Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

At the moment, things look awful.

The latest Bureau of Statistics count of retail spending (spending online and in shops) released Tuesday shows we spent less in April than in February.

The Westpac card tracker, which tracks spending by Westpac customers, shows spending on essentials has fallen 1.6% since April. Spending on non-essentials (what Westpac calls discretionary spending) has fallen 2.2%.

Each month for decades now the Melbourne Institute has asked Australians whether “now is the right time to buy a major household item”.

This month, in a survey conducted just before and just after the federal budget, only 15.2% said it was. That’s the second-lowest percentage in the three decades I have been keeping results.

Go back a few years to the time before COVID (and even during COVID in the lockdowns) and the proportion was typically double – 30-40% of Australians said now was a good time to buy a major household item.

The economic growth figures due for release next week might well show living standards, as measured by GDP per person, going backward for the fourth consecutive quarter – for an entire year.

It’s something that hasn’t happened since the early 1980s, in more than 40 years.

The good news (and there is good news) is things are about to get a little better, beginning very soon, in July.

Reasons to be (more) cheerful

Already well publicised (probably over-publicised given its size) is the $300 per household electricity rebate, which will work out at $75 per quarter, or 82 cents per day.

In some states there will be more. The West Australian government is offering an extra $400, and the Queensland government an extra $1,000.

Added to this will be lower electricity prices for most customers not already on a good deal. The Australian Energy Regulator has announced cuts in the maximum that can be charged of 2% to 4% beginning in July.

Tax cuts hit pay packets in July

Much more important will be the long-awaited (and revamped) Stage 3 tax cuts due finally to hit pay packets in July.

For a middle-earning Australian (half earn more than this, half earn less) on $67,600 it’ll mean a tax cut of $1,369, or $52.60 every fortnight.

And there’s something likely to make an even bigger difference to the one in five Australian workers whose pay is set by an award rather than an enterprise agreement or an individual contract.

For many, wage increases will be bigger

Next Monday the Fair Work Commission will announce the increase in award wages due to take effect four weeks later on July 1.

In headline terms (and there’s more to it than the headline this time, as I’ll outline shortly) the Australian Council of Trades Unions is asking for 5%.

One of the employer groups, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, is asking for much less, and much less than the rate of inflation – just 2%.

Its chief executive Andrew McKellar says employers’ legislated superannuation contributions are set to climb by 0.5% of most wages in July, meaning the cost to employers of a 2% increase would be 2.5%.

Another employers body, the Australian Industry Group, is suggesting 2.8%, which would also be less than the rate of inflation.

The government itself wants at least the rate of inflation for workers on low pay. It has asked the commission to ensure the “real wages of Australia’s low-paid workers do not go backwards”.

It’s a fair bet the commission will award at least the rate of inflation.

On only two occasions in the past decade has the commission awarded less than the published annual rate of inflation at the time. One was when businesses were in danger of going under as COVID hit in 2020 and the other was last year, when inflation was an unusually high 7%.

The most recent quarterly inflation figures point to an annual rate of 3.6%. (There will be an update on the more experimental monthly figure on Wednesday, but the commission is unlikely to pay too much attention to that).

That’ll make an increase of 3.6% to 4% from July highly likely, which for an Australian on an award wage of $67,600 will mean an after-tax increase of at least $1,703, which is $65.50 per fortnight, on top of the fortnightly tax cut of $52.60.

There was a bizarre moment at last week’s hearing when the Australian Industry Group tried to argue that whatever increase the commission thought was fair should be cut to take account of the benefit workers would get from the tax cut.

Fair Work Commission President Adam Hatcher pointed out the commission had never boosted pay rises to compensate for higher tax payments resulting from bracket creep, and asked rhetorically: “why should we go in the other direction now?”

Wage decision unlikely to feed inflation

History suggests that if the wage rise the commission hands to Australians on awards is substantial, it won’t spark broader wage inflation. Only about 20% of workers are on awards. Many of them have low rates of pay, and many of them work in retail and hospitality.

Last year the commission awarded them 5.75%. Overall wages didn’t jump in response, climbing just 4.1%.

And there might be something else for low-paid workers. By law, the commission is now required to redress the undervaluation of work in industries traditionally dominated by women.

The Australian Council of Trades Unions has asked that, as an interim measure, workers in industries that require “emotional labour” be given an extra 4%.

Peter Martin is Economics Editor of The Conversation.

– ref. Stand by for a pay rise on top of a tax cut. Here’s why things will feel better from July – https://theconversation.com/stand-by-for-a-pay-rise-on-top-of-a-tax-cut-heres-why-things-will-feel-better-from-july-231006

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Waling, Senior Lecturer & Research Fellow, Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University

The Australian government has recently launched Consent Can’t Wait, a campaign focused on supporting sexual consent communication between adults and young people.

Advertisements will run on television, in cinemas, online and on social media, encouraging adults to check their understanding of consent. Videos pose questions such as “how do I bring up consent?”, “do I have to ask every time?” and “what if we’ve been drinking?”, before finally asking “if we don’t know the answers, how will our kids?”.

The campaign website provides a range of resources designed to equip adults to have conversations with each other, and with young people.

While this campaign has a lot of positives, consent education won’t be enough to stop sexual violence on its own.

What motivated this campaign?

In launching this campaign, the government has cited statistics showing one in five women and one in 16 men have experienced sexual violence since the age of 15. One in two women and one in four men have experienced sexual harassment in their lifetime.

These statistics don’t account for the experiences of trans and gender diverse people. In Private Lives 3, a survey on the health and wellbeing of queer people in Australia, 64% of non-binary people, 55% of trans men and 42% of trans women had experienced sexual assault.

A lack of understanding of sexual consent is considered a major reason why sexual violence occurs. One report noted almost half of people living in Australia who were surveyed were confused about what consent actually means for sex and intimacy.

In a separate survey, more than one in four young people in Australia agreed that “when a man is very sexually aroused, he may not realise that the woman doesn’t want to have sex”.

What the campaign does well

The campaign is a welcome update to the infamous milkshake video in 2021, which formed part of the Respect Matters campaign. This video was heavily criticised for its confusing messages and trivialising of consent.

Conversely, Consent Can’t Wait takes a simple, direct and carefully worded approach that’s not only directed at young people, but at adults as well.

This is perhaps what makes the campaign unique. Most consent campaigns have largely focused on supporting young people, but can forget that sexual violence occurs in all age groups, and that adults play an important role in shaping young peoples’ understandings and attitudes towards consent.

Adults are often asked to lead conversations around consent with young people. However, they may not have a good understanding of the issue. Many adults today in their 30s and older are unlikely to have had a comprehensive sex education that included conversations about consent during their formative years. Being an adult who has sex does not automatically equate to a good understanding of consent.

The campaign includes guides on how adults should talk to each other and how they should talk to young people about consent. It includes interactive activities that unpack common questions (“what is sexual consent?”) and bust myths about consent such as “you only need to check for consent the first time”.

There’s also a “community kit” that includes flyers for spreading awareness, and a resource hub with links to sexual health and sexual violence services. Guides are translated into more than 15 languages while specific guides are provided for First Nations communities.

The campaign includes diverse representations of people with disabilities, queer couples, and people across different ages and cultural and ethnic backgrounds.

Consent education is a start, but not enough

While the campaign should be commended for its simple and straightforward messages about consent, there’s one crucial aspect missing.

Sexual violence is often not just the result of a lack of consent. For decades, research has shown sexual violence is rooted in misogyny (hatred of or prejudice against women), femmephobia (hatred of femininity), queerphobia (fear and hatred of LGBTIQA+ people), and a sense of sexual entitlement.

It’s tempting to think these issues don’t persist in 2024. But the rise of incel culture (men who feel entitled to sex with women but angry they cannot get it), and the continued influence of people such as Andrew Tate (who believes women belong in the home and are a man’s property, among other things), all point to broader societal issues.

The recent incident in Melbourne where boys were caught with derogatory lists rating the sexual attractiveness of girls in their school similarly highlights the currency of these problems.

We know most sexual violence is perpetrated by men, against other men, women, and trans, non-binary and gender diverse people. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare data shows 2.5 million people who have experienced sexual violence reported a man as the perpetrator, compared to 353,000 who said it was a woman. Meanwhile, 2 million women said their assailant was known to them, as opposed to a stranger.

In Private Lives 3 84% of LGBTIQA+ participants who experienced sexual violence in the previous 12 months reported a cisgender man as the perpetrator.

While power is discussed in the campaign, I believe this discussion is vague, less central than it should be, and ignores the role of gender and culture.

Understanding and respecting consent are different things

A recent study I conducted with colleagues showed young men and women in Australia do understand consent, but don’t necessarily apply this knowledge in the moment. Rather, a range of other factors impact how they might navigate consent (or choose not to) in sexual situations.

Other research has shown men do understand what consent is, the issue is actually respecting it.

Educating about consent is important. This campaign, alongside mandated consent education in schools, is overall a very good start.

But it will not necessarily reduce sexual violence if we don’t recognise that the heart of sexual violence isn’t necessarily about a lack of understanding. It is, and continues to be, about a perceived entitlement to bodies.

Andrea Waling receives funding from The Australian Research Council, the Commonwealth Department of Health, and the Medical Research Future Fund.

– ref. Australia’s new consent campaign gets a lot right. But consent education won’t be enough to stop sexual violence – https://theconversation.com/australias-new-consent-campaign-gets-a-lot-right-but-consent-education-wont-be-enough-to-stop-sexual-violence-230956

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Narelle Yeo, Associate Professor in Voice, Opera and Stagecraft, Director Music Theatre, Sydney Conservatorium of Music, University of Sydney

Walt Disney songwriter Richard M. Sherman, who has died aged 95, wrote some of Hollywood’s greatest film musical songs and brightened the days of children, parents and school teachers around the world.

Working with his brother Robert, who died in 2012 aged 86, Richard created chirpy, toe-tapping and often poignant songs in Hollywood films such as Mary Poppins (1964), Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968), The Jungle Book (1967) and Bedknobs and Broomsticks (1971).

The Sherman brothers were responsible for the scores of more motion pictures than any other songwriting team.

Over the past 70 years, millions of children have learned to sing the catchy word-puzzle Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious in Mary Poppins, or It’s a Small World, originally written for Disneyland. According to Time magazine, It’s a Small World may be the most publicly performed song in history.

A musical family

Born in New York to Russian Jewish immigrants, the Sherman brothers were exposed to music early, as their father Al Sherman was a gifted songwriter who wrote for Tin Pan Alley. Their mother Rosa was a Vaudeville singer.

Moving to Beverly Hills as a family in 1937, Richard went to Beverly Hills High School and learned piano, flute and piccolo.

He graduated with classmate André Previn, who coincidentally was nominated for an Oscar for best musical score adaptation for My Fair Lady in 1965, the same year the Sherman Brothers were nominated for best original music score for Mary Poppins. They both won.

Richard was known as an inspirational and upbeat entertainer. Recordings of him at the piano show an ability to entertain as well as write.

The Sherman brothers’ relationship was rocky. They also faced the wrath and exacting standards of Australian-born PL Travers in writing the score for Mary Poppins.

Richard wrote more of the music and sat at the piano, but there were porous boundaries between lyricist and composer. Most of their repertoire was created while directly working for Walt Disney, but they were released from contract to allow them to compose for other films, including Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, one of many of their movie musicals which serve as allegories for the American Dream, American exceptionalism and progress.

American optimism

Many Sherman scores, for both Disney and others, hold a firm place in the canon, including Winnie the Pooh (1977), The Parent Trap (1961), The Aristocrats (1970), The Magic of Lassie (1978) and more.

Their sound world is as accessible to children as adults, with recognisable strophic structures and expert rhyming, making their songs instantly memorable. Their music and lyrics are optimistic, tonal, within a singable range for most amateurs, and use perfectly balanced hooks.

Their quirky aphorisms avoid the tendency to become sickly sweet. Because of the clever turn of phrase of many of their lyrics, singers such as Tony Bennett and even Christopher Walken have recorded them.

The Shermans and Alan Menken are melodic genii, principally responsible for the “Disney sound” of the middle period between the 1960s and 2010s. Together they created a sound world that represented peak American optimism, from a period when gorgeous melodic arcs were highly valued neo-romantic ideals.

The Shermans were also eclectic in their prolific composing of more than 200 works, using diverse influences from Tin Pan Alley, jazz, Dixieland, barbershop, blues, tango, parlour songs and even operetta.

Walt Disney’s favourite Sherman song was Feed the Birds from Mary Poppins. Sherman told a story of being called to Disney’s place on a Friday afternoon to sing the song around the piano.

The Sherman sound, from the invented superlative Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, to the simple and affecting tale of a bird woman, to the aspirational beauty of magical Hushabye Mountain, create an imagined world of beauty and possibility.

In this way, the Shermans were the perfect match for Disney’s image of aspirational America, musicalising stories of infectious optimism and creative zeal that defined the mid-century United States.

