be.

Water and land: the essences of life

Imagine you’ve stepped into a time machine and gone back 4 billion years ago. As the dials whirr to a halt, you look out and see a vast ocean all around you. Not blue as you know it, but brown with iron and other dissolved minerals. You look up into the sky and it’s dark orange, with a smog of carbon dioxide and regular flashes from incoming meteors. Inhospitable to life.

This is what scientists think Earth looked like 4 billion years ago. But did it?

Just as you abandon all hope for life, you spot it on the horizon: land. Kicking the time machine into travel mode, you fly across to this expanse of emerged rock and touch down.

You quickly realise you’ve stepped onto a volcanic island, with lava spewing across its flanks. But you also feel raindrops on your nose, and you spot water collecting in little pools at the base of the volcano. Cautiously you cup your hands and have a taste … it’s fresh! The first proof there was fresh water on Earth, at least by 4 billion years ago.

Fresh water and emerged land go hand in hand. If all land is underwater, then you can only have salty, ocean water. This is because salty water wants to encroach under land, a phenomenon known as seawater intrusion.

So, if you find fresh water, you must have dry land – and a reasonably large expanse of it.

How do we know there was fresh water and land on the early Earth?

Fresh water is very different from sea water. Obviously, you might say, but how do you know if one or both were present on Earth if you can’t actually go back in a time machine?

The answer is in the rock record and chemical signals preserved in that time capsule. Earth is a bit over 4.5 billion years old, and the oldest rocks scientists have found are just a little older than 4 billion years.

To really understand our planet in its first 500 million years, we have to turn to crystals that once came from older rocks and ended up deposited in younger rocks.

Unlike rocks, the oldest preserved crystals go back as far as 4.4 billion years. And the bulk of these super-old crystals comes from one place on Earth: the Jack Hills in Western Australia’s midwest.

This is precisely where we went. We dated over a thousand crystals of a mineral called zircon, famed for its extreme resistance to weathering and alteration.

That’s quite important, as over the span of billions of years, a lot of later processes can erase the primary chemical signal when the crystals first formed. Most other types of minerals are much easier to alter, a process that would erase their original chemistry and not provide us with clues into Earth’s deep past.

Truly ancient grains

Our work shows that about 10% of all the crystals we analysed were older than 4 billion years. That might seem small, but it’s an enormous amount of super-old grains compared to other places around the world.

To figure out whether these grains held a record of fresh water, we used tiny beams of ions on these dated zircon grains to measure the ratio of heavier to lighter oxygen. This ratio, known as an oxygen isotopic ratio, is thought to be nearly constant through time for seawater, but much lighter for fresh water.

Conspicuously, a small portion of zircon crystals from 4 billion years ago had a very light signature that could only have formed from the interaction of fresh water and rocks.

Zircon is extremely resistant to alteration. For the Jack Hills’ zircon to obtain this light oxygen signature, the rock altered by fresh water had to melt and then re-solidify to impart the light oxygen isotopic signature into our zircon.

Thus, fresh water had to be present on Earth before 4 billion years ago.

Whether life also began so early in Earth’s history is a question we can’t quite be sure of yet. But we’ve at least found evidence for the cradle of life on Earth some time before 4 billion years ago – extremely early in our planet’s 4.5-billion-year history.

Hugo Olierook receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Hamed Gamaleldien receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Khalifa University, UAE.

– ref. Fresh water and key conditions for life appeared on Earth half a billion years earlier than we thought – https://theconversation.com/fresh-water-and-key-conditions-for-life-appeared-on-earth-half-a-billion-years-earlier-than-we-thought-228789

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phoebe McInerney, Researcher in Palaeontology, Flinders University

Until around 45,000 years ago, Australia was home to a giant flightless bird called Genyornis newtoni, which was two metres tall and weighed up to 230 kilograms.

Palaeontologists first discovered these so-called “thunder birds” in the late 1800s. Yet exactly what Genyornis looked like has remained a mystery, because until now no well-preserved fossil of a Genyornis head has been found.

Scientists have instead interpreted its appearance based on large, flightless relatives, such as Dromornis and the more distantly related emus.

From the dry salt lakes in north-eastern South Australia, we have now discovered several new Genyornis fossils, including a complete skull. These finds show what this ancient thunderbird really looked like, and offer clues to how it evolved, lived and died. This research is now published in Historical Biology.

The skull

Genyornis and its cousins in the family Dromornithidae (known as dromornithids) have unusually large skulls for flightless birds. They also have short braincases and oversized jaws. Genyornis is set apart from other dromornithids by a distinctive upper jaw which gives the bird a unique appearance.

Genyornis has a tall skull, joined to a large and robust lower jaw, suiting the name Genyornis, which roughly means “jaw bird” in Greek.

The upper jaw is long and a bit higher than it is wide, with an especially spatulate, or goose-like, rounded tip, and an enclosed palate. A tall ridge runs down the centre of the beak, and a bulbous structure called a casque is positioned just in front of the eyes, above its small nostrils. The casque’s purpose is unknown but it might have been for sexual display.

Highly flexible joints in the skull allowed Genyornis to open its mouth wide, like parrots can, and the arrangement of jaw muscles suggests a higher bite force than originally expected. Powerful muscles attaching to the back of the braincase allowed a strong backwards pull of the head.

How did Genyornis evolve?

The fossil record for dromornithids extends back to at least 55 million years ago, though their origin is certainly more ancient. Although Genyornis existed relatively recently, this long evolutionary history, paired with a shortage of older fossils, has made understanding dromornithid evolution very complex.

The Dromornithidae family is part of a broader group which includes landfowl (such as chickens and quails) and waterfowl (including ducks and geese). Dromornithids share skull features with both.

Only through extensive comparisons of dromornithid skull fossils with those of these relatives could we interpret the anatomy and evolution of Genyornis’ surprising skull.

Several skull features dromornithids share with landfowl appear to have been present in the last common ancestor of dromornithids, landfowl, and waterfowl.

However, skull features that dromornithids share with ducks and geese are likely linked to the early evolution of waterfowl from a more chicken-like ancestor. Notably, the arrangement of jaw muscles and bony structures on the side of the braincase and lower jaw are almost identical to those of the screamers (Anhimidae) found in South America today.

Screamers are the most early-diverging waterfowl still alive today. Our research shows dromornithids were closely related to screamers and other early waterfowl. Interpreting how skeletal structures relate between dromornithids and their relatives was crucial to this understanding.

What do we know about Genyornis’ lifestyle?

The structure of the new Genyornis skull also supports previous ideas about how the species lived. This includes their dietary preferences for soft, non-fibrous plants including fresh new growth, shoots and fruit.

Newly discovered though, are adaptations for immersing the head in water, including an enclosed palate, nostrils far back by the eyes, and isolation of the ear from the regions involved in jaw movement. All help to prevent water inflow and limit hearing interference while feeding submerged.

These features indicate Genyornis was adapted to thrive around swamps, wetlands and lakes. Fittingly, Genyornis fossils have been recovered from areas associated with these environments – and of course they were closely related to early waterfowl.

Today, the large bodies of freshwater once present in northern South Australia are mostly dry salt lakes. While Genyornis had broad, short toes and hoof-like claws for moving across open ground between bodies of water, their partial reliance on freshwater and new plant growth would have become more difficult as ponds and lakes shrunk and disappeared.

While not the whole story, the drying of the Australian continent likely contributed to the eventual extinction of Genyornis – and the demise of the dromornithid dynasty.

Trevor H. Worthy has received funding from the Australian Research Council in the past.

Jacob C. Blokland and Phoebe McInerney 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. New fossils show what Australia’s giant prehistoric ‘thunder birds’ looked like – and offer clues about how they died out – https://theconversation.com/new-fossils-show-what-australias-giant-prehistoric-thunder-birds-looked-like-and-offer-clues-about-how-they-died-out-221599

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jess Reia, Assistant Professor of Data Science, University of Virginia

As a scholar of urban governance and data policy, I viewed the responses to protests on U.S. campuses as about more than threats to academic freedom and freedom of speech.

They are also threats to the fundamental rights of people in public spaces.

The protesters’ tactics, particularly their use of tents in encampments, have brought debates around definitions of public order and disorder to the fore.

Over the past couple of months, students in universities across the country, from the University of California, Los Angeles to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, have occupied courtyards, classrooms and libraries in solidarity with Palestinians. Students in Canada, Brazil and France have also joined in, setting up encampments to demand changes in their governments’ policies toward Israel due its war in the Gaza Strip.

Most encampments and buildings have been cleared in the name of order or safety – often by the police, sometimes with the use of excessive force. These police responses can have ripple effects in communities far beyond the university walls.

After studying the ways in which technology can be deployed in public spaces , I’ve started to view calls for public order with suspicion. When those in power frame dissent and poverty as disorder, more than freedom of expression is at stake.

Public order versus the ‘right to the city’

As the populations of cities swelled during the 19th and 20th centuries, some residents started decrying the “disorder” of urban spaces.

Whether it was due to loud noises, informal markets or political protests, calls to tame the unruly city grew louder. Everything and everybody seen as undesirable, inadequate or a nuisance could be targeted.

Legislation like Virginia’s Vagrancy Act of 1866 made it a crime to be homeless in cities – a concept that remains in the country’s regulatory framework through state and local loitering laws. These statutes continue to be used to police people of color and the poor.

Other laws that have since been overturned – women being prohibited from using public restrooms, public bathing laws that led to arrests of beachgoers – might sound ridiculous today, but they show how notions of what counts as disorder can change over time.

Laws that police what people can and can’t do in public often conflict with what French philosopher Henri Lefebvre called the “right to the city.”

Laid out in his 1968 book “Le Droit à la Ville,” it speaks to the right of all residents to shape and govern urban life. Decades later, the right to the city was seen as so important that it was included in the New Urban Agenda, which was signed at the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development in 2016.

The issue today is that city residents with the least amount of power – the poor, the young, immigrants, people of color – have little say in how cities are governed. And public order laws tend to target them.

Public order crimes refer to the acts that disrupt the running of society. The U.S. has around 117,000 people currently incarcerated under public order offenses.

Although public order is an important element of modern city life, it’s also been used as a mechanism to justify surveillance and control – especially of the most vulnerable communities. Historically, public order has served to organize urban spaces, but also to dampen government criticism and crush dissent.

Last year, for example, the U.K. passed its Government Public Order bill, which gave the government the ability to break up protests deemed too noisy or unruly.

Clearing the camps

Encampments – a military word used since at least the late 1500s – have been in the spotlight not only due to student protesters. Homeless communities also set up clusters of tents as makeshift shelters in public spaces. These have drawn the attention of city residents and policymakers, some of whom see them as unsightly symbols of disorder.

In cities where shelters are scarce or nonexistent and proper policies to tackle poverty and homelessness fall short, sleeping in tents and cars, on public transit or under bridges – all forms of “rough sleeping” – have become improvised responses to a nationwide problem.

The crackdown on rough sleeping can be both proactive and reactive. The implementation of spikes on ledges or bars on benches to prevent people from lying down – what’s called hostile architecture – is a defensive approach. The clearing of encampments, meanwhile, might happen in response to complaints and outcry.

Regardless of the approach, you’ll often hear safety and public order as justifications.

Taming the city

Debates over order, disorder and the right to the city don’t just involve whether people experiencing homelessness can sleep in public spaces. They also include alternative economies.

Can street performers pass the hat? What about street vendors selling their wares?

Both groups have been battling regulators for centuries.

When city leaders want to showcase their city, order becomes an even bigger priority.

For instance, in preparation for the 2014 FIFA World Cup and 2016 Summer Olympics, the then-mayor of Rio de Janeiro, Eduardo Paes, decided to create a Department of Public Order.

Through heavy policing, Paes tried to make the city look more orderly and safe for an international audience.

The reality meant brutal crackdowns in Rio’s favelas, the city’s informal settlements of improvised homes. The authorities euphemistically described this campaign as “pacification”. In other areas, they cleared the roads of street vendors and homeless people, while installing surveillance cameras.

AI in the name of order

When new technologies enter the picture, public order is translated – and enforced – by big data. Some technocrats even envision cities operating with the efficiency of a computer.

In March 2024, news emerged that San Jose, California, was planning to use an artificial intelligence detection tool trained to identify “signs of habitation” in vehicles and encampments.

By targeting primarily people experiencing homelessness in one of the least affordable housing markets in the U.S., these kinds of predictive algorithms are worrisome trends. To me, they’re representative of technological solutionism – the idea that all problems can be solved with technology.

Other controversial tools, such as predictive policing and emotion recognition, have been met with backlash because of their potential to discriminate, encroach on privacy and profile people.

Facial recognition systems have triggered a series of false positives and wrongful arrests, mostly affecting people of color. This has led to their ban in some cities.

The indiscriminate deployment of AI in cities can undermine trust in technology and governments, and it’s easy to see how deploying big data under the guise of enforcing public order can backfire, limiting freedom of expression and assembly while harming people living on the margins of society.

In “The Death and Life of Great American Cities,” Jane Jacobs explains how cities can provide something for everybody – that they are wellsprings of spontaneity, creativity and connection.

To me, surveillance, control and repression are at odds with these aims.

Order is ultimately an illusion. The right to the city means living with unpredictability, whether it’s in the form of a student protest, a block party or a busker.

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

– ref. Who gets to decide what counts as ‘disorder’? – https://theconversation.com/who-gets-to-decide-what-counts-as-disorder-229783

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Luis Gómez Romero, Senior Lecturer in Human Rights, Constitutional Law and Legal Theory, University of Wollongong

On October 17, 1953, constitutional reform granted women the right to vote in Mexico, and two years later, women cast ballots for the first time in a federal election.

Now, nearly 70 years later, Mexico has elected a woman president for the first time, according to an official quick count.

Claudia Sheinbaum, the former mayor of Mexico City with a PhD in energy engineering, is also the first Jewish person to lead Mexico, where 70% of the population is Catholic.

The election was mainly contested between two candidates, both of whom were women. Sheinbaum, the front-runner, represented the left-wing coalition “Let’s Keep Making History”. This was formed by the ruling party, Morena, and its minor partners, the Green Party (PVEM) and the Labor Party (PT).

Her main rival, Xóchitl Gálvez, who was trailing by nearly 30% in the official quick count, represented the coalition “Strength and Heart for Mexico”. This is composed of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), National Action Party (PAN) and the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). Jorge Álvarez of the Citizen Movement party trailed in third place.