In 2015, talking to movie publication Collider, Richard summed up their holistic compositional approach, one that can inspire the next generation of musical composers:

Walt Disney was a story man, and he knew that we were thinking story. That’s why he dug us so much […] We always thought about the story. That was more important than any words and any music. That’s all it’s about.

Narelle Yeo 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. From Mary Poppins to Winnie the Pooh, Richard Sherman wrote the soundtrack of life for generations of children – https://theconversation.com/from-mary-poppins-to-winnie-the-pooh-richard-sherman-wrote-the-soundtrack-of-life-for-generations-of-children-231054

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabriel Crowley, Adjunct associate professor in geography, University of Adelaide

Bushfires cause catastrophic biodiversity loss across Australia. In the Black Summer of 2019–20 alone, 103,400 square kilometres of habitat went up in flames.

The irony is, laws to protect native vegetation did nothing to prevent this destruction. This is because, in most states, these laws make it hard for private landholders to burn on their own land, meaning more fuel is left to feed bushfires.

We have a chance to change that now in South Australia, where the Native Vegetation Act is under review.

With greater knowledge and understanding of the role of fire in the Australian landscape, we can take better care of native vegetation on private land as well as public parks. There’s a strong case to be made for private landholders to conduct their own cool burns, for dual purposes of reducing fuel load and restoring ecosystems.

Fire can be good for biodiversity

A wide range of species will benefit from good fire management, which creates a patchwork of different ages of vegetation.

Some plant and animal species are found only in long-unburnt vegetation. Others need recently burnt areas. Many shrubs only occur in areas burnt in the past 15–20 years.

Fire is also needed to maintain food supplies for many threatened animals. For example, the glossy black-cockatoo feeds almost exclusively on the seeds of drooping sheoak trees. But seeds become scarce in long-unburnt vegetation.

Breaking up the landscape should also mean fewer animals will be caught in each fire, because they have places to which they can escape.

Managing fire at landscape scale

Proactive burning can reduce wildfire risk under most conditions, when managed at the whole-of-landscape scale. This requires everyone to manage fire on their own land in a coordinated way. Such an approach emulates Indigenous land management and was partially adopted by land managers in southern Australia until the 1970s.

Private landholders are no longer allowed to contribute to these efforts, perhaps because the community distrusts both farmers and fire. However, without landholder involvement, fire management capacity is severely limited.

For instance, National Parks and Wildlife Service South Australia’s Burning on Private Land program has managed only 28 hectares of fuel reduction burns on Kangaroo Island since Black Summer. Given forest fuel loads can reach dangerous levels six years after bushfire, the next big one may not be far away.

Climate change means catastrophic bushfires will happen more frequently. Addressing this escalating risk requires allowing landholders to manage fire hazards on their own land.

The devastating Black Summer wildfires

The Black Summer fires killed an estimated three billion animals and drove at least 20 threatened species closer to extinction.

Human lives were lost, livestock perished. More than half of Kangaroo Island burned, including areas that had not seen fire since the 1930s. Along with 96% of Flinders Chase National Park, about 40,000 hectares of native vegetation burned on privately owned land.

While nothing could prevent the spread of fires under catastrophic weather conditions, many of Black Summer’s fires started earlier. They may have been better controlled, or stopped altogether before conditions got out of hand, if the vegetation was not so thick and connected. The very small amount of fuel reduction being undertaken on private land is inadequate.

Burning does not equal land clearing

In 1985, SA introduced the first laws in Australia to protect native vegetation. These effectively stopped the widespread clearance of native vegetation in the state.

However, they have done little to maintain or restore its ecological condition. Since the laws were passed, we have learned more about the effects of fire in Australian landscapes. We now know proactive use of fire can make vegetation more complex and biodiverse. So, fire needs to be actively managed, not excluded.

While well-intended, the existing legislation discourages burning by private landholders, making it almost impossible for them to take responsibility for reducing fuel loads on their own land. This is because South Australia’s Native Vegetation Act defines all burning as clearance.

What do other states do?

Both New South Wales and Western Australia also classify burning as clearing. In Victoria, approval for burning on private land is managed at the local government level and appears to have no provision for ecological burning.

Elsewhere, burning is only considered to be clearance when it is intentionally used for the purpose of destroying native vegetation, as in Tasmania, Queensland and the Northern Territory, or remnant trees, in the case of the Australian Capital Territory.

All states and territories allow exemptions for the purpose of bushfire prevention or fire fighting. None has incorporated fire management for ecological purposes into their native vegetation legislation.

An opportunity for legislative change

So far, proposed changes to the SA Native Vegetation Act have missed an opportunity to reduce wildfire risk across the state.

This could be fixed by simply changing the definition of clearance to exclude fire used for ecological purposes. This is effectively the case in Queensland, where fire is only considered to be clearing when it is specifically used to destroy native vegetation.

SA’s Native Vegetation Council would then need to provide guidance on how landholders should burn to both reduce fuel loads and benefit biodiversity. This should extend the current advice to provide the type of detailed ecological and operational information that is provided in Queensland.

Changing South Australia’s Native Vegetation Act to facilitate fire management by landholders is one step we can take to minimise the risk of catastrophic wildfires. The next steps are trusting landholders to take this responsibility seriously and help them do so. This would bring South Australia back to the forefront of native vegetation management in Australia.

Gabriel Crowley is a former member of Kangaroo Island Landscape Board, and is on the Kangaroo Island Bushfire Management Committee. The author’s views expressed here do not represent those of either organisation.

Stephen A Sutton 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. Changing native vegetation laws to allow burning on private land is good fire management – https://theconversation.com/changing-native-vegetation-laws-to-allow-burning-on-private-land-is-good-fire-management-229796

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Kingham, Professor of Human Geography, University of Canterbury

New Zealand is one of the most car-centric countries in the world. With the exception of the capital Wellington, New Zealand cities have some of the highest rates of car ownership globally.

In central Auckland, roads occupy 18% of all land and a further 25% of land is car parks.

Ask people what “public space” means and they probably won’t mention roads because these are assumed to be for cars.

But New Zealanders pay for roads, especially road maintenance, through fuel taxes, road user charges and general taxation. So is there a way road space could be used differently?

Superblock neighbourhoods

One city that has worked to reinvent the concept of public space is Barcelona. Over 30 years, the city has developed “superblocks” – neighbourhoods where traffic speeds are reduced and through-traffic is limited.

There is no reduction in access for cars or emergency services. It’s more a redefinition of the bus and car network, coupled with lower speed limits in certain areas.

By reducing the priority given to cars in some parts of the city, Barcelona has released public land for a range of uses such as play, business, markets and active travel such as walking and cycling. Significant benefits include lower air pollution and noise, increased green space, more physical activity, fewer premature deaths and higher economic activity.

It is true that cities in Europe are older and denser than in Oceania. But during a recent visit to New Zealand, the inventor of superblocks, urban ecologist Salvador Rueda, outlined how they could work in cities such as Christchurch and Auckland and the benefits this could deliver.

Here are his suggestions, in order of how easy they would be to implement.

1. Stop hoping for a silver bullet

New Zealand has a tendency to favour big infrastructural projects to change cities. Whether it is a new tunnel under Wellington, as proposed by the coalition government, or a light-rail system for Auckland, such projects imply the only solutions are big and expensive.

But because cities are networks, there are often far cheaper options that can be implemented with careful analysis and reallocation of space. This shift in thinking and planning needs to happen first.

2. Use bus networks to identify superblocks

The most climate-efficient, readily available and flexible system to reduce car use in cities is the bus network.

However, organising the bus network in a grid of orthogonal routes that follow perpendicular lines is key. Radial systems leave large gaps of unserviced areas. An orthogonal grid means the city is served equally by buses no matter how large it becomes.

Buses are also frequent and fast. They can easily outcompete cars, and high frequencies can also mitigate any concerns about having to transfer between buses.

3. Better management of on-street parking

Free parking does not actually exist. The question is rather who is paying for it – the user or everyone. In private developments, the user pays in some way. But this is not the case for public spaces.

In Japan, people have to prove they have access to a local parking space before they can buy a car.

But generally, on-street car parking represents a major subsidy to drivers through the use of public space that could be put to other uses. Car parking creates large areas of paved roads that reduce social and business opportunities.

Any revenue gains from parking charges are a false economy, especially when enforcement is weak.

4. Redirect traffic

At the moment, New Zealand cities are designed for unlimited through traffic, with unfettered access across the city.

As much as possible, the city’s public spaces should be divided into those for movement across the network and those which are for mixed uses for all, including pedestrians and those with mobility needs.

In New Zealand, the One Network Framework facilitates this, but few streets seem to actually prioritise people. In Barcelona, in the streets which are for movement, car traffic is aligned with the bus transit, using a one-way system and speed limits of 30km/h.

This comes with many benefits, including less congestion and safer streets.

On the inside of Barcelona’s superblocks, speeds are reduced to 10km/h to allow for different activities.

5. Make targeted investments in public spaces

If the experience of Barcelona demonstrates anything, it is that the creation of public space underwrites a whole range of commercial (as well as social) activity that uncovers latent demand.

In other words, the creation of public space in our cities supports small businesses and commercial activity because people shop and buy coffee, and cars don’t.

6. Encourage density

The New Zealand government acknowledges that boosting density is critical to addressing the housing shortage. Denser housing offers multiple benefits, including lower emissions, reduced infrastcructure costs and better physical and mental health.

Systemic planning changes to enable density are required to maximise the benefits of a superblock approach to development. But a final reason for considering superblocks is their low cost. They don’t require investment in hard infrastructure, demolition of buildings or massive development. They represent very low-tech urbanism.

To mitigate any risk and allay any fears, superblocks can be trialled as low-cost temporary interventions. At a time of necessary cost savings, perhaps New Zealand cities should embrace low-cost, high-impact change.

From 2018 to the end of May 2024, Simon Kingham was chief scientist at the NZ Ministry of Transport.

Marco Amati was an Erskine Fellow at the University of Canterbury, Ōtautahi Christchurch in 2022 and 2024. He has collaborated with Salvador Rueda on research and in speaking engagement and conference presentations.

– ref. Rethinking roads as public spaces – what NZ cities can learn from Barcelona’s ‘superblock’ urban design – https://theconversation.com/rethinking-roads-as-public-spaces-what-nz-cities-can-learn-from-barcelonas-superblock-urban-design-226601

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pierre Rognon, Associate Professor, University of Sydney

A devastating landslide struck several remote villages in the mountainous Enga province in Papua New Guinea late last week.

While it is too early for official confirmation, estimates place the death toll between 690 and 2,000 people, with thousands more missing. That only a few bodies have been recovered serves as a tragic reminder of the destructive power of these events.

The ongoing search and rescue operations have proven challenging. As often with landslides, secondary slides and rock falls are hampering efforts in the search zone. There’s also a lack of access to heavy digging machinery, and roads need to be cleared or repaired for assistance and equipment to arrive.

Even more critically, it is difficult to locate potential survivors, as landslides carry away buildings and their occupants in an unpredictable manner. What causes these devastating events and why are they so sudden and unpredictable?

What causes landslides?

Landslides happen when the pull from gravity exceeds the strength of the geomaterial forming the slope of a hill or mountain. Geomaterials can be as varied as rocks, sand, silt and clays.

Then, part of this slope starts sliding downhill. Depending on where the slope fails, the material sliding down can be just a few cubic metres or a few million cubic metres in volume.

Why do slopes fail? Most natural landslides are triggered by earthquakes or rainfall, or a combination of both.

Earthquakes shake the ground, stress it and weaken it over time. Rainwater can seep through the ground and soak it – the ground is often porous like a sponge – and add weight to the slope. This is why PNG is so prone to landslides, as it sits on an active fault and is subjected to heavy rainfalls.

Another adverse effect of water is erosion: the constant action of waves undercuts coastal slopes, causing them to fail. Groundwater can also dissolve rocks within slopes.

Humans can (and do) cause landslides in several ways, too. For example, deforestation has a negative impact on slope stability, as tree roots naturally reinforce the ground and drain water out. Also, mine blasts produce small earthquake-like ground vibrations that shake slopes nearby.

Why can’t we predict landslides?

It’s very difficult to predict and mitigate landslide risk effectively. The Enga landslide and the thousands of deadly and costly landslides occurring every year worldwide suggest so. Even in Australia – the flattest continent in the world – home insurance policies don’t tend to cover landslide risk for a simple reason: this risk is difficult to estimate.

So what would it take to warn people of a coming landslide? You would need a prediction for earthquakes and rainfall, in addition to a perfect knowledge of the slope-forming geomaterial.

Under our feet, geomaterials may include multiple, entangled layers of various kinds of rocks and particulate materials, such as sand, silt and clays. Their strength varies from a factor of one to 1,000, and their spatial distribution dictates where the slope is likely to fail.

To accurately assess the stability of the slope, a three-dimensional mapping of these materials and their strengths is needed. No sensor can provide this information, so geologists and geotechnical engineers must deal with partial information obtained at a few selected locations and extrapolate this data to the rest of the slope.