This was the largest election in Mexico’s history, with more than 98 million citizens registered to vote. Nearly 20,000 elected positions were being contested, including the presidency, both chambers of Congress and thousands of local seats.

It was also the most violent election, with more than 30 politicians killed.

The new president will now face two major challenges: confronting the rampant violence in Mexican society and increasing militarisation of public life, and the deterioration of checks and balances on executive power.

Sheinbaum’s mentor, current President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has not solved the first issue, and has significantly worsened the second.

A populist leader

Part of Gálvez’s defeat is attributed to the tarnished reputation of the PRI, PAN, and, to a lesser extent, the PRD. These parties are associated with a period known as Mexico’s democratic transition from 1988-2018.

The democratic transition resulted in new laws reinforcing independent decision-making in electoral practices in the 1990s.

The transition governments, however, were marked by the mediocre performance of political leaders, as well as a growing inequality in society. The military also became more involved in law enforcement in response to the worsening Mexican drug war, leading to unprecedented violence.

López Obrador was elected in 2018 after two failed campaigns. He has never accepted his 2006 defeat, alleging the opposition parties stole the election. When he lost the 2012 vote by seven points, he again claimed there was electoral fraud.

López Obrador has seen himself as the continuation of Mexico’s three great periods of emancipation: independence from Spain (1810-1821), the Reform War that marked the separation between church and state (1857-1861), and the Revolution (1910-1920) that ended a 30-year dictatorship and ushered in the current Constitution. López Obrador labelled his regime as the “Fourth Transformation” of Mexico.

He deeply despises the imperfect and fragmented achievements of Mexico’s democratic transition, a period he considers a betrayal of Mexican history, tainted by neo-liberal policies and corruption. He has frequently denounced the opposition — even during the electoral period, despite laws against this.

López Obrador still maintains a 65% approval rating. Many Mexicans considered his economic and social programs a success, such as scholarships and pensions for lower-income residents.

So while his popularity benefited Sheinbaum’s campaign, his shadow will now loom over her government.

More militarised society

By 2018, around 227,000 Mexicans had lost their lives due to the drug war initiated by former President Felipe Calderón. López Obrador began his term promising to withdraw the army from policing duties. “Hugs, not bullets,” he has said on numerous occasions.

That changed quickly. López Obrador dismantled the federal police and replaced it with a new force called the National Guard, primarily composed of military personnel. He also pushed for this new force to be attached to the National Defense Secretariat (Sedena), without civilian oversight. Sedena is under the direct control of the president.

López Obrador has argued the military guarantees loyalty and honesty, which is highly questionable given allegations of corruption and summary executions against the military.

And in the past six years, violence has reached unprecedented levels in the country. Official data shows between 2018 and 2023, there were more than 171,000 homicides, of which nearly 5,000 were femicides (the killings of women by men in acts of gendered violence).

In addition, more than 50,000 Mexicans went missing since López Obrador took office — this is roughly one person per hour.

Sheinbaum denies Mexico is becoming more militarised. She has also promised to pursue López Obrador’s plan to attach the National Guard to the Sedena.

Consolidating power

López Obrador has gradually concentrated power in the office of the president.

In the second half of his term, the opposition said it would no longer support his government’s legislative initiatives. The ruling bloc decided to ignore the opposition and pass reforms with the support of minor parties that were later invalidated by the Supreme Court.

This included a legislative overhaul of the national electoral authority, which critics said would give more power to officials affiliated with Morena.

Then, on February 5, the anniversary of the signing of the Mexican Constitution, the president presented a series of constitutional reforms to Congress aimed at fundamentally changing the judiciary’s structure.

López Obrador did not have the necessary congressional majority to achieve the reforms, but Sheinbaum has promised to carry out the amendments.

Restoring hope

One Mexican woman, Leticia Hidalgo, voted for her son for president in last weekend’s election. He was not a candidate. Rather, police took the 18-year-old from his home in Monterrey in 2011 and he never returned.

His mother, along with several other activists, launched a protest during the election to encourage people to cast their ballot for a disappeared person. The goal: to make visible those who have disappeared in Mexico.

Sheinbaum must now govern a country that has become polarised by López Obrador’s policies and governing style. She must govern not only for those who voted for her opponents, but also those, like Hidalgo, who demand the government finally provides Mexicans with the means to live in freedom, equality and peace, without fear of losing their lives or disappearing.

Luis Gómez Romero 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. Mexico has elected its first female president. Claudia Sheinbaum inherits a polarised, violent country looking for hope – https://theconversation.com/mexico-has-elected-its-first-female-president-claudia-sheinbaum-inherits-a-polarised-violent-country-looking-for-hope-231475

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Buchanan, Professor, Discipline of Business Information Systems, University of Sydney Business School, University of Sydney

The Fair Work Commission has boosted the wages of workers on awards by 3.75%, just a touch above the official inflation rate of 3.6%.

The increase will apply to fortnightly pay packets from next month and will only directly apply to the one-fifth of Australian workers on centrally determined awards.

Taking into account other workers who will get pay rises because their pay is linked to awards, the Commission says the decision will affect one in four employees.

Most of the workers affected are part time, most are women, and almost half are casual.

While the decision will maintain real wages in the sense that it is just above the official rate of inflation, the Commission reports that even after it real wages for award-reliant employees will remain lower than they were five years ago.

Workers with mortgages will fall further behind. The employee living cost index (which takes into account changes in mortgage interest rates, unlike the consumer price index) has climbed 6.5% over the past 12 months.

Why didn’t the Commission do more?

The Commission noted that “discretionary expenditure” in the retail and hospitality sectors is down. These two industries alone account for one-third of employees on awards.

Less spending means less ability of employers to fund pay rises.

As well, employers of workers on awards are going to have to find an extra 0.5% of each wage to pay the latest increase in the compulsory superannuation contributions, which comes into effect in July.

The Commission also noted low-paid workers will get help from a number of the measures announced in the budget, including the energy bill rebate and an increase in Commonwealth rent assistance.

There’s more to come, for some

In a year’s time, next July, the Commission has offered hope of extra increases for workers in industries including childcare, where work is largely done by women and has historically been undervalued.

The Commission has already received a report on the effect of gender-based occupational segregation and plans to commence work within weeks on determining the size of the increases needed.

In line for extra increases are

• early childhood education and care workers

• disability home-care workers and social and community services workers

• dental assistants

• medical technicians

• pharmacists

• psychologists

• other health professionals (including Aboriginal health workers)

Importantly, the Commission says it’s reviews won’t begin with a “blank slate”. They will build on the reasoning used to increase the wages of aged-care workers and teachers.

Those decisions found the “invisible” caring skills of interpersonal and contextual awareness, verbal and non-verbal communication and emotion management had been “effectively disregarded” by the simplistic use of masculinised benchmarks such as technical skills, strength and responsibility.

The Commission’s new approach, required by legislation, opens up the possibility of a new era in wage setting in which revaluing work traditionally done by women becomes a lever for lifting the pay of people neglected for decades.

For now, it’s a safe decision

This year’s decision is best described as “safe” – or more accurately, unlikely to feed inflation. It affects around 11% of Australia’s wage bill, and it won’t increase it by much. It will lift the minimum hourly wage from $23.23 to $24.10.