The weakest link of the chain – such as an existing fracture in a rock mass – is easily missed. This is an inevitable source of uncertainty when trying to predict how much material might slip.

We do know that the larger the volume of a landslide, the farther its runout distance. But it’s hard to gauge the exact size of a landslide, making predictions of runout distances and safe zones uncertain.

The question of “when will a landslide will occur” is also uncertain. Mechanical analysis enables us to estimate the vulnerability of a slope in a particular scenario, including earthquake magnitude and distribution of groundwater. But predicting if and when these triggers will happen is as “easy” as predicting the weather and seismic activity – a difficult task.

Unfortunately, all the money in the world can’t buy accurate landslide predictions – especially in remote parts of the world.

Pierre Rognon 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 causes landslides? Can we predict them to save lives? – https://theconversation.com/what-causes-landslides-can-we-predict-them-to-save-lives-230968

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Gowthorp, Associate Professor of Sport Management, Bond Business School, Bond University

The Australian Sport Commission (ASC) has appointed Kate Jenkins as its new board chair, replacing Josephine Sukkar, who was the first female chair appointed to the ASC board in 2021.

As a lawyer and governance expert, Jenkins boasts a wealth of experience in sport, equality and cultural change – she was previously director of the Carlton Football Club and chair of Play by the Rules, an organisation dedicated to sport participation, equality and inclusion.

Jenkins was an ambassador for the 2020 T20 Women’s World Cup and the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup and participated in the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Independent Review of Gymnastics Australia in 2021.

Jenkins, a former Australian sex discrimination commissioner, is an advocate for human rights, gender equality and inclusiveness and believes the ASC has a national leadership role for all sports, and for all Australians.

So, what should Jenkins prioritise in her new role?

What is Jenkins’ vision with the ASC?

The ASC is the national government agency responsible for supporting and investing in all sport at all levels. It was responsible for more than A$222 million in sport-related grants last financial year.

Jenkins’ vision is for sport “to be safe, fair, accessible and inclusive for everyone. And with every athlete supported to reach their full potential.”

Two key ASC strategic focuses are “Play Well” and “Win Well” – Jenkins has already highlighted these two priority areas.

“Play Well” focuses on participation in sport by all Australians and safe, fair and inclusive opportunities for all Australians participating in sport. The strategy encourages lifelong involvement, building connections and transforming culture.

“Win Well” is the high performance sport strategy. It highlights the support and resources allocated to Australia’s elite athletes.

By winning well, the ASC believes Australia’s athletes can inspire a nation. At its heart is a commitment to performance with focus on a culture of care, prioritising integrity, fair play and pride.

What else must Jenkins and the ASC prioritise?

The new chair of the ASC must find a way to boost women’s sport participation, develop elite female sport pathways and ensure sustainability in women’s sport at the highest level.

There are signs things are improving. Following the Women’s World Cup, football NSW’s female registrations increased by 34%.

Australia now has seven professional women’s sport leagues and young girls can now see future opportunities in elite sport – not just in soccer but in traditionally male-dominated sports.

In the AFL, almost one in five registrations are now women. The NRL says women’s participation is the fastest growing area of the sport, while Cricket Australia has also recorded a 26% rise in female participation in 2023.

Despite the rise of women’s sporting leagues though, most female athletes still face a gender pay gap.

Australia’s female cricketers take home an average of $55,000 for competing in the Women’s National Cricket League. However, top female cricketers also competing in WBBL can earn retainers as high as $420,000.

AFLW players now earn around $50,000, with an increase to $82,000 expected by the end of 2027. The minimum wage for Australian Super Netball players is $46,000, with the average wage recently rising to $89,211.

In contrast, male national cricketers earn on average $951,000, while male AFL players earn an average $450,000.

Jenkins, previously an Australian sex discrimination commissioner, should also be well placed to fight the discrimination and harassment prevalent in women’s sport.

Women participating in male-dominated sports often receive harassment – both in real life and online. They often have to put up with inappropriate comments about their appearance, gender identity or sexual orientation.

Cultural change is needed within sport clubs if younger generations of females want to participate more regularly in these sports.

A brighter future?

Jenkins believes women’s sport is at a turning point and attributes much of this to the Matildas’ historic World Cup result.

The Matildas united the nation at the 2023 World Cup in Australia. Despite not making the final, history was made – the quarterfinal against France was watched by 7.2 million Australians, which was the biggest television audience for a sports event in more than two decades.

The legacy of that World Cup is seen by some as new era for women’s sport in Australia – Jenkins believes the tournament is an example of how gender equality can benefit everyone.

However, she acknowledges there is still some opposition to women’s sport in Australia but examples like the Matildas’ success create positive conversations and change.

Jenkins has a mission to advance gender equality on the sports field and is well positioned to address the current inequalities women in sport face. After her appointment to the ASC, she said:

“If we can harness the opportunities ahead of us, I’m confident Australia’s sporting system can be the world’s best.”

There is a long way to go to address the inequalities in women’s sport in Australia but with Jenkins at the helm, the future is looking brighter.

Lisa Gowthorp 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. ‘Play well, win well’: new Australian sports chair Kate Jenkins faces challenges and opportunities – https://theconversation.com/play-well-win-well-new-australian-sports-chair-kate-jenkins-faces-challenges-and-opportunities-230770

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katie Ellis, Professor in Internet Studies, Curtin University

Furiosa, the latest instalment of the Mad Max franchise, has arrived a decade after the release of George Miller’s groundbreaking reboot Fury Road (2015).

As we demonstrated in our 2019 book, Miller and the ongoing Mad Max saga used representations of disability, gender, trauma and mythology to propel the films into cult status, global markets and international fandom, while sensitive to shifting sensibilities within the zeitgeist.

Max (Mel Gibson) in the earlier films reflected an era of generation X machismo. Furiosa in Fury Road, played by Charlize Theron, represented a more inclusive form of heroism – a postfeminist celebration of teamwork.

The overtaking of a male action hero with a disabled female protagonist was a widely celebrated feature of Fury Road, and something we had never seen before in action cinema.

Furiosa promised to give us the impairment origin story and explain the experiences that shaped Furiosa to become the strong, disabled female leader in Fury Road.

Unfortunately, aside from some clever references to Max’s own madness origin story, the film’s focus on Furiosa’s amputation exploits disability, and closes down the related commentary and critique previously expanded in each progressive Mad Max film.

Haunted by the past

Miller and his co-writers have consistently presented the movies’ principal antagonists as survivors of deeply traumatic events.

In the 1979 first film, Max recognises his emerging, vengeful mania, saying spending too much time on the road will make him “a terminal crazy”.

As he spends more time in the Wasteland, becoming that terminal crazy, characters in the second and third films chide him for maintaining his antisocial grief and vengeful rage.

As Max further withdraws from society, the films chronicle patriarchy at its extremes, and the breakdown of post-apocalyptic society. Max’s inner traumas are reflected on his body as physical impairments.

By Fury Road, Max (Tom Hardy) is artfully shown suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, repeatedly haunted by guilt and experiencing hallucinations.

Powerfully, also in Fury Road, the cause of Furiosa’s disability is neither revealed nor spoken of. Her lack of one arm is never presented as a particular struggle or disadvantage. The focus is on her heroism and leadership; her emotions range from raw fury to compassion.

Fury Road’s prequel, Furiosa (now played by Anya Taylor-Joy) barely registers emotion at all: part survival mechanism, but also post-trauma mutism and hypervigilance.

A brief dream montage of her traumatic experiences ends with a startled fight or flight reflex. But there is little to empathise with.

The film promised to offer an insight into Furiosa’s motivations. By focusing mostly on the lead up to the amputation – instead of developing her inner world – audiences are deprived of an opportunity to really understand this character.

Furiosa launches herself into increasingly dangerous situations and threats to her body and life, teasing the inevitable: when will she lose her arm?

Compared with the complex representations of disability, gender and leadership in Fury Road, in which Furiosa’s strength and evolving leadership is communicated through her emotive facial expressions and empathy for others, this Furiosa remains one-dimensional.

This is such a departure from the innovation in disability and gender representation in Fury Road. The film obscures more than reveals.

A narrative prosthesis

Cultural disability theorists David Mitchell and Sharon Snyder write of a tendency in film and popular literature to use disability as a “narrative prosthesis”:

as a crutch upon which narratives lean for their representational power, disruptive potentiality, and analytic insight.

When disability is used as a narrative prosthesis, the story focuses on disability as a tragedy, or on overcoming the tragedy of an impaired body.

Furiosa’s impairment origin story is the crutch upon which this film relies. This focus comes at the expense of representations of disability and trauma explored throughout the previous films’ subtexts.

Miller’s critique of the rising road toll in the 1970s inspired the first two films.

As the series progressed, the films provided commentary on catastrophe, capitalism and survivalism, showcasing tyrannical leaders who forgo the health of the planet and its people for the sake of profit and power.

Fury Road turned its lens towards disabled and traumatised characters – there is rarely a scene without them. The characters with disabled and ageing bodies hold the promise for a new beginning, suggesting alternatives to violent, despotic overlords.

For the most part in Furiosa, these broader narratives are missing. The drama hinges on the possibility the next scene could be the moment Furiosa will lose her arm.

To regress from a complex representation of disability and gender in Fury Road to an exploitative fascination with how and when Furiosa acquires this impairment – rather than who it allowed her to become – is disappointing.

Fury Road asked us to expand our understanding of disability. Furiosa feeds on voyeuristic anticipation.

Furiosa’s end titles are interrupted with brief iconic clips from Fury Road. Such arresting imagery only serves to emphasise the former film’s potency and resonance at the expense of the latter.

Katie Ellis receives funding from the Australian Research Council

Mick Broderick 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. Mad Max: Fury Road was a pioneering portrayal of disability. Furiosa is a letdown – https://theconversation.com/mad-max-fury-road-was-a-pioneering-portrayal-of-disability-furiosa-is-a-letdown-229126

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amy Reichelt, Senior Lecturer (Adjunct), Nutritional neuroscientist, University of Adelaide

It’s a Saturday afternoon at a kids’ birthday party. Hordes of children are swarming between the spread of birthday treats and party games. Half-eaten cupcakes, biscuits and lollies litter the floor, and the kids seem to have gained superhuman speed and bounce-off-the-wall energy. But is sugar to blame?

The belief that eating sugary foods and drinks leads to hyperactivity has steadfastly persisted for decades. And parents have curtailed their children’s intake accordingly.

Balanced nutrition is critical during childhood. As a neuroscientist who has studied the negative effects of high sugar “junk food” diets on brain function, I can confidently say excessive sugar consumption does not have benefits to the young mind. In fact, neuroimaging studies show the brains of children who eat more processed snack foods are smaller in volume, particularly in the frontal cortices, than those of children who eat a more healthful diet.

But today’s scientific evidence does not support the claim sugar makes kids hyperactive.

The hyperactivity myth

Sugar is a rapid source of fuel for the body. The myth of sugar-induced hyperactivity can be traced to a handful of studies conducted in the 1970s and early 1980s. These were focused on the Feingold Diet as a treatment for what we now call Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a neurodivergent profile where problems with inattention and/or hyperactivity and impulsivity can negatively affect school, work or relationships.

Devised by American paediatric allergist Benjamin Feingold, the diet is extremely restrictive. Artificial colours, sweeteners (including sugar) and flavourings, salicylates including aspirin, and three preservatives (butylated hydroxyanisole, butylated hydroxytoluene, and tert-Butrylhdryquinone) are eliminated.

Salicylates occur naturally in many healthy foods, including apples, berries, tomatoes, broccoli, cucumbers, capsicums, nuts, seeds, spices and some grains. So, as well as eliminating processed foods containing artificial colours, flavours, preservatives and sweeteners, the Feingold diet eliminates many nutritious foods helpful for healthy development.

However, Feingold believed avoiding these ingredients improved focus and behaviour. He conducted some small studies, which he claimed showed a large proportion of hyperactive children responded favourably to his diet.

Flawed by design

The methods used in the studies were flawed, particularly with respect to adequate control groups (who did not restrict foods) and failed to establish a causal link between sugar consumption and hyperactive behaviour.

Subsequent studies suggested less than 2% responded to restrictions rather than Feingold’s claimed 75%. But the idea still took hold in the public consciousness and was perpetuated by anecdotal experiences.

Fast forward to the present day. The scientific landscape looks vastly different. Rigorous research conducted by experts has consistently failed to find a connection between sugar and hyperactivity. Numerous placebo-controlled studies have demonstrated sugar does not significantly impact children’s behaviour or attention span.

One landmark meta-analysis study, published almost 20 years ago, compared the effects of sugar versus a placebo on children’s behaviour across multiple studies.
The results were clear: in the vast majority of studies, sugar consumption did not lead to increased hyperactivity or disruptive behaviour.

Subsequent research has reinforced these findings, providing further evidence sugar does not cause hyperactivity in children, even in those diagnosed with ADHD.

While Feingold’s original claims were overstated, a small proportion of children do experience allergies to artificial food flavourings and dyes.

Pre-school aged children may be more sensitive to food additives than older children. This is potentially due to their smaller body size, or their still-developing brain and body.

Hooked on dopamine?

Although the link between sugar and hyperactivity is murky at best, there is a proven link between the neurotransmitter dopamine and increased activity.

The brain releases dopamine when a reward is encountered – such as an unexpected sweet treat. A surge of dopamine also invigorates movement – we see this increased activity after taking psychostimulant drugs like amphetamine. The excited behaviour of children towards sugary foods may be attributed to a burst of dopamine released in expectation of a reward, although the level of dopamine release is much less than that of a psychostimulant drug.

Dopamine function is also critically linked to ADHD, which is thought to be due to diminished dopamine receptor function in the brain. Some ADHD treatments such as methylphenidate (labelled Ritalin or Concerta) and lisdexamfetamine (sold as Vyvanse) are also psychostimulants. But in the ADHD brain the increased dopamine from these drugs recalibrates brain function to aid focus and behavioural control.

Why does the myth persist?

The complex interplay between diet, behaviour and societal beliefs endures. Expecting sugar to change your child’s behaviour can influence how you interpret what you see. In a study where parents were told their child had either received a sugary drink, or a placebo drink (with a non-sugar sweetener), those parents who expected their child to be hyperactive after having sugar perceived this effect, even when they’d only had the sugar-free placebo.

The allure of a simple explanation – blaming sugar for hyperactivity – can also be appealing in a world filled with many choices and conflicting voices.

Healthy foods, healthy brains

Sugar itself may not make your child hyperactive, but it can affect your child’s mental and physical health. Rather than demonising sugar, we should encourage moderation and balanced nutrition, teaching children healthy eating habits and fostering a positive relationship with food.

In both children and adults, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends limiting free sugar consumption to less than 10% of energy intake, and a reduction to 5% for further health benefits. Free sugars include sugars added to foods during manufacturing, and naturally present sugars in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates.

Treating sugary foods as rewards can result in them becoming highly valued by children. Non-sugar rewards also have this effect, so it’s a good idea to use stickers, toys or a fun activity as incentives for positive behaviour instead.

While sugar may provide a temporary energy boost, it does not turn children into hyperactive whirlwinds.

Amy Reichelt receives funding from NHMRC and ARC. She is affiliated with PurMinds Neuropharma.

– ref. No, sugar doesn’t make your kids hyperactive – https://theconversation.com/no-sugar-doesnt-make-your-kids-hyperactive-229107

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Mehigan, Associate Professor in Law, University of Canterbury

Norway, Spain and Ireland will formally recognise the state of Palestine today (May 28). While 143 of the 193 United Nations member states already recognise Palestine, this is a significant moment – and leaves New Zealand in an even smaller group of countries yet to follow suit.

The latest move is important because it makes a clear statement that members of the international community can no longer wait for the Middle East peace process to conclude before recognising Palestinian statehood.

New Zealand – along with a number of former colonial powers such as the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan and Italy – continues to withhold recognition. Foreign minister Winston Peters has said it is a matter of “when, not if”, but also that recognition will depend on certain conditions.

These include holding elections (although this was never a requirement for recognising China), and the vague standard of “serious negotiations between both Israel and Palestinians, including over the political authority of a future Palestinian state”.

This position represents the longstanding view that statehood was to be an incentive to completing peace negotiations. But the latest developments signal a shift away from that. As the Norwegian foreign minister told media:

We used to think that recognition would come at the end of a process […] Now we have realised that recognition should come as an impetus, as a strengthening of a process.

The tattered ‘road map’ for peace

That process is often referred to as the “two-state solution” and has for decades had the support of many countries, including New Zealand. In essence, it would mean Israeli and Palenstininan states would be established on the land where Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories now stand.

The exact borders and relationships between the two states would be ironed out in the peace process. This would involve each state’s leaders making appropriate concessions, developing trust and goodwill, and bringing their people with them to a sustainable peace.

(The Northern Irish Peace Process, culminating in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, is often given as an example of how this might succeed.)

The high point of progress in developing a two-state solution came with the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993. This was not an agreement, but a “roadmap” to developing one.

Within a few years however, violence on both sides – including Hamas attacks against civilians and the 1995 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a Jewish opponent of the peace process – made it impossible to sustain that progress.

Recognition of Palestine, not Hamas

When Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu first came to power in 1996, the two-state solution was left to wither on the vine.

It has been moribund ever since, with Israeli leaders prevaricating over progressing the idea, while increasing the levels of military and civil oppression faced by Palestinians. Netanyahu remains implacably opposed to Palestinian statehood.

New Zealand has supported the two-state solution for decades, and has not been afraid to challenge Israel. During its time on the UN Security Council (2015-16), New Zealand voted for Resolution 2334, which condemned Israeli settlement building in the Occupied Territories.

Because the US abstained, the resolution passed. It stands as one of the high-water marks of international opposition to Israel’s illegal occupation policies (which are in direct contravention of the Geneva Conventions).

Officially recognising a Palestinian state, then, would be in line with New Zealand’s past positions and actions. It would be one part of a bigger push to achieve a peaceful two-state solution, and it would not mean recognition of Hamas (or any other party).

‘Soft power’ can be effective

Recognition is not, as the Israeli government has portrayed it, a “reward” for the horrendous Hamas attacks of October 7. But it would be an acknowledgement that the peace process has stagnated and a different approach must be tried.

In the short term, the practical effect of recognising a Palestinian state would be minimal. Palestine’s representative in Canberra would present their credentials in Wellington, and relations with Palestine would continue as normal.

The long-term effects may be more significant, however. If Palestine is a state, then the two-state solution has its vital components. It will then be time to focus on how those two states will coexist in peace.

Small states can often feel powerless at times of international upheaval, and in some respects (particularly when hard military power is being used) they are. But there are still levers of “soft power” available. These become more effective when used collectively in conjunction with other small states.

The actions of Norway, Spain and Ireland present a unique opportunity for New Zealand to be in the vanguard of the development of a lasting peace in Israel and Palestine.

James Mehigan received funding from the Irish O’Brien Foundation to support the research and publication of Defending Hope: Dispatches From the Front Lines in Palestine and Israel (edited with Eoin Murray, published by Veritas in 2018).

– ref. Norway, Spain and Ireland have recognised a Palestinian state – what’s stopping NZ? – https://theconversation.com/norway-spain-and-ireland-have-recognised-a-palestinian-state-whats-stopping-nz-230851

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sanjoy Paul, Associate Professor, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

The shift towards net zero emissions and greater international competition have created new opportunities for clean energy industries – poised to shape the global economy in the coming decades.

To harness these opportunities, the government has developed a long-term strategic initiative called the Future made in Australia program.

This program, first flagged by the government last month with a total $22.7 billion investment over the next decade, aims to attract private investment into priority areas while supporting a net zero policy.

The government has identified five priority industries – renewable hydrogen, critical minerals processing, green metals, low carbon liquid fuels and clean energy manufacturing.

It has targeted these sectors, which will receive tax incentives and other benefits, to become a global leader in the move to net zero, boosting the broader economy and industrial sectors.

Major challenges

Despite the positive intentions, there are major challenges.

These include ongoing implementation, bringing in new local and global partners and gaining local community support to build essential infrastructure such as wind turbine and power transmission lines.

Other challenges include complex mining operations of critical minerals in remote areas, huge upfront capital costs, problems transporting hydrogen and cost competitiveness of alternative manufacturing locations.

The current budget allocation to be spent over the next decade for the five critical sectors is significant. However, to achieve the intended outcome, the program needs to be expanded.

Expanding priorities

While the critical mineral sector is already a priority, expanding the program to create a large-scale battery supply chain where critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt are essential, would make Australia more competitive.

A sovereign battery supply chain would help secure a renewable energy storage system and contribute to producing electric vehicles.

In line with this, the government has developed a National Battery Strategy. However, the focus of this should be extended to include exports and installation at residential and business premises.

Given concerns about supply chain disruption, especially at a time of increased global tensions, other sectors including the health product manufacturing and food processing sectors should also be prioritised.

Developing these industries, which are highly vulnerable to disruption, is important for community well being and economic security.

Becoming more self-sufficient

Since the COVID pandemic, Australia has been experiencing dire shortages of critical medicines including blood thinners, antibiotics and hormone replacement therapy medication.

By extending the Future Made program to health products, Australia could boost its domestic production of critical medicines and protect against future shortages. This would also increase Australia’s export opportunities.

Australia could step up exports to Asia by using its free trade agreements with China, Japan, Korea and other countries in the region.

Developing the local food manufacturing and processing industry should also be a priority to protect against supply disruptions already experienced as a result of the Russia/Ukraine war, climate-fuelled weather disasters and the pandemic.

The food industry accounts for the bulk of Australia’s manufacturing jobs, highlighting its importance in the economic resilience of the country.

With the correct government policies, the food and grocery sector could be doubled by 2050, increasing employment by 54% to 427,000 people.

Reducing emissions

Agriculture should also be included in the priority list. This sector alone was responsible for 16.8% of the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2020-21.

It is therefore necessary to ensure freight transport and manufacturing of farm inputs, such as energy and water, are sustainable to achieve the net zero target. Green technologies should replace the existing carbon-generated equipment and machinery in the agriculture sector.

The sector could also be carbon neutralised using microalgae-based technologies. Furthermore, microalgae-based technologies can reduce carbon emissions and pollution for many other manufacturing industries with significant emissions.

Therefore, the development and large-scale implementation process of green and microalgae-based technologies should also be included in the program.

The benefits of Future Made in Australia

The Future Made in Australia program’s potential benefits include job creation and skill development, strengthening local industries, securing supply chains and keeping them independent, long term economic growth and cutting carbon emissions.

Under the existing priorities numerous jobs are expected to be created in manufacturing, especially in the renewable energy sector. While job growth will be particularly strong in central and northern Queensland which have been selected for renewable energy and hydrogen hubs, jobs will also grow in other parts of the country.

With an allocation of $91 million for developing a clean energy workforce, $55.6 million for building women’s career program and $178.6 million for skills and employment supports for regions in transition, the program is expected to contribute heavily to job creation in clean energy and advanced manufacturing sectors.

New investment and tax incentives will help develop new industries and boost existing ones including hydrogen and critical minerals production. The incentives will make hydrogen projects commercial sooner and develop green energy manufacturing capabilities to strengthen the renewable energy sector.

Recent research ranked Australia third in the world for renewable electricity prices in 2030 and 2050, showing its competitiveness in the global arena and potential for economic resilience and growth.

Australia is likely to benefit from exporting renewable hydrogen to its international trading partners including Japan, which is planning to import one million tonnes annually, and the European Union which will import 10 million tonnes by 2030.

The exporting cost of various hydrogen carriers to Japan is lowest for Australia compared to its competitors.

Similarly, Australia could leverage its huge capacity to produce iron and bauxite to become one of the world’s cheapest places for green metals.

How Future Made could be even better

The Future Made program targets five priority industries: renewable hydrogen, critical minerals processing, green metals, low carbon liquid fuels and clean energy manufacturing.

Expanding the program to include other critical industries such as agriculture, food processing and health manufacturing and their supply chains will enhance Australia’s economic resilience and security by generating more jobs and ensuring a seamless supply of essential products during future disruptions.

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. Future Made in Australia will boost sustainable growth and create jobs as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go far enough – https://theconversation.com/future-made-in-australia-will-boost-sustainable-growth-and-create-jobs-as-far-as-it-goes-but-it-doesnt-go-far-enough-230536

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darius von Guttner Sporzynski, Historian, Australian Catholic University

In the pantheon of Renaissance art, Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa stands as an unrivalled icon. This half-length portrait is more than just an artistic masterpiece; it embodies the allure of an era marked by unparalleled cultural flourishing.

Yet, beneath the surface of the Mona Lisa’s elusive smile lies a debate that touches the very essence of the Renaissance, its politics and the role of women in history.

A mystery woman

The intrigue of the Mona Lisa, also known as La Gioconda, isn’t solely due to Leonardo’s revolutionary painting techniques. It’s also because the identity of the subject is unconfirmed to this day. More than half a century since it was first painted, the real identity of the Mona Lisa remains one of art’s greatest mysteries, intriguing scholars and enthusiasts alike.

The painting has traditionally been associated with Lisa Gherardini, the wife of Florentine silk merchant Francesco del Giocondo. But another compelling theory suggests a different sitter: Isabella of Aragon.

Isabella of Aragon was born into the illustrious House of Aragon in Naples, in 1470. She was a princess who was deeply entwined in the political and cultural fabric of the Renaissance.

Her 1490 marriage to Gian Galeazzo Sforza, Duke of Milan, positioned Isabella at the heart of Italian politics. And this role was both complicated and elevated by the ambitions and machinations of Ludovico Sforza (also called Ludovico il Moro), her husband’s uncle and usurper of the Milanese dukedom.