Last year’s bigger increase of 5.75% didn’t flow through to overall wages, which have climbed 4.1% over the year to March, with the rate of increase slowing.

For those on low pay, Monday’s decision will be disappointing. The increase of 3.75% won’t be nearly enough.

But the Commission has maintained the possibility of modest but permanent increases in the pay and status of some of Australia’s lowest paid, but most essential, workers. There’s more to come.

Professor John Buchanan has built his career through undertaking scholarly and applied research for ALP and Coalition Governments, employers, unions and non-government bodies. Currently he is undertaking applied research projects supported by Industry Funds Management (associated with the industry superannuation funds), the NSW Teachers Federation, the NSW Nurses and Midwives Association and the Queensland Nurses and Midwives Union – as well as for icare NSW. He has been a member of the National Tertiary Education Union since 1991 and was a member of the Enterprise Bargaining Team at the University of Sydney from 2021 – 2023.

– ref. Low-paid wages up 3.75%, with more to come for childcare and health professionals – https://theconversation.com/low-paid-wages-up-3-75-with-more-to-come-for-childcare-and-health-professionals-231473

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Harrington, Senior Lecturer in English and Cultural Studies, University of Canterbury

June is set to be a month of holding up the mirror to reality, with our experts recommending three new non-fiction watches.

No streaming list is complete without some true crime, so we’ve got the long-awaited second season of The Jinx (which comes nearly a decade after the first). We also look at Netflix’s scandalous Ashley Madison: Sex, Lies & Scandal, a three-part docuseries that dissects the infamous site designed for people seeking affairs.

Of course, we’d be remiss to not pay attention to the latest Bridgerton offering, which has proven to be equal parts sultry, dramatic and inventive. And if, after all the crime, scandal and heavy petting, you seek some light relief – we’ve got some great options for that too.

There’s no shortage of captivating storytelling on hand, so dive in!

The Jinx season two

Binge

Season one of the gripping American true crime documentary The Jinx (2015) culminated in its subject, enigmatic millionaire Robert Durst, seemingly confessing his role in the murders of his first wife, his best friend and his neighbour when he thought Director Andrew Jarecki’s microphones weren’t rolling.

Nine years on, the second season is just as compelling, although its remit is wider. We follow the fallout from the first season, the launch of a new investigation into the murder of Durst’s friend, Susan Berman, in 2000, and ultimately a new trial. Jarecki and producer Marc Smerling have impressive access. They interview the victims’ families, journalists, the prosecution, some of Durst’s most loyal longtime friends and even his defence team, all while acknowledging their own roles as participants.

They also draw on decades’ worth of archival material, tastefully staged reenactments and candid prison phone calls that do much to undermine Durst and his closest supporters’ credibility. The show ultimately builds an unsettling picture of how Durst used his wealth and charisma to attract a messy network of people who were willing to enable and protect him at the expense of victims and their families – some of whom have waited more than 40 years for justice.

Even those who know what’s coming will find this captivating, illuminating viewing.

– Erin Harrington

The Beach Boys

Disney+

Disney’s documentary The Beach Boys feels like catching a wave through the iconic band’s storied past. From their humble beginnings in a garage in the 1960s to their mid-70s revival, the documentary highlights some touching moments and celebrates many a sunny success.

However, unlike a surfer riding the crest, we don’t get to witness those defining wipeouts. Rather, the production seems to avoid delving into the darker, more complex aspects of the band’s history. I couldn’t help but notice the absence of member Brian Wilson, who is portrayed largely through archival footage. This year, the death of Wilson’s wife (and subsequent declining health) led to him being placed under a conservatorship. With this in mind, his omission takes on a bittersweet tone.

Ultimately, The Beach Boys misses an opportunity to embrace all the bumps and pivots in the band’s illustrious career. And this is a shame since their story has always been about celebrating life despite its hardships.

That said, the documentary is enjoyable, and it serves as a great entry point for those yet to ride the ups and downs of the band’s career. So grab your board and dive in!

– Jadey O’Regan

Read more:
New Disney documentary The Beach Boys tells the iconic band’s story – but not the whole story

Bridgerton season three (part one)

Netflix

As someone raised on BBC’s North and South and Pride and Prejudice, I was convinced Bridgerton wasn’t my cup of tea. However, curiosity caught me during a COVID-induced moment of weakness: I binged it all and added season three’s dates to my calendar.

Bridgerton’s seduction lies in creative world-building, extravagant visuals and gripping social tensions. Heaped servings of lustful fervour don’t hurt either. I shock myself by saying these elements are well executed because of, and not in spite of, a gleeful lack of historical accuracy.

We see the inimitable Lady Featherington (Polly Walker) grill her married daughters about sex, to which a gormless Phillipa cheerily asks, “inserts himself where?” Elsewhere, the Queen wears a gasp-worthy mechanical wig, one smutty scene in a carriage is set to a (genuinely) stirring string rendition of a Pitbull song, and Cressida Cowper’s satellite-like sleeves are big enough to transmit the show itself.

Bridgerton’s inventiveness is balanced by genuine onscreen chemistry. Our friends-to-lovers couple, Penelope Featherington (Nicola Coughlan) and Colin Bridgerton (Luke Newton), orbit one another beautifully. There is true tension via an alternative suitor, along with some tender self-discovery.

All is heightened by the suspicion these fledgling foundations will shake in part two. It is escapist storytelling at its most charming.

– Marina Deller

Ashley Madison: Sex, Lies & Scandal

Netflix

Ashley Madison: Sex, Lies & Scandal is a recent three-part docuseries that delves into the history of an infamous dating website that guaranteed anonymity for individuals seeking extramarital affairs. It spans the startup of the online service soon after the dot-com boom, the impact of a massive data breach in 2015 and the stories of those affected.

With elements we’ve come to expect of Netflix’s storytelling style, the docuseries presents nail-biting narratives and cliffhangers typical of a true crime documentary set in the digital age. Interviews are expertly conducted, providing valuable insights from key individuals involved – although some responsible parties are notably absent.

One intriguing aspect of the plot is the self-righteous hackers known as the The Impact Team, whose identities remain unknown to law enforcement to this day. They broke through Ashley Madison’s paltry cybersecurity defences, outing millions of users and publicly spilling the tea on the company and its duplicitous CEO, Noel Biderman.

What I discovered watching this docuseries is trust means little when it comes to infidelity. Many associated with the website learned this lesson the hard way and have only restored their reputations by coming clean. The debacle serves as a cautionary tale: if you build relationships on deceit, don’t expect them to last.

– Phoebe Hart

Hacks season three

Stan

At the time of writing, eight episodes of Hacks’ third season are currently available on Stan. Critics and fans of the show, myself included, had their misgivings upon hearing there would be a third season – given how neatly all the storylines had concluded at the end of season two. Deborah Vance (Jean Smart) had a successful comedy special, where she took a humorous look at her life’s trauma and fired her comedy writing assistant, Ava (Hannah Einbinder), so she would pursue bigger and better opportunities.

I am so thankful for this third season, however, because it’s the strongest one yet. The writing is a lot tighter and the jokes richer. The season arc focuses on the friendship between Deborah and Ava where, on her break from her esteemed comedy writing gig for a late-night talk show, Ava assists Deborah in securing a late-night hosting gig of her own.