Scholarly perspectives

The theory that Isabella is the real Mona Lisa is supported by a combination of stylistic analyses, historical connections and reinterpretations of Leonardo’s intent as an artist.

In his biography of Leonardo, author Robert Payne points to preliminary studies by the artist that bear a striking resemblances to Isabella around age 20. Payne suggests Leonardo captured Isabella across different life stages, including during widowhood, as depicted in the Mona Lisa.

US artist Lillian F. Schwartz’s 1988 study used x-rays to reveal an initial sketch of a woman hidden beneath Leonardo’s painting. This sketch was then painted over with Leonardo’s own likeness.

Schwartz believes the woman in the sketch is Isabella, because of its similarity with a cartoon Leonardo made of the princess. She proposes the work was made by integrating specific features of the initial model with Leonardo’s own features.

This hypothesis is further supported by art historians Jerzy Kulski and Maike Vogt-Luerssen.

According to Vogt-Luerssen’s detailed analysis of the Mona Lisa, the symbols of the Sforza house and the depiction of mourning garb both align with Isabella’s known life circumstances. They suggest the Mona Lisa isn’t a commissioned portrait, but a nuanced representation of a woman’s journey through triumph and tragedy.

Similarly, Kulski highlights the portrait’s heraldic designs, which would be atypical for a silk merchant’s wife. He, too, suggests the painting shows Isabella mourning her late husband.

The Mona Lisa’s enigmatic expression also captures Isabella’s self-described state post-1500 of being “alone in misfortune”. Contrary to representing a wealthy, recently married woman, the portrait exudes the aura of a virtuous widow.

Late professor of art history Joanna Woods-Marsden suggested the Mona Lisa transcends traditional portraiture and embodies Leonardo’s ideal, rather than being a straightforward commission.

This perspective frames the work as a deeply personal project for Leonardo, possibly signifying a special connection between him and Isabella. Leonardo’s reluctance to part with the work also indicates a deeper, personal investment in it.

Beyond the canvas

The theory that Isabella of Aragon could be the true Mona Lisa is a profound reevaluation of the painting’s context, opening up new avenues through which to appreciate the work.

It elevates Isabella from a figure overshadowed by the men in her life, to a woman of courage and complexity who deserves recognition in her own right.

Through her strategic marriage and political savvy, Isabella played a crucial role in the alliances and conflicts that defined the Italian Renaissance. By possibly choosing her as his subject, Leonardo immortalised her and also made a profound statement on the complexity and agency of women in a male-dominated society.

The ongoing debate over Mona Lisa’s identity underscores this work’s significance as a cultural and historical artefact. It also invites us to reflect on the roles of women in the Renaissance and challenge common narratives that minimise them.

In this light, it becomes a legacy of the women who shaped the Renaissance.

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

– ref. Who really was Mona Lisa? More than 500 years on, there’s good reason to think we got it wrong – https://theconversation.com/who-really-was-mona-lisa-more-than-500-years-on-theres-good-reason-to-think-we-got-it-wrong-220666

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Senaka Ranadheera, Associate Professor, The University of Melbourne

We all know fresh produce is good for us, but fruit, vegetables and herbs have a tendency to perish quickly if left uneaten.

This is because even after harvesting, produce from living plants tends to continue its biological processes. This includes respiration: producing energy from stored carbohydrates, proteins and fats while releasing carbon dioxide and water vapour. (Ever found a sprouting potato in your pantry?)

On top of that, fresh produce also spoils easily thanks to various microbes – both harmless and ones that can cause disease, called pathogens.

Simply chucking things in the fridge won’t solve the problem, as different types of plants will react differently to how they’re stored. So, how can you combat food waste and keep produce fresh for longer? Fortunately, there are some helpful tips.

Freshness and quality begin at the farm

Farmers always aim to harvest produce when it’s at an optimal condition, but both pre-harvest and post-harvest factors will affect freshness and quality even before you buy it.

Pre-harvest factors are agricultural, such as climatic conditions, soil type and water availability. Post-harvest factors include washing and cleaning after harvesting, transportation and distribution, processing and packaging, and storage.

As consumers we can’t directly control these factors – sometimes the veggies we buy just won’t be as good. But we can look out for things that will affect the produce once we bring it home.

One major thing to look out for is bruised, wounded or damaged produce. This can happen at any stage of post-harvest handling, and can really speed up the decay of your veggies and fruit.

Moisture loss through damaged skin speeds up deterioration and nutrient loss. The damage also makes it easier for spoilage microbes to get in.

To wash or not to wash?

You don’t need to wash your produce before storing it. A lot of what we buy has already been washed commercially. In fact, if you wash your produce and can’t get it completely dry, the added moisture could speed up decay in the fridge.

But washing produce just before you use it is important to remove dirt and pathogenic bugs.

Don’t use vinegar in your washing water despite what you see on social media. Studies indicate vinegar has no effect on lowering microbial loads on fresh produce.

Similarly, don’t use baking soda. Even though there’s some evidence baking soda can remove pesticide residues from the surface of some produce, it’s not advisable at home. Just use plain tap water.

Location, location, location

The main thing you need is the correct type of packaging and the correct location – you want to manage moisture loss, decay and ripening.

The three main storage options are on the counter, in the fridge, or in a “cool, dry and dark place”, such as the pantry. Here are some common examples of produce and where best to put them.

Bananas, onion, garlic, potatoes, sweet potato and whole pumpkin will do better in a dark pantry or cupboard. Don’t store potatoes and onions together: onions produce a gas called ethylene that makes potatoes spoil quicker, while the high moisture in potatoes spoils onions.

In fact, don’t store fruits such as apples, pears, avocado and bananas together, because these fruits release ethylene gas as they ripen, making nearby fruits ripen (and potentially spoil) much faster. That is, unless you do want to ripen your fruits fast.

All leafy greens, carrots, cucumbers, cauliflower and broccoli will do best in the low-humidity drawer (crisper) in the fridge. You can put them in perforated plastic bags to retain moisture but maintain air flow. But don’t put them in completely sealed bags because this can slow down ripening while trapping carbon dioxide, leading to decay and bad smells.

Some fruits will also do best in the fridge. For example, apples and citrus fruits such as oranges can keep fresh longer in the fridge (crisper drawer), although they can stay at room temperature for short periods. However, don’t store watermelon in the fridge for too long, as it will lose its flavour and deep red colour if kept refrigerated for longer than three days.

Most herbs and some leafy vegetables – like celery, spring onions and asparagus – can be kept with stems in water to keep them crisp. Keep them in a well-ventilated area and away from direct sunlight, so they don’t get too warm and wilt.

Fight food waste and experiment

Don’t buy too much. Whenever possible, buy only small amounts so that you don’t need to worry about keeping them fresh. Never buy bruised, wounded or damaged produce if you plan to keep it around for more than a day.

“Process” your veggies for storage. If you do buy a large quantity – maybe a bulk option was on sale – consider turning the produce into something you can keep for longer. For example, banana puree made from really ripe bananas can be stored for up to 14 days at 4°C. You can use freezing, blanching, fermentation and canning for most vegetables.

Consider vacuum sealing. Vacuum packaging of vegetables and berries can keep them fresh longer, as well. For example, vacuum-sealed beans can keep up to 16 months in the fridge, but will last only about four weeks in the fridge unsealed.

Keep track. Arrange your fridge so you can see the produce easily and use it all before it loses freshness.

Experiment with storage hacks. Social media is full of tips and hacks on how best to store produce. Turn your kitchen into a lab and try out any tips you’re curious about – they might just work. You can even use these experiments as a way to teach your kids about the importance of reducing food waste.

Grow some of your own. This isn’t feasible for all of us, but you can always try having some herbs in pots so you don’t need to worry about keeping them fresh or using up a giant bunch of mint all at once. Growing your own microgreens could be handy, too.

Senaka Ranadheera 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 do I keep my fruit, veggies and herbs fresh longer? Are there any ‘hacks’? – https://theconversation.com/how-do-i-keep-my-fruit-veggies-and-herbs-fresh-longer-are-there-any-hacks-226763

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

The recent Gaza war protests and counterprotests roiling universities around the world have attracted vocal supporters and critics alike. Protesters have occupied buildings on campuses from Los Angeles to Paris to Melbourne, and police have intervened to break up encampments, at times with violent altercations.

Clashes between pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian protesters have also become commonplace outside universities, while people on both sides of the debate have been subjected to doxing, harassment and abuse.

US President Joe Biden warned of a “ferocious surge” of antisemitism in the United States, while the Australian government has established an inquiry to report on racism at universities. Hate crimes are on the rise across Europe, as well.

What’s going on? Why has this issue over the war in Gaza – compared to all the other controversies and crises we face – become so fraught, and the debate so toxic?

Major ethical concerns

There are some straightforward reasons why the Gaza war attracts attention and activism.

Both sides (Hamas and the Israel Defense Forces) have committed acts that prompt allegations of the most serious moral charges imaginable: genocide, slaughter, war crimes. These are atrocity crimes: among the worst things humans can do to one another.

Israel and Palestine also have a long and complex history. Any given act can – and perhaps must – be viewed in the context of prior provocations, offers and grievances. There are also starkly different readings of that history.

The immediate future raises enormous moral stakes, as well. For its part, Israel aims to safeguard itself from subsequent atrocities and to free its hostages.

For Palestinians, the stakes are almost unimaginably high. There is the civilian cost of the current military incursion into Rafah. There is the unthinkable humanitarian cost if famine or disease becomes worse. And there is the massive damage to Gaza itself as a place that can sustain a human population after the war is over.

Lastly, multicultural and immigrant nations, like the US, Australia and others, have many people with personal ties to one side or the other. People who see the conflict through very different lenses might live, work and play alongside each other in our communities. This makes conflicts even more likely.

Read more:
What is it about Gaza? Wars are raging around the world, so why are young people so passionate about this one?

Our current moment

But must all this add up to charges of intimidation, provocation and racism? Three features of our current cultural moment are likely causing these disagreements to become even more vitriolic:

1. We are all politically active, and publicly so. Ordinary people and organisations routinely take public moral stands on charged issues. Even the absence of a public statement can be notable.

2. There is a pronounced social concern for vulnerable groups and their safety, especially when minorities face identity-based discrimination and oppressive speech.

3. There is an increased willingness, super-charged through social media, to use “social punishment” against opposing views. This can include efforts at cancelling, disrupting, shouting down, blackballing, doxing, lawfare, public shaming through vitriolic abuse and other efforts to inflict harms on perceived wrongdoers. Some partisans even feel justified in threatening violence.

These three features have become interconnected in our current climate. Seeing society as an us-and-them struggle between good and evil can drive people to take public stances, and to socially punish the perceived oppressors.

These features were apparent in movements against systemic racism (such as the Black Lives Matter protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death in police custody) and sexism (the #Metoo movement). And we are seeing it now with the Gaza war, as well.

What’s different this time?

A crucially different feature of the current controversy is that both sides can and do freely employ these features against each other.

This is a change. Previously, the main opposition to the above three cultural features came from centre-left critics who largely agreed with the goals of progressive movements, but disagreed with their methods.

For example, Yasha Mounk, author of The Identity Trap, acknowledged the need for a reckoning on racial justice, but criticised the use of public shaming and cancel culture. As he himself observed, this ambivalence about the ends and means of progressive movements often prevented critics like him from mounting assertive, full-frontal attacks on their opponents.

In contrast, the Israel-Gaza conflict sees both sides wielding uncompromising language, concepts and methods against each other. Both Jews and Palestinians have faced undeniable bigotries (antisemitism, Islamophobia), and have responded by publicly calling out this racism.

A social system in which people take such public moral stances, target identity-based oppression and employ social punishment against perceived wrongdoers can be relatively stable, provided there is widespread agreement about who counts as oppressors and the oppressed.

But in the current controversy, both sides can plausibly claim they are the persecuted minority. After all, the Jewish people had a long history of persecution even before the horrors of the Holocaust, and Israel has been surrounded by countries violently opposed to its existence since its inception.

And compared to Israel’s military might, the Palestinians plainly suffer from systemic oppression and deadly violence. This will seem especially true to those who see Israel as an oppressive “settler colony” – invaders aiming to permanently replace the existing locals.

Once there is direct disagreement about which party counts as the oppressed group, conflicts can quickly escalate.

Each side is righteously sensitive to any perceived hate speech from the other, but unwilling to limit their own punitive strategies or inflammatory language. After all, why should the victims have to curb their language and methods to suit the oppressors?

Tit-for-tat escalations

Using social punishment to achieve policy goals can also sometimes shade into coercive force.

At low levels, disruptive and rule-breaking protests can help publicise a political message and communicate its importance. But the more disruptive a protest becomes, it takes on the unvarnished threat of a protection racketeer: we will make running your operations impossible unless you submit to our demands.

Worse still, once one side steps outside the bounds of normal rules and expectations — such as through disruptive or intimidating protests or attempts to get others fired —the other side righteously retaliates, trading accusations of racism and bigotry.

There is no longer just a conflict, but a conflict about the conflict.

Language, power, humanity

And this perhaps leaves us with the final ethical concern. Even if it is right, sometimes, to judge people based on their group membership, and to be sensitive to the role of systemic power, people are individuals, too. It still matters how each individual is treated, not as a place-holder for a group, and not as responsible for the group’s sins.

Just because a person might be in the right politically doesn’t mean that what they are doing for their cause is permissible morally.

There are no easy answers here. In a multicultural and pluralistic country, we can’t prevent others having different views, and we can’t shy away from the sharp disagreements those differences will create.

But we can at least remember we are all human, and put limits on intimidating, haranguing, ostracising and threatening others, even as we tolerate their rights to protest and criticise the things we hold most sacred.

Hugh Breakey 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 is the Gaza war tearing us apart? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-the-gaza-war-tearing-us-apart-229996

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

The cost of living crisis is affecting how we spend our money. For many people, this means tightening the budget on the weekly supermarket shop.

One victim may be fresh fruit and vegetables. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) suggests Australians were consuming fewer fruit and vegetables in 2022–23 than the year before.

The cost of living is likely compounding a problem that exists already – on the whole, Australians don’t eat enough fruit and vegetables. Australian dietary guidelines recommend people aged nine and older should consume two serves of fruit and five serves of vegetables each day for optimal health. But in 2022 the ABS reported only 4% of Australians met the recommendations for both fruit and vegetable consumption.

Fruit and vegetables are crucial for a healthy, balanced diet, providing a range of vitamins and minerals as well as fibre.

If you can’t afford as much fresh produce at the moment, there are other ways to ensure you still get the benefits of these food groups. You might even be able to increase your intake of fruit and vegetables.

Frozen

Fresh produce is often touted as being the most nutritious (think of the old adage “fresh is best”). But this is not necessarily true.

Nutrients can decline in transit from the paddock to your kitchen, and while the produce is stored in your fridge. Frozen vegetables may actually be higher in some nutrients such as vitamin C and E as they are snap frozen very close to the time of harvest. Variations in transport and storage can affect this slightly.

Minerals such as calcium, iron and magnesium stay at similar levels in frozen produce compared to fresh.

Another advantage to frozen vegetables and fruit is the potential to reduce food waste, as you can use only what you need at the time.

As well as buying frozen fruit and vegetables from the supermarket, you can freeze produce yourself at home if you have an oversupply from the garden, or when produce may be cheaper.

A quick blanching prior to freezing can improve the safety and quality of the produce. This is when food is briefly submerged in boiling water or steamed for a short time.

Frozen vegetables won’t be suitable for salads but can be eaten roasted or steamed and used for soups, stews, casseroles, curries, pies and quiches. Frozen fruits can be added to breakfast dishes (with cereal or youghurt) or used in cooking for fruit pies and cakes, for example.

Canned

Canned vegetables and fruit similarly often offer a cheaper alternative to fresh produce. They’re also very convenient to have on hand. The canning process is the preservation technique, so there’s no need to add any additional preservatives, including salt.

Due to the cooking process, levels of heat-sensitive nutrients such as vitamin C will decline a little compared to fresh produce. When you’re using canned vegetables in a hot dish, you can add them later in the cooking process to reduce the amount of nutrient loss.

To minimise waste, you can freeze the portion you don’t need.

Fermented

Fermentation has recently come into fashion, but it’s actually one of the oldest food processing and preservation techniques.

Fermentation largely retains the vitamins and minerals in fresh vegetables. But fermentation may also enhance the food’s nutritional profile by creating new nutrients and allowing existing ones to be absorbed more easily.

Further, fermented foods contain probiotics, which are beneficial for our gut microbiome.

5 other tips to get your fresh fix

Although alternatives to fresh such as canned or frozen fruit and vegetables are good substitutes, if you’re looking to get more fresh produce into your diet on a tight budget, here are some things you can do.

1. Buy in season

Based on supply and demand principles, buying local seasonal vegetables and fruit will always be cheaper than those that are imported out of season from other countries.

2. Don’t shun the ugly fruit and vegetables

Most supermarkets now sell “ugly” fruit and vegetables, that are not physically perfect in some way. This does not affect the levels of nutrients in them at all, or their taste.

3. Reduce waste

On average, an Australian household throws out A$2,000–$2,500 worth of food every year. Fruit, vegetables and bagged salad are the three of the top five foods thrown out in our homes. So properly managing fresh produce could help you save money (and benefit the environment).

To minimise waste, plan your meals and shopping ahead of time. And if you don’t think you’re going to get to eat the fruit and vegetables you have before they go off, freeze them.

4. Swap and share

There are many websites and apps which offer the opportunity to swap or even pick up free fresh produce if people have more than they need. Some local councils are also encouraging swaps on their websites, so dig around and see what you can find in your local area.

5. Gardening

Regardless of how small your garden is you can always plant produce in pots. Herbs, rocket, cherry tomatoes, chillies and strawberries all grow well. In the long run, these will offset some of your cost on fresh produce.

Plus, when you have put the effort in to grow your own produce, you are less likely to waste it.

Evangeline Mantzioris is affiliated with Alliance for Research in Nutrition, Exercise and Activity (ARENA) at the University of South Australia. Evangeline Mantzioris has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, and has been appointed to the National Health and Medical Research Council Dietary Guideline Expert Committee.

– ref. Cost of living: if you can’t afford as much fresh produce, are canned veggies or frozen fruit just as good? – https://theconversation.com/cost-of-living-if-you-cant-afford-as-much-fresh-produce-are-canned-veggies-or-frozen-fruit-just-as-good-229724

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Albert Pessarrodona Silvestre, Research Fellow in Ecology, The University of Western Australia

Deep in the ocean lies the world’s largest active carbon reservoir, which plays a pivotal role in buffering our planet’s climate. Of the roughly 10 billion tonnes carbon dioxide we emit each year, about 3 billion tonnes are taken up and stored in the oceans – and largely by plants.

When we consider natural carbon storage in the deep oceans, we generally focus on phytoplankton. Trillions of these microscopic plants live in the surface waters all across the oceans. When they die, they sink to the ocean floor, transporting carbon to the depths.

But there’s a missing piece of the puzzle. Our two new studies show coastal vegetation such as seaweed forests are more important to natural carbon storage than we thought. Around 56 million tonnes of carbon in the form of seaweed is carried into the deep ocean each year.

For carbon to be stored for hundreds of years, it has to enter slow cycling pools of carbon in the deep ocean. But most seaweeds only grow in shallow coastal seas. How can they get there?

Rivers in the sea

For decades, deep sea explorers have reported surprising findings. Pieces of seaweed and other coastal plants appear where they shouldn’t be.

Fragments of seaweed are often caught in deep-sea trawls, or recorded by submarines and underwater robots during surveys of the ocean floor. Seaweed DNA has been detected in deep sea water and sediments in all of the world’s oceans, as deep as 4 kilometres down and up to 5,000 km from the closest seaweed forest.

But how can seaweeds travel that distance?

Our team discovered part of the answer. Seaweed can be carried by large “underwater rivers”, which flow from coastal waters along the seafloor across the continental shelf and into the deep.

These currents form when localised cooling causes cold dense coastal water to rapidly sink below warmer offshore surface waters. The dense water slides down the slope of the seafloor, following the topography like a river, and carrying with it large quantities of seaweed to deeper areas.

In Western Australia, these flows of seaweed and coastal vegetation towards the deep ocean happen most during colder months, when conditions allow these underwater rivers to form. During these months, storms often hit coastal waters, ripping up seaweed and filling the water with seaweed fragments.

These underwater rivers are a well-documented phenomenon in Australia. But are these ocean currents transporting seaweed and their carbon elsewhere?

We worked with an international team of scientists to find out. To do so, we tracked seaweed from coastal waters to the deep ocean using advanced ocean models.

The hidden role of seaweed forests in oceanic carbon export

Our findings were clear. Seaweed forests do, in fact, transfer substantial amounts of carbon to the deep ocean in many parts of the world.

This phenomenon is particularly high in the kelp forests of Australia’s Great Southern Reef, which stretches 8,000 km from Kalbarri in Western Australia to Coolangatta in Queensland.

The seaweed forests of the United States, New Zealand, Indonesia and Chile are also carbon transport hotspots.

While phytoplankton still sink vast amounts of carbon, our discovery suggests the plants of the coastal ocean transfer more carbon than we thought.

Mangroves, salt marshes and seagrass all contribute to these flows of carbon, but seaweed forests are really big contributor. These forests are made up of large brown algae such as kelp and rockweed species, which form extensive hidden forests. Seaweed forests – such as Tasmania’s disappearing giant kelp forests – are the largest and most productive coastal ecosystems on the planet.

Globally, these forests cover an area twice the size of India, and fix as much carbon during their growth as the northern forests of Canada – nearly 1 billion tonnes a year.

Of this carbon, our research suggests between 10 and 170 million tonnes makes it to the deep ocean every year.

A threatened ecosystem

Many of us don’t give seaweed much thought. But underwater seaweed forests play a vital role. These forests give shelter and home to huge numbers of fish and other marine species. They improve water quality and boost biodiversity. And now we know they help store carbon for hundreds of years.

Like many other ecosystems, underwater forests are at risk. Hotter seas from climate change, coastal development, pollution and overfishing have pushed seaweed forests to die off faster than most other coastal ecosystems.

Their fate has worsened in recent decades. The ocean is getting hotter, faster, bringing with it longer lasting and more frequent marine heatwaves.

In Tasmania, the heating ocean has brought new species to seaweed forests, which now have subtropical fish species and voracious sea urchins. These urchins are chewing through the state’s kelp forests.

In Western Australia, a severe marine heatwave struck in 2011, wiping out kelp forests along 100 km of coastline. These forests have not recovered.

When we lose seaweed forests, we lose their natural ability to transfer carbon to the deep ocean. But their loss also threatens the other species who rely on them, and the half a trillion dollars of value they provide to us.

We should think of conserving seaweed forests in the same way we do forests on land. Scaling up restoration where forests have been lost is vital to ensure these unsung plants can keep supporting us – and help store carbon.

Albert Pessarrodona receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Conservation International, Revive & Restore and Morris Animal Foundation. Albert is also affiliated with Conservation International.

Karen Filbee-Dexter receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Research Council of Norway, Canopy Blue and Schmidt Marine Technology Partners. She is an advisor for Seaforester.

Mirjam van der Mheen receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Thomas Wernberg receives funding from The Australian Research Council, The Norwegian Research Council, The Schmidt Marine Technology Partners and Canopy Blue. Thomas is also affiliated with the Institute of Marine Research (Norway) and Roskilde University (Denmark). He is an advisor for SeaForester.

– ref. Buried kelp: seaweed carried to the deep sea stores more carbon than we thought – https://theconversation.com/buried-kelp-seaweed-carried-to-the-deep-sea-stores-more-carbon-than-we-thought-228888

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brandon Michael Sideleau, PhD student studying human-saltwater crocodile conflict, Charles Darwin University

What’s the connection between your smartphone and crocodile attacks? It’s quite straightforward.

Smartphones need tin, which is often mined illegally in Indonesia. When illegal tin mines are abandoned, they fill with water. Crocodiles enter from nearby waterways, looking for food, as fishing and other human pressures have made prey short. Croc attacks increase.

That’s the short version. Here’s the longer one.

After intense culling in Indonesia in the 20th century, saltwater crocodiles (Crocodylus porosus) are now returning to islands such as Bali and Java. Croc attacks have become a serious issue. Over 1,000 attacks have taken place in the ten years to 2023, leading to 486 deaths.

But these attacks aren’t distributed evenly. Croc hotspots include the Bangka-Belitung islands, off the southeastern coast of Sumatra. And these islands have a huge amount of tin.

The islands of tin

The Bangka-Belitung province consists of two large namesake islands, as well as hundreds of smaller islands. About 1.5 million people live here. Tin is the mainstay of the economy.

Tin is vital to smartphone production, as it is used to solder different components together. Indonesia is second only to China in tin production, producing roughly a third of the world supply. And within Indonesia, almost all the tin – 90% – comes from the Bangka-Belitung islands.

During the authoritarian Suharto government, tin mining here was controlled by the central government. After Indonesia democratised in 1998, the regional government of Bangka-Belitung gained control of tin. In 2001, the government allowed its citizens the right to mine tin. Illegal tin mines ballooned as a result, increasing four-fold in just three years after the laws passed.

Two decades later, illegal tin-mining has now destroyed much of the province’s biodiversity, particularly fish populations. It’s dangerous work for humans – around 150 miners die each year due to accidents, including crocodile attacks. Miners have also encroached into crocodile habitat such as mangroves.

Tin mining makes the landscape look like the moon. Native animals flee or die. Mud pollutes waterways. Fish numbers dwindle. And crocodiles get hungrier. They start looking for different prey. Dogs. Cows. Humans.