The season smartly focuses on this friendship, whereas season two featured extensive distractions from several subplots with the supporting cast, which ultimately felt like just that: distractions. The focus on Deborah’s aspirations for the top hosting gig provides a poignant commentary on ageing and the “boys’ club” nature of comedy.

– Stuart Richards

Read more:
Psychological drama, wilderness reality and everyone’s favourite dog: the best of streaming this May

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. Carriage romps, good vibrations and a web of lies: what we’re streaming in June – https://theconversation.com/carriage-romps-good-vibrations-and-a-web-of-lies-what-were-streaming-in-june-230785

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

Former Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has ruled out attempting to displace Amelia Hamer as the Liberals’ candidate for Kooyong.

Frydenberg’s quick decision comes after a public backlash against the possibility he could push aside an already preselected woman.

It had also become clear the redrawn draft boundaries for Kooyong, unveiled by the Australian Electoral Commission on Friday, are unlikely to give the boost to the Liberal vote in the seat that some Liberals had initially thought. The seat is held by teal Monique Ryan.

Under the Victorian draft boundaries, the seat of Higgins, held by Labor, is set to be abolished, with large numbers of its voters pushed into Kooyong and Chisholm. Chisholm, now in Labor hands, improves for the Liberals.

Frydenberg posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Monday that he was “not rushing back to politics.

“My position on contesting the next election remains unchanged. I will continue to support the Liberal Party and our local candidate Amelia Hamer.”

The speculation about Frydenberg had split Liberals, with a faultline between those appalled at the idea of dumping a woman – the Liberals are under criticism for not promoting enough female candidates – and those who argued Frydenberg’s return (assuming he won the seat) would boost the parliamentary party’s talent pool.

Former minister Karen Andrews had strongly backed an effort to get him back into parliament.

But Charlotte Mortlock, founder of Hilma’s Network, which encourages women to join the Liberal Party, posted: “Josh could have challenged Scott Morrison for the leadership, he didn’t. Josh could have put his hand up for Kooyong, he didn’t. He could have run for the Victorian Senate vacancy, he didn’t. Women are not collateral damage for Josh Frydenberg’s regrets.”

With Kooyong settled, the Victorian Liberal Party will still have to decide whether to reopen nominations for Chisholm where Theo Zographos was preselected unopposed. There is a push to have Katie Allen, who is the Higgins Liberal candidate, moved to Chisholm.

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. Josh Frydenberg rules out seeking Kooyong preselection – https://theconversation.com/josh-frydenberg-rules-out-seeking-kooyong-preselection-231487

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hal Pawson, Professor of Housing Research and Policy, and Associate Director, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

Post-COVID housing stress has been especially intense in Queensland. Brisbane property prices have climbed by 65% since the pandemic began. That’s almost double the Australian capital city average (34%).

According to new data released by CoreLogic this week, Brisbane now has the second-most expensive housing in the country, behind Sydney. Prices rose by 1.4% in May, with the median property price hitting $843,231.

Across the state, new tenancy rents are up by 45% in just four years. Adjusted for inflation, that’s a 23% increase in real terms, much more than the growth in incomes over that time. Without doubt, rising accommodation costs are inflicting financial pain on many in the Sunshine State.

Soaring rents have squeezed people on lower incomes particularly hard. Our analysis shows the share of new lettings at rents low-income households can afford has slumped from 23% to 10% of all private tenancies since 2020. And less than 1% of available Queensland rentals in March 2024 were affordable to a single person earning minimum wage or a pensioner couple.

These conditions push some people into homelessness. With “tent cities” appearing across Brisbane, the crisis looks to be deepening.

Yet, as we report today, this situation has triggered a flurry of constructive housing policymaking. Queensland has begun to reverse a long-term decline in its social housing stock. The state has also boosted homelessness funding and services.

What led to this crisis?

The pandemic’s economic disruption and state population growth well above the national rate have made the housing situation worse. Since COVID hit in 2020, Queensland’s population has grown by 6.6%, compared with 4.7% for Australia as a whole.

But historic policy inaction and complacency on housing are also to blame. Both state and federal governments have been highly culpable. And, given their complexity, the fundamental flaws of our housing system cannot be quickly solved, even if there is the political will to do so.

Despite this, as argued in our new report for Queensland Council of Social Service (QCOSS), we have recently seen something of a sea change in official policy responses to the state’s housing challenges. The past two years, especially, have been a remarkably fertile time for housing policy (both state and federal).

Social housing is expanding at last

Nowhere is this shift more striking than in the area of social housing – public or community housing for the lowest income earners.

This is a sector in long-term decline across Australia. Investment has been minimal since the 1990s. By 2021, social housing was down to barely 3% of all occupied dwellings in Queensland.

The sector has withered on the vine, even as demand for its secure and affordable tenancies soared. To manage the resulting mismatch, the state government ratcheted up entry restrictions on social housing.

The income limit to be eligible for social housing has been frozen since the 2000s. The freeze has effectively lowered the income limit by 30% in real terms. The effect is to exclude more of those who are merely poor, rather than extremely poor.

In the past five years, though, we have seen a marked turnaround. Thanks to increasing state investments, the number of social housing dwellings has begun to grow.

Building on that progress, the Queensland government pledged in early 2024 to add 53,500 social housing units by 2046. This would expand the stock of public and community housing by 73%.

Compatible with this target, a medium-term goal is to expand annual output to 2,000 units by 2027-28 – a fourfold increase on the late 2010s.

Crucially, committed (or reasonably expected) state and federal government funding and building contracts underpin this four-year goal. The “reasonably expected” part of this is the Commonwealth’s Housing Australia Future Fund (HAFF), a share of which should flow to Queensland.

Adding 2,000 social housing units a year by the late 2020s would reverse the sector’s historic decline. If sustained over time, it would begin to expand social housing back towards 5% of all housing, where it once was.

State leads way on evidence-based policy

An aspect of this story is notable not so much for the policy itself, but for the policymaking process. By its own account, the Queensland government scaled its long-term social housing construction target based on demographic modelling of current and projected need.

For readers familiar with service planning in areas like health or education this might sound pretty humdrum. For social housing, though, it is virtually unprecedented in Australia. For example, no such evidence base underpins the size of the Albanese government’s HAFF program.

Queensland can therefore reasonably claim to be leading the way on long-term, evidence-informed planning of social housing investment. That said, the government’s very limited disclosure of its modelling assumptions makes it difficult to assess the adequacy of its 53,500 target. Compared with our own census-based estimate of currently unmet need, it appears relatively low.

Will Queensland’s ambition inspire others?

In other creditable recent initiatives, the state government has stepped up homelessness service funding, acquired former National Rental Affordability Scheme homes that would otherwise revert to market prices, and expanded homelessness case co-ordination and outreach services.

In other areas, reform has been more hesitant. These include tenants’ rights and the use of the planning system to leverage affordable housing production.

At the federal level, the current modest scale and duration of pledged social and affordable housing investment under the Housing Australia Future Fund is similarly concerning. A broader Commonwealth shortcoming is the continuing lack of any commitment to consider – at the very least – the fundamental property tax reforms needed to rebalance Australia’s distorted housing system.

Nevertheless, the recent direction of housing policy has been generally more positive for Queensland than many might imagine. Let’s hope this trajectory continues, as well as inspiring more progressive ambition and action by other Australian governments.