Desperate humans, desperate crocodiles

Illegal tin mining brings crocodiles closer to humans by creating new habitat, though of poor quality. After miners dig out the tin ore by hand, the craters left behind fill with water, creating pools known as “kulongs”.

These kulongs are often found close enough to waterways that fish and other prey animals can end up living in them after a flood. These mining pools go much further inland than natural waterways on the islands do, allowing salties to reach far further inland. Hungry crocodiles come for the fish, but might go after a dog or human.

It’s not only mining – the felling of forests and planting of oil palms often comes with the creation of drainage canals. These canals make it easier for crocs to get close to areas where workers might be swimming or fishing.

All of this means the sharp increase in croc attacks was almost inevitable. Destroying habitat while mining in or near waterways means crocodiles found it easier and easier to be near humans.

Over the 10 years to 2023, almost 100 crocodile attacks were reported on these islands, and 41 people died. Of these attacks, almost a third (32%) were in current or former tin mines, and one sixth (16.5%) were mining at the time.

By contrast, over that same decade in Queensland, there were just five fatal attacks and 14 non-fatal.

As Langka Sani, the founder of local wildlife conservation group Alobi Foundation has said:

In the past, we might never hear of a crocodile attack in a year, whereas now in the last two weeks there have been dozens of reports of crocodile cases.

His organisation has taken in dozens of crocodiles attacked by people as reprisals for croc attacks. Some of these are being resettled.

Reducing croc attacks will mean ending illegal tin-mining. Is that possible? Yes, but it’s unlikely. The state-owned tin mining company, PT Timah, provides miners with safer working conditions. But they cannot compete with the extra income from illegal mining.

That means for the foreseeable future, the world’s demand for tin for smartphones will have a deadly cost.

Read more:
Saltwater crocodiles are slowly returning to Bali and Java. Can we learn to live alongside them?

Brandon Michael Sideleau 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. Your smartphone might be linked to crocodile attacks in Indonesia. Here’s how – https://theconversation.com/your-smartphone-might-be-linked-to-crocodile-attacks-in-indonesia-heres-how-229630

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Toby Walsh, Professor of AI, Research Group Leader, UNSW Sydney

Google has rolled out its latest experimental search feature on Chrome, Firefox and the Google app browser to hundreds of millions of users. “AI Overviews” saves you clicking on links by using generative AI — the same technology that powers rival product ChatGPT — to provide summaries of the search results. Ask “how to keep bananas fresh for longer” and it uses AI to generate a useful summary of tips such as storing them in a cool, dark place and away from other fruits like apples.

But ask it a left-field question and the results can be disastrous, or even dangerous. Google is currently scrambling to fix these problems one by one, but it is a PR disaster for the search giant and a challenging game of whack-a-mole.

AI Overviews helpfully tells you that “Whack-A-Mole is a classic arcade game where players use a mallet to hit moles that pop up at random for points. The game was invented in Japan in 1975 by the amusement manufacturer TOGO and was originally called Mogura Taiji or Mogura Tataki.”

But AI Overviews also tells you that “astronauts have met cats on the moon, played with them, and provided care”. More worryingly, it also recommends “you should eat at least one small rock per day” as “rocks are a vital source of minerals and vitamins”, and suggests putting glue in pizza topping.

Why is this happening?

One fundamental problem is that generative AI tools don’t know what is true, just what is popular. For example, there aren’t a lot of articles on the web about eating rocks as it is so self-evidently a bad idea.

There is, however, a well-read satirical article from The Onion about eating rocks. And so Google’s AI based its summary on what was popular, not what was true.

Another problem is that generative AI tools don’t have our values. They’re trained on a large chunk of the web.

And while sophisticated techniques (that go by exotic names such as “reinforcement learning from human feedback” or RLHF) are used to eliminate the worst, it is unsurprising they reflect some of the biases, conspiracy theories and worse to be found on the web. Indeed, I am always amazed how polite and well-behaved AI chatbots are, given what they’re trained on.

Is this the future of search?

If this is really the future of search, then we’re in for a bumpy ride. Google is, of course, playing catch-up with OpenAI and Microsoft.

The financial incentives to lead the AI race are immense. Google is therefore being less prudent than in the past in pushing the technology out into users’ hands.

In 2023, Google chief executive Sundar Pichai said:

We’ve been cautious. There are areas where we’ve chosen not to be the first to put a product out. We’ve set up good structures around responsible AI. You will continue to see us take our time.

That no longer appears to be so true, as Google responds to criticisms that it has become a large and lethargic competitor.

A risky move

It’s a risky strategy for Google. It risks losing the trust that the public has in Google being the place to find (correct) answers to questions.

But Google also risks undermining its own billion-dollar business model. If we no longer click on links, just read their summary, how does Google continue to make money?

The risks are not restricted to Google. I fear such use of AI might be harmful for society more broadly. Truth is already a somewhat contested and fungible idea. AI untruths are likely to make this worse.

In a decade’s time, we may look back at 2024 as the golden age of the web, when most of it was quality human-generated content, before the bots took over and filled the web with synthetic and increasingly low-quality AI-generated content.

Has AI started breathing its own exhaust?

The second generation of large language models are likely and unintentionally being trained on some of the outputs of the first generation. And lots of AI startups are touting the benefits of training on synthetic, AI-generated data.

But training on the exhaust fumes of current AI models risks amplifying even small biases and errors. Just as breathing in exhaust fumes is bad for humans, it is bad for AI.

These concerns fit into a much bigger picture. Globally, more than US$400 million (A$600 million) is being invested in AI every day. And governments are only now just waking up to the idea we might need guardrails and regulation to ensure AI is used responsibly, given this torrent of investment.

Pharmaceutical companies aren’t allowed to release drugs that are harmful. Nor are car companies. But so far, tech companies have largely been allowed to do what they like.

Toby Walsh receives funding from the ARC via a Laureate Fellowship, as well as a number of grants on AI for Good from google.org, the philanthropic arm of Google.

– ref. Eat a rock a day, put glue on your pizza: how Google’s AI is losing touch with reality – https://theconversation.com/eat-a-rock-a-day-put-glue-on-your-pizza-how-googles-ai-is-losing-touch-with-reality-230953

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kitty-Rose Foley, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Health, Southern Cross University

Noise can make it hard to concentrate, especially for people who are extra sensitive to it.

Neurodivergent people (such as those who are autistic or have attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder – ADHD) can experience different sensory sensitivities. Their nervous system may process information differently when they are exposed to sensory experiences such as bright lights, loud noise, strong smells or busy environments.

Decreased sound tolerance is estimated to affect up to 70% of autistic people and is described in three ways: hyperacusis (perceiving everyday sounds as loud or painful), misophonia (an aversion to specific sounds) and phonophobia (fear of a specific sound). As a sensory feature of autism, decreased sound tolerance may have the largest overall impact on quality of life.

Many autistic or ADHD people describe how noise stops or limits their day-to-day activities such as attending classes, work meetings, socialising or even health care.

In the overall population, we know too much noise can lead to poorer physical and psychological health. Unwanted or unexpected noise can cause irritation, anxiety, anger and restlessness.

Noise-cancelling headphones, earplugs and earmuffs are often recommended or marketed to help manage noise sensitivities. But do they actually make a difference?

How they work

Different devices work in different ways. Most earplugs and earmuffs simply act as a barrier to block or muffle sound. Noise-cancelling headphones (and now some in-ear devices) can reduce unwanted sound by using active noise-control engineering.

Sound travels in waves into the eardrum, where it vibrates. Noise-cancelling headphones use tiny microphones to send another sound wave which is exactly the opposite of the incoming sound. The opposing forces reduce the vibration in the ear. This process is called phase cancellation.

There are a range of noise-cancelling devices available for use in different settings and situations from parenting and social gatherings, to sleep and deep focus, to school, concerts or festivals. They may be recommended by health professionals, often occupational therapists whose role it is to find ways people can participate in everyday activities. There is a small amount of evidence to support their use.

In one study, researchers interviewed 17 autistic adults about their public transport use. Most said they used coping strategies to avoid too much noise stimuli. They did this by listening to music or using noise-cancelling headphones. They felt this prevented sensory overload and stress. It followed an earlier pilot study of 16 school children, which found earmuffs and noise-cancelling headphones helped them in the classroom.

Their usefulness based on what others observe

Other research has explored people’s feelings about the usefulness of noise-cancelling headphones for autistic children and adults.

A 2019 study explored how autistic children and teens joined in everyday life at home and school when wearing noise-cancelling headphones. Parents and teachers said the kids were able to pay attention and focus, and had a better ability to stay calm when wearing them.

The autistic children in the study were also able to participate in loud activities at school without noise-related anxiety or stress. Some teachers were concerned that wearing headphones could be stigmatising for children and they may not be able to hear instructions.

Another study surveyed more than 250 speech pathologists, audiologists and teachers about the pros and cons of autistic children using noise-cancelling headphones, earplugs or earmuffs.

High rates of device use were reported and 40% of those surveyed thought the devices may allow for better participation in classroom lessons, social situations and recreational activities. They were uncertain about the benefits and potential downsides overall, including any reductions in the amount of speech heard and spoken. However, almost half of respondents believed headphone use would be more likely to increase listening skills and vocabulary diversity.

Noise-cancelling headphones were included as part of a sensory toolkit to support autistic children’s access to health care in a 2019 American study. Over 2,580 patient visits, more than 1,640 children aged 3 to 18 were flagged with sensory sensitivities and given a kit. Families universally reported improvements in their children’s care when the kits were used.

While research from the perspectives of parents, teachers and health professionals is useful, more research which centres the voices and perspectives of neurodivergent children and adults is required to really understand the effectiveness of these devices.

4 features to consider

So, while acknowledging limited evidence and some potential downsides, noise-cancelling headphones, earplugs and earmuffs may be an accessible and relatively cheap option to reduce noise stimuli and stress.

In selecting between noise cancelling headphones, earplugs or earmuffs, people may need to think about:

1. the wearer’s ability to tolerate earplugs within the ear. If they are sensitive to touch, headphones or earmuffs may be easier to tolerate
2. the desired noise cancelling level. Different devices will provide different levels of noise reduction, so it’s important to consider whether the person will need to be able to hear speech (such as for school or work)
3. how they look. Earplugs may be more subtle and difficult to see as they are positioned mostly within the ear
4. storage when not in use. If headphones or earplugs are for use at school or in the workplace, they may be removed at different times during the day. A storage case can ensure they don’t get lost or damaged.

Finding useful devices to help neurodivergent people cope with sensory input and support access to the community is very important. More research is needed into the benefits of headphones, earplugs or earmuffs for wearers and to explore any potential risks.

In addition, more thought and consideration should be given to the universal design of buildings and public spaces in relation to sensory experiences. This can make everyday activities more inclusive for everyone.

Kitty-Rose Foley previously received funding from the Cooperative Research Centre for Living with Autism. Kitty is an Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) registered occupational therapist and a member of Occupational Therapy Australia (OTA).

– ref. Noise-cancelling headphones, earplugs and earmuffs – do they really help neurodivergent people? – https://theconversation.com/noise-cancelling-headphones-earplugs-and-earmuffs-do-they-really-help-neurodivergent-people-230113

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeanette Mollenhauer, Honorary Fellow (Dance), Faculty of Fine Arts & Music, The University of Melbourne

Ireland won the 1994 Eurovision Song Contest, but their victory was overshadowed by the seven-minute interval “filler” that received a standing ovation.

The combined talents of Jean Butler, Michael Flatley and their supporting cast showcased Irish dance in a new, exciting way in an item called Riverdance. And the world – including Australia – took notice.

Thirty years later, Riverdance still circles the globe, with several troupes touring in different locations. So, does Riverdance matter in Australia? Yes, I believe it does.

The Irish in Australia

Australia has had a significant Irish-heritage population since the 1788 arrival of the First Fleet.

Throughout the 19th century, signs saying “No Irish Need Apply” were common in job advertisements.

The 20th century saw some improvement, but comedians continued to promote the idea Irish people had low intelligence and were often drunk.

Performing or watching Irish dance was a way of sticking together and celebrating Irishness. Records of Irish dance in Australia date back to the early 19th century, with the first mention of an Irish dancing teacher in Sydney in an Australian newspaper published in 1829.

The folk music revival of the 1960s and ‘70s, when Irish artists such as The Chieftains became globally popular, brought positive change to perceptions of Irish people both here and worldwide.

Riverdance themes of migration and feelings of longing for the former homeland struck a chord with Australians who have Irish heritage, and there was a surge in popularity of Irish dance.

An evolving dance form

Riverdance showed “traditional” does not have to mean “frozen in the past”; traditional dance can be adapted for modern audiences.

Irish dance has always been a malleable art form. While there is evidence of it in the 17th century, most records date from the 19th century when it became competitive.

A video from 1929 shows dancers keeping their feet low and dancing within a small space.

By the 1980s, the style was more athletic, with the feet sometimes coming above knee level.

In 1994, Riverdance put a whole lot of new ideas into the seven-minute performance.

One important change was Flatley bursting onto the stage using his arms in a way never seen before in competition dancing. Until then, dancers kept straight arms by their sides. Suddenly, restraint was blown away.

Traditionally males wore kilts in competitions, which did little to attract boys to Irish dance either in Ireland or Australia. The Riverdance men wore black trousers. Irish dance was depicted as an activity in which men and boys can participate, excel at – and even look sexy while performing.

The women also wore new outfits. Instead of restrictive heavy competition costumes, Riverdance put women into short, body-hugging dresses.

The first full-length production of Riverdance was performed in Dublin in 1995, and first toured Australia in March 1997.

Most elements of Riverdance have remained constant since those first performances. But the cast has changed many times and is now truly international, including Morgan Bullock, the first African American cast member.

But while Riverdance is very similar to its first performances, the popularity of the production has led to changes in Irish dance.

Riverdance resulted in higher enrolments in Irish dance classes in both Ireland and Australia.

The larger numbers of competitors has driven many changes in the style of competition dancing because the more dancers there are, the more difficult it is to win. Competitors are increasingly introducing new elements – such as more complex steps and innovatively designed costumes (within prescribed competition guidelines) to attract the judges’ attention.

A multicultural artform

People of all ages and cultural backgrounds filled Margaret Court Arena, Melbourne, last month when I attended a performance. Riverdance stills draws large audiences 30 years on, provides a rare opportunity for Australians to witness a culturally-specific dance on a concert stage.

Many immigrant communities in Australia have dance groups and generally, group members belong to that community. Until the mid-1990s, Irish dance behaved the same way; it remained within the Irish community.

Post-Riverdance, that cultural boundary fell away: anyone could learn Irish dance and excel at it.

At 30, Riverdance still demonstrates the spirit of multiculturalism: one of the many cultures in Australia’s population being publicly celebrated, with numerous Australian dancers having been in the cast over the years.

Riverdance matters in Australia because it weaves a thread into Irish-Australian history and attracts many people to the art of dance, as performers and audience members. While other dance works come and go on the world’s concert stages, Riverdance has been a constant presence for three decades.

It is still unmistakably Irish dance but is performed and witnessed by people from many backgrounds. A rare feat, indeed.

Jeanette Mollenhauer 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. Riverdance at 30: how Riverdance shaped Irish dance, and reflected a multicultural Australia – https://theconversation.com/riverdance-at-30-how-riverdance-shaped-irish-dance-and-reflected-a-multicultural-australia-229010

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Rossell, Director Clinical Trials and Professor Cognitive Neuropsychiatry Centre for Mental Health and Brain Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology

Anorexia nervosa is a severe mental health disorder where people fear weight gain. Those with the disorder have distorted body image and hold rigid beliefs their body is too big. They typically manage this through restricted eating, leading to the serious medical consequences of malnutrition.

Anorexia has one of the highest death rates of any mental illness. Yet there are currently no effective drug treatments and the outcomes of psychotherapy (talk therapy) are poor. So we’re desperately in need of new and improved treatments.

Psilocybin, commonly known as magic mushrooms, is one such novel treatment. But while it shows early promise, you won’t see it used in clinical practice just yet – more research is needed to test if it’s safe and effective.

What does treatment involve?

The treatment involves the patient taking a dose of psilocybin in a safe environment, which is usually a specifically set up clinic. The patient undergoes preparation therapy before the dosing session and integration therapy after.

Psilocybin, extracted from mushrooms, is a psychedelic, which means it can produce altered thinking, sense of time and emotions, and can often result in hallucinations. It also has the potential to shift patients out of their rigid thinking patterns.

Psilocybin is not administered alone but instead with combined structured psychotherapy sessions to help the patient make sense of their experiences and the changes to their thinking. This is an important part of the treatment.

What does the research show?

Research has shown improved effects of psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy after one or two dosing sessions, a couple of weeks apart. Most research to date has targeted depression.

Psilocybin has been found to increase cognitive flexibility – our ability to adjust our thinking patterns according to changing environments or demands. This is one of the ways researchers believe psilocybin might improve symptoms for conditions such as depression and alcohol use disorder, which are marked by rigid thinking styles.

People with anorexia similarly struggle with rigid thinking patterns. So researchers and clinicians have recently turned their attention to anorexia.

In 2023, a small pilot study of ten women with anorexia was published in the journal Nature Medicine. It showed psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy (with 25mg of psilocybin) was safe and acceptable. There were no significant side effects and participants reported having valuable experiences.

Although the trial was not a formal efficacy trial, 40% of the patients did have significant drops in their eating disorder behaviour.

However, the trial only had one dosing session and no long-term follow up, so further research is needed.

A recent animal study using rats examined whether rigid thinking could be improved in rats when given psilocybin. After the psilocybin, rats gained weight and had more flexible thinking (using a reversal learning task).

These positive changes were related to the serotonin neurotransmitter system, which regulates mood, behaviour and satiety (feeling full).

Brain imaging studies in humans show serotonin disturbances in people with anorexia. Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy is showing promise at modifying the serotonin disturbances and cognitive inflexibility that have been shown to be problematic in anorexia.

Research with animals can provide unique insights into the brain which can sometimes not be investigated in living humans. But animal models can never truly mimic human behaviour and the complex nature of chronic mental health conditions.

What’s next for research?

Further clinical trials in humans are very much needed – and are underway from a research team at the University of Sydney and ours at Swinburne.

Our trial will involve an initial 5mg dose followed by two subsequent doses of 25mg, several weeks apart. An initial low dose aims to help participants prepare for what is likely to be a new and somewhat unpredictable experience.

Our trial will examine the usefulness of providing psychotherapy that directly addresses body image disturbance. We are also investigating if including a family member or close friend in the treatment increases support for their loved one.

Data from other mental health conditions has suggested that not everyone sees benefits, with some people having bad trips and a deterioration in their mental health. So this treatment won’t be for everyone. It’s important to work out who is most likely to respond and under what conditions.

New trials and those underway will be critical in understanding whether psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy is a safe and effective treatment for anorexia, and the optimal conditions to improve the patient’s response. But we are some way off from seeing this treatment in the clinic. One of the big issues being the cost of this intervention and how this will be funded.

Susan Rossell receives funding from Australian Eating Disorders Research and Translation Centre via the IgnitED Grant – Australian Government National Leadership in Mental Health Program – National Eating Disorder Research Centre and NSW Health (Grant ID: P051002-4GOTT7NX).

Claire Finkelstein has previously received funding from the Australian Eating Disorders Research and Translation Centre via the IgnitED Grant – Australian Government National Leadership in Mental Health Program – National Eating Disorder Research Centre and NSW Health (Grant ID: P051002-4GOTT7NX).

– ref. Magic mushrooms may one day treat anorexia, but not just yet – https://theconversation.com/magic-mushrooms-may-one-day-treat-anorexia-but-not-just-yet-230391

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sukhbir Sandhu, Associate Professor in Sustainability, University of South Australia

Why can some plastics be recycled but others can’t?

– Jessica, age ten, Sydney

Great question Jessica! We use lots of plastic in Australia and it’s frustrating to find out how little is recycled.

I work at a university with a team trying to find new ways for people to use less plastic, recycle more and not waste anything. So this is a question I think about a lot.

Basically, some plastics can be recycled because they are easy to melt down and make into other products. Others can’t be, or they contain extra ingredients that make them hard to recycle, such as dyes or chemicals that stop them catching fire.

But even if you could recycle the plastic, then you have a whole new problem: you have to find someone who will buy the recycled material to make new products.

There are many different types of plastic

Have you ever wondered why the plastic used to make soft drink bottles looks and feels so different to the plastic used for other types of containers – such as yoghurt tubs, lunch boxes or even plastic bags?

It turns out there’s more than one type of plastic. We classify plastic into seven main types. But there are many more when you consider all the mixtures and new or unusual varieties.

The raw material is almost always fossil fuels (oil or gas). Although these days, people can also make plastic from plants such as corn.

Either way, plastic is “synthetic”, which means it’s not natural. Long chains of molecules are stitched together to make “polymers” (from the Greek “poly”, meaning many, and “mer”, meaning parts). Different polymers make different types of plastic.

Some polymers are easier to recycle because they can be melted down and reshaped into new products. This includes number one on our list of seven main types: “polyethylene terephthalate”, found in soft drink bottles.

It also includes type number two, the “high-density polyethylene” in some milk bottles, and number five, “polypropylene”, which makes things like yoghurt containers.

Other plastics such as type number three, “polyvinyl chloride”, found in plumbing pipes, and number six, “polystyrene” such as Styrofoam, are much harder to recycle. That’s mainly because they tend to contain lots of extra ingredients, which makes melting and recycling difficult.

These extra ingredients can include dyes to make the plastic brightly coloured, or chemicals to stop the plastic catching fire. But these extra ingredients can make it harder for the plastic to be recycled.

Did you know almost 300 billion plastic coffee cups have made their way to rubbish dumps around the world? These cups were not recycled, because they were made from a mixture of paper lined with plastic.

It’s hard to separate the plastic from the other materials. This makes it difficult to recycle them. But we can choose to use reusable or compostable coffee cups instead.

Plastic can also be too dirty to recycle. That’s why you should always rinse plastics before putting them in the recycling bin.

Here’s a little tip. Check the label on plastic bottles, containers and packaging for the symbol that looks like a triangle made of arrows, with a number in the middle. Read the table below to see what the numbers mean and whether it’s worth putting that plastic in your recycling bin or not.

Just because there’s a logo on it doesn’t mean it can be recycled. It depends on the recycling services that are available near where you live.

Look up your local council’s website to see what facilities they have for plastic recycling. If it’s not clear, you could ask your council to explain what they can and can’t recycle.

Will anyone use the recycled plastic and will they pay for it?

But if no one wants to use recycled plastic, then it’s hard to find someone willing to recycle it in the first place.

We need to make it easier for people to sell the plastic they have collected to someone who wants to buy it and turn it into something else.

To make this work, we need:

• people to put used plastic in the recycling bin properly

• someone willing to collect it

• a business that can recycle that type of plastic, and

• other businesses that will buy the recycled material.

In Australia, many people are willing to recycle their plastic and we have good recycling facilities, but there aren’t enough people willing to buy stuff made from all the recycled plastic.

One idea is for governments to make businesses and local councils buy products made from recycled plastic. Then people who make products from recycled plastic will be able to sell them.

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au

Sukhbir Sandhu has received research grants from Australian Research Council (Discovery), Green Industries SA, and the European Union.

– ref. Curious Kids: why can some plastics be recycled but others can’t? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-can-some-plastics-be-recycled-but-others-cant-229270

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Spoonley, Distinguished Professor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Massey University

The first data from the 2023 census will be released on May 29 – and not before time. We will see how successful – or not – the census exercise was in achieving participation and coverage.

It’s no secret past censuses have faced real challenges. We would not want to see a repeat of the poor return rate and low Māori participation that affected the previous census in 2018.

Stats NZ has said this latest five-yearly census has counted 99% of the population. But this figure is a combination of those who filled out the census forms (about 4.5 million) and others counted from existing government data (about half a million).

We can also cast forward by looking at the 12 months since the 2023 census was taken. In the year to March 2024, the key indicators are that the New Zealand population has changed significantly from where we were in March 2023.

Fertility continues to decline

In March 2023, the total fertility rate (births per woman) was 1.65 – well below the rate required for population replacement. In March 2024, the rate had dropped again to 1.52, a not inconsiderable decline in a single year.

Some forecasts had assumed New Zealand might stabilise at around the 1.6 rate. But the latest data show a steady downward trend. Internationally, and in New Zealand, the higher educational credentials of Millennial and Gen Z women, combined with their participation in the paid workforce, are driving this trend.

Additionally, the economic pressures facing those generations are having an effect. When it comes to decisions about having children, the cost of living, especially housing, and the increasing need for two incomes, are now much greater considerations.

When we reach a fertility rate of 1.3, as seems inevitable, New Zealand will join the ranks of the “lowest low-fertility” countries.

Aside from the actual fertility rate, there is also an absolute decline in births. In March 2024, there were 56,277 live births in New Zealand, compared with 58,707 a year earlier (2,430 fewer births).

That is why the Ministry of Education is forecasting 30,000 fewer children in the education system by 2032.

New Zealand is now hovering around 56,000 births within a population of 5.3 million. Fifty years ago, in 1974, there were 59,334 births when the population was three million.

More arriving and many more leaving

The number of immigrant arrivals peaked in December 2023 at 244,763, a net gain of 134,445. Both figures significantly exceed the annual average from 2002 to 2019 of 119,000 arrivals and 27,500 net migration gain.

As of March 2024, arrival numbers have dropped back to 239,000, with a net migration gain of 111,100. Both numbers are still very high, but it suggests the coming