Hal Pawson receives research funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation (Melbourne) and Crisis UK. He is also an advisor to Senator David Pocock and a Director of Community Housing Canberra.

– ref. The housing crisis hit Queensland hard. Jolted into action, the state has raised its game – https://theconversation.com/the-housing-crisis-hit-queensland-hard-jolted-into-action-the-state-has-raised-its-game-230870

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Livingstone, NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow and Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University

What’s the difference? is a new editorial product that explains the similarities and differences between commonly confused health and medical terms, and why they matter.

Vegan and vegetarian diets are plant-based diets. Both include plant foods, such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains.

But there are important differences, and knowing what you can and can’t eat when it comes to a vegan and vegetarian diet can be confusing.

So, what’s the main difference?

What’s a vegan diet?

A vegan diet is an entirely plant-based diet. It doesn’t include any meat and animal products. So, no meat, poultry, fish, seafood, eggs, dairy or honey.

What’s a vegetarian diet?

A vegetarian diet is a plant-based diet that generally excludes meat, poultry, fish and seafood, but can include animal products. So, unlike a vegan diet, a vegetarian diet can include eggs, dairy and honey.

But you may be wondering why you’ve heard of vegetarians who eat fish, vegetarians who don’t eat eggs, vegetarians who don’t eat dairy, and even vegetarians who eat some meat. Well, it’s because there are variations on a vegetarian diet:

• a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet excludes meat, poultry, fish and seafood, but includes eggs, dairy and honey

• an ovo-vegetarian diet excludes meat, poultry, fish, seafood and dairy, but includes eggs and honey

• a lacto-vegetarian diet excludes meat, poultry, fish, seafood and eggs, but includes dairy and honey

• a pescatarian diet excludes meat and poultry, but includes eggs, dairy, honey, fish and seafood

• a flexitarian, or semi-vegetarian diet, includes eggs, dairy and honey and may include small amounts of meat, poultry, fish and seafood.

Are these diets healthy?

A 2023 review looked at the health effects of vegetarian and vegan diets from two types of study.

Observational studies followed people over the years to see how their diets were linked to their health. In these studies, eating a vegetarian diet was associated with a lower risk of developing cardiovascular disease (such as heart disease or a stroke), diabetes, hypertension (high blood pressure), dementia and cancer.

For example, in a study of 44,561 participants, the risk of heart disease was 32% lower in vegetarians than non-vegetarians after an average follow-up of nearly 12 years.

Further evidence came from randomised controlled trials. These instruct study participants to eat a specific diet for a specific period of time and monitor their health throughout. These studies showed eating a vegetarian or vegan diet led to reductions in weight, blood pressure, and levels of unhealthy cholesterol.

For example, one analysis combined data from seven randomised controlled trials. This so-called meta-analysis included data from 311 participants. It showed eating a vegetarian diet was associated with a systolic blood pressure (the first number in your blood pressure reading) an average 5 mmHg lower compared with non-vegetarian diets.

It seems vegetarian diets are more likely to be healthier, across a number of measures.

For example, a 2022 meta-analysis combined the results of several observational studies. It concluded a vegetarian diet, rather than vegan diet, was recommended to prevent heart disease.

There is also evidence vegans are more likely to have bone fractures than vegetarians. This could be partly due to a lower body-mass index and a lower intake of nutrients such as calcium, vitamin D and protein.

But it can be about more than just food

Many vegans, where possible, do not use products that directly or indirectly involve using animals.

So vegans would not wear leather, wool or silk clothing, for example. And they would not use soaps or candles made from beeswax, or use products tested on animals.

The motivation for following a vegan or vegetarian diet can vary from person to person. Common motivations include health, environmental, ethical, religious or economic reasons.

And for many people who follow a vegan or vegetarian diet, this forms a central part of their identity.

So, should I adopt a vegan or vegetarian diet?

If you are thinking about a vegan or vegetarian diet, here are some things to consider:

• eating more plant foods does not automatically mean you are eating a healthier diet. Hot chips, biscuits and soft drinks can all be vegan or vegetarian foods. And many plant-based alternatives, such as plant-based sausages, can be high in added salt

• meeting the nutrient intake targets for vitamin B12, iron, calcium, and iodine requires more careful planning while on a vegan or vegetarian diet. This is because meat, seafood and animal products are good sources of these vitamins and minerals

• eating a plant-based diet doesn’t necessarily mean excluding all meat and animal products. A healthy flexitarian diet prioritises eating more whole plant-foods, such as vegetables and beans, and less processed meat, such as bacon and sausages

• the Australian Dietary Guidelines recommend eating a wide variety of foods from the five food groups (fruit, vegetables, cereals, lean meat and/or their alternatives and reduced-fat dairy products and/or their alternatives). So if you are eating animal products, choose lean, reduced-fat meats and dairy products and limit processed meats.

Katherine Livingstone receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (APP117380) and the National Heart Foundation (ID106800).

– ref. What’s the difference between vegan and vegetarian? – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-difference-between-vegan-and-vegetarian-225275

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cahyani Widi Larasakti, PhD Student in International Relations, The University of Melbourne

Australia and Indonesia have long had an uneasy relationship, over issues ranging from Timor-Leste’s independence to asylum seekers and bans on live cattle export to the aftermath of the Bali bombings.

While the politics have long been challenging, there’s reason to believe a change may be coming. One of the fastest-growing economies in the world, Indonesia has long been powered by coal. Now, it’s endeavouring to go green through renewables, grid modernisation, electric vehicles and geothermal.

That’s where Australia comes in. In March this year, the two nations formalised a climate partnership, named KINETIK. Through the agreement, Indonesia will secure supplies of lithium for EV batteries, and Australia will gain more export markets for its critical minerals, as well as potential access to the batteries’ industry supply chain.

Why has the relationship been rocky?

Since winning independence from the Dutch, Indonesia has focused heavily on keeping its many islands and ethnic groups united.

But Australia’s role has sometimes been destabilising. During the Cold War, Australian agencies backed the Indonesian army’s bloody purges of communists.

Australia also backed the cause of East Timorese secession. In 1998, Australian Prime Minister John Howard wrote to Indonesia’s President, B.J Habibie, pushing for East Timorese independence. A year later, over 5,500 Australian soldiers arrived as peacekeepers during a tense referendum over the region’s future.

Many people in Indonesia saw Australia’s involvement as a threat to national unity and cohesion. Before Howard and Indonesia’s next president, Megawati Soekarnoputri, had time to restore the relationship, tensions ramped up again after the 2002 terrorist bombings in Bali which killed 88 Australians.

Four years later, the Australian decision to grant temporary protection visas to 43 asylum seekers from Papua, which has long sought independence from Indonesia, led Indonesia’s ambassador to Canberra to be recalled.

This diplomatic incident bore positive fruit, resulting in improved dialogue and, the same year, the signing of the Lombok Treaty, in which both countries promised not to interfere with the sovereignty of the other.

Since then, Australia has been diplomatically silent on other Indonesian territorial issues, such as the separatist movement in Papua.

Despite these efforts, many differences remain. Experts have often warned the relationship is tenuous.

In 2019, the two nations signed a new Comprehensive Economic Partnership after a tortuous negotiation period. With a focus on climate change and energy transition, this paved the way for this year’s announcement.

In a broader context, this partnership also illustrates Australia’s approach as a middle power nation to counterbalance China’s increasing economic dominance in the Indo-Pacific region.

Could the green transition help the relationship?

In 2022, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visited Indonesia, where he promised A$200 million to kickstart climate and infrastructure projects.

Now we have a formalised partnership. This is an important step, which should improve the political relationship.

The two nations already trade $18 billion of goods and services yearly, centred on Australian coal and beef and Indonesian fertilisers and petrol.

But there is room for much more growth. Indonesia’s population is young and large, with almost 280 million people. By 2030, estimates suggest it could be the world’s fifth-largest economy.

If the KINETIK partnership works, it will be because it offers both nations what they need – Australia gets a new export market for green minerals, technology and know-how, and Indonesia starts to shift away from coal.

The agreement builds on a memorandum of understanding on electric vehicles and another between Export Finance Australia and Indonesia’s State-owned Electricity Company last year.

What are we likely to see as tangible outcomes?

Indonesia perches on the Pacific Ring of Fire, with a number of active volcanoes and frequent earthquakes. This also means the archipelago nation has huge geothermal resources, estimated at 40% of the world’s total. Many geothermal plants are already running.

But making the most of the resource faces many technological challenges. The best underground heat resources tend to be located in mountains or in isolated areas. The KINETIK partnership could help through connecting Australian mining expertise to Indonesia’s deep heat resources.

Australia’s expertise in using renewables to power isolated communities will be vital to make exploration easier. And Australian investors will be allowed to own a majority share of Indonesian geothermal plants.

The partnerships are expected to align with Indonesia’s National Energy Policy, which aims in part to shift from exporting raw energy resources and critical minerals to exporting value-added energy products through downstream projects such as EV and battery industries.

Australia is home to the world’s largest hard-rock lithium mine, Greenbushes. The new partnership will open up options for Indonesian battery manufacturers to access this key metal.

Indonesia, in turn, is rich in nickel, which will be needed in great quantities for green technologies. In fact, cheaper Indonesian nickel has pushed some Australian producers out of the market. Indonesia has already secured commercial deals with EV and battery manufacturers such as Hyundai and LG from South Korea, as well as Foxconn from Taiwan.

Will this be enough?

Politically, the relationship between Indonesia and Australia has long been thorny. A new focus on mutual advantageous investment could help, especially given the deal has strong political backing on both sides. Developing electric vehicles in Indonesia was also a key campaign issue for the newly elected Indonesian president, Prabowo Subianto.

From the Australian side, the agreement bolsters the Albanese government’s push to make the nation a green energy superpower.

Of course, many agreements stay on paper and don’t shape the real world. But this one has a better chance, given the alignment between Indonesia’s efforts to make itself part of the electric vehicle supply chain, and Australia’s dream of becoming a green superpower.

Bilateral agreements like these also show how the world is changing. More and more, middle power cooperation is emerging as a counterbalance against the intensifying Chinese-American rivalry.

It’s also a positive sign Australia has realised the need to more actively build alliances across the Indo-Pacific region.

Cahyani Widi Larasakti receives funding from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Australian Government through the G20 “Recover Together, Recover Stronger” Australia Awards Scholarship for her PhD at the University of Melbourne. She is also a member of Melbourne Climate Future at the University of Melbourne.

– ref. Could a green investment deal help Indonesia and Australia overcome their past tensions? – https://theconversation.com/could-a-green-investment-deal-help-indonesia-and-australia-overcome-their-past-tensions-229913

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Margaret Raven, Senior Scientia Lecturer (Research), UNSW Sydney

Last week, at a conference in Geneva, the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organisation agreed on a new treaty aimed at preventing the for-profit piracy of traditional knowledge.

So-called “biopiracy”, in which companies lift ideas from traditional knowledge and patent them, is a significant problem. In one case a US company patented derivatives of the neem tree as pesticides, when the plant’s properties were already well known to local communities in India. There have also been attempts to patent traditionally cultivated plant varieties, such as basmati rice and jasmine rice.

The main purpose of the new Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge is to ensure patent applications disclose any involvement of traditional knowledge.

At last week’s conference, we contributed advice on the treaty text to the Indigenous Caucus, member states and advisors, and gave presentations at side events. The final text of the treaty, while it does contain some compromises, is an important step for protection of traditional knowledge after 24 years of deliberation.

What international law says

International law already has protections for genetic resources and traditional knowledge. The 2010 Nagoya Protocol established some rules.

Under the Nagoya Protocol, “users” of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge must obtain permission from “providers”. “Users” must also come to agreements with “providers” and traditional knowledge holders about sharing the fruits of their research and development activities.

However, the Nagoya Protocol doesn’t cover patents. That’s where the new treaty comes in. It contains three key provisions on genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

Disclosure: where did the resources and knowledge come from?

The treaty requires applicants for patent claims “based on” genetic resources to disclose where the genetic resources came from. This is often places such as herbariums or gene banks.

For patents “based on” traditional knowledge, applicants must disclose the Indigenous peoples and local communities who provided it. If this is unknown, the applicant must disclose where they sourced it from.

Sometimes the applicant doesn’t know where the genetic resources or traditional knowledge came from. In these cases they must declare they genuinely don’t know the source.

Patent officers are expected to provide guidance to help applicants with the disclosure requirement. They should also provide opportunities to fix any failures to disclose.

The disclosure requirement is not retroactive: it doesn’t apply to patents granted in the past.

Sanctions and remedies: what happens if people don’t follow the rules?

During the treaty negotiations, Japan, the United States and the Republic of Korea claimed that punitive measures for not disclosing would dampen innovation. On the other hand, the Group of Latin American Countries, the Indigenous Caucus and the African Group argued that a treaty without teeth would do little to rein in biopiracy and patent fraud.

This negotiation resulted in a compromise. The treaty doesn’t allow patents to be revoked or made unenforceable if an applicant has failed to disclose. However, it does allow other sanctions and remedies if a patent holder has failed to disclose with “fraudulent intent”, which may include fines.

Information systems: what is already known?

The treaty allows states to establish systems (such as databases) of information about genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. This is to be done in consultation with Indigenous peoples, local communities and other stakeholders.

These systems should then be available to patent offices to use when determining whether patent applications are actually new or cover information that is already publicly available.

While this provision mentions “appropriate safeguards” for these information systems, it doesn’t indicate who should own and control the systems. This is a shortcoming, as it disregards the idea that Indigenous peoples should retain sovereignty over their own data.

Treaty negotiations and compromises

At the conference, members of the Indigenous Caucus made suggestions on the draft treaty text. However, this text needed to be endorsed by a member state to be considered in the negotiations.

This is something of a flaw in the process, as the treaty relates specifically to Indigenous peoples’ knowledge.

The final treaty reflects compromises between the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (influenced by the Indigenous Caucus), industry bodies and representatives of civil society.

What is Australia’s role in combatting biopiracy?

In Australia, patents relating to Kakadu plum, emu oil and native tobacco include claims that seem to be based on traditional knowledge and uses.

Australia’s government agency for intellectual property rights, IP Australia, has created an Indigenous Knowledge Initiative to improve the handling of Indigenous knowledge in our intellectual property system.

Australia played an important role in the treaty negotiations, with an Australian delegate – Jodie McAlister from IP Australia – elected president of one of the two main committees. Australia welcomed Indigenous participation both in informal and formal negotiations, as well as supporting the text proposed to protect traditional knowledge.

Australia’s progress on protecting Indigenous knowledge will be influenced by future negotiations at the World Intellectual Property Organisation. These will include working out exactly what sanctions will be faced by those who breach the patent disclosure requirement.

Margaret Raven receives funding from Australian Research Council. She is affiliated with NSW Government as a member of an Indigenous Advisory Group and a grant to examine co-governance.

Daniel Robinson receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery Project Scheme, for the Indigenous Knowledge Futures project. Daniel previously received European Union funding relating to the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol in the Pacific.

Alana Gall and Bibi Barba 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. Patents based on traditional knowledge are often ‘biopiracy’. A new international treaty will finally combat this – https://theconversation.com/patents-based-on-traditional-knowledge-are-often-biopiracy-a-new-international-treaty-will-finally-combat-this-231272

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sara Dehm, Senior lecturer, International Migration and Refugee Law, University of Technology Sydney

Anyone following recent news reporting may rightly think Australia’s migration system is in “crisis”. Much of this reporting is fixated on the perceived threat posed by non-citizens to the safety or prosperity of the Australian community.

Last week, this panic was reflected in Immigration Minister Andrew Giles’ proposed revised directive to decision-makers to prioritise vague notions of “community safety” over other important considerations, such as an individual’s connection to Australia, when reviewing visa cancellation cases.

And earlier this month, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton dubiously claimed migration exacerbates Australia’s housing crisis, including through “excessive numbers” of international students.

Such framing misses the real “crisis” of Australia’s migration system and the real harms it enables and produces to non-citizens. Ongoing failures to bring in systemic, migrant-centred reforms has left many non-citizens exposed to situations of exploitation, prolonged immigration detention, painful legal uncertainty or even punitive deportation.

Read more:
Albanese government gives new Ministerial Direction on visa appeals to make ‘community safety’ paramount

Australia’s long history of ‘migration panic’

Sociologist Zymunt Bauman describes “migration panic” as a magnified hostility towards migrants animated by politically motivated fearmongering and xenophobia.

Non-citizen migrants become scapegoats for perceived dangers to the wellbeing of the national population. They can also be blamed for the “uncertainties” of contemporary global capitalism.

Such migration panic fosters an artificial “us and them” divide and creates the perception of a crisis around immigration that is then used to justify more migration controls and restrictions against non-citizens.

Such migration panic is not new. Australia has a long colonial history of racial exclusion through immigration law. The Whitlam government’s formal dismantling of the White Australia Policy in 1973 did not end this racial anxiety. In fact, the Whitlam government commissioned Australia’s first purpose-built immigration detention centres, with Sydney’s Villawood centre opening in 1976.

Today, this migration panic centres around “unauthorised” asylum seekers arriving by boat and criminalised non-citizens.

Prolonged detention or precarity

A key failure of successive recent governments has been their unwillingness to provide a pathway to permanency to all asylum seekers who arrived by boat from August 2012 onwards. During this time, around 35,000 people – mainly from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sri Lanka – arrived “unauthorised” by boat to seek asylum.

The vast majority of these people remained in Australia, first in immigration detention and later on short-term bridging visas. Successive governments have referred to this group of people as the “legacy caseload”.

A small portion of 4,245 people were forcibly sent to Australian-run immigration detention in Nauru and Papua New Guinea between 2012 and 2014. More than 1,000 of them are now in Australia on short-term final departure visas, after a decade of waiting for elusive third country resettlement. Despite the documented harms many suffered, and their rebuilding of lives in Australia, they all remain ineligible for any Australian visas.

From 2015 onwards, individuals in the legacy caseload were invited to apply for temporary protections visas. Unlike asylum seekers who arrived by plane, they were largely barred from permanent visas.

The process for reviewing their asylum applications (known as the “fast track” process) was discriminatory, flawed and unfair, with a disproportionately high rejection rate of cases.

In May 2022, the Albanese government was elected on an election promise to ensure “no migrant is ‘permanently temporary’”. In 2023, it created a pathway for temporary protection visa holders to apply for permanent ones.

But this process excluded around 7,500 people who were rejected via the fast-track process. They now remain either in immigration detention or on short-term final departure bridging visas.

The recent High Court case of a bisexual Iranian man who has been in immigration detention for almost a decade is a well-known example of a person failed by this fast-track process.

As a migration expert recently stated before a senate inquiry:

Given the legitimate criticisms of the fast-track process and the fact that those people have now been living in and contributing to Australian society for over a decade, this parliament should find a way to provide those persons a pathway to permanent residence.

Instead, the current government continues to maintain arbitrarily created distinctions between this population.

Visa cancellations as double punishment

Another failure has been successive governments’ decision to politicise the offending of non-citizens.

Since 2014, Australian law says certain non-citizens must have their visas cancelled. This includes people who have been convicted of a crime carrying a sentence of 12 months or more. These offences “vary enormously in seriousness” and can include non-violent property offences. All visa cancellation decisions can be reviewed by independent tribunal decision-makers.

Between July 2018 and December 2023, immigration ministers cancelled the visas of 4,415 people on the basis of “character grounds”, with New Zealanders being the single largest most cancelled visa nationality group. Many have lived in Australia for years, with strong family ties to Australia. Only a small proportion (883 people) managed to have this decision revoked by an administrative tribunal.

This has long caused friction in Australia’s relationship with New Zealand, prompting Giles to issue Ministerial Direction 99 in early 2023. This directed tribunal decision-makers to weigh up five factors when deciding to revoke a visa cancellation decision, including the “protection of the Australian community from criminal or other serious conduct” as well as the “strength, nature and duration of [a person’s] ties to Australia”. It also directed decision-makers to consider any future “risk” to the Australian community.

Last November, the High Court ruled indefinite detention to be unlawful where there was “no real prospect” of removal from Australia. A small cohort of people was then released from long-term immigration detention, including people with criminal convictions or who had been denied visas on “character grounds”.

Since then, there’s been a lot of media coverage around the reoffending of people released from immigration detention, as well as others who have had their visa cancellation decisions revoked by the tribunal decision-makers.

In response, Giles this week announced that he would revise Directive 99 to “ensure the protection of the community outweighs any other consideration” in reviews of visa cancellations.

Yet this means further entrenching how immigration law duplicates the work of the criminal law system. Criminal law can already broadly consider questions of the “risk” to or “protection” of the Australian community when making sentencing or parole decisions.

Mandatory visa cancellation laws effectively punish non-citizens twice. People impacted by visa denials or cancellations have been stuck for many years in immigration detention pending deportation. Even if they are eventually released, they are subject to heightened monitoring through the use of electronic ankle shackles and even drones.

But rather than reexamining this duplication between immigration law and criminal law, the government is now proposing a controversial new law that will further criminalise people who refuse to participate in their own deportation. This will lead to people being further caught between the criminal justice system and immigration detention.

There are currently around 900 people in Australian immigration detention, with the average time a person spends in immigration detention now reaching 610 days (almost two years).

Rather than promoting “migration panic”, perhaps the greater challenge is how to undo the enduring legacies of Australia’s long practice of inflicting harms to non-citizens at our borders.

Sara Dehm receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Migration has been in the news a lot lately. What’s going on? – https://theconversation.com/migration-has-been-in-the-news-a-lot-lately-whats-going-on-231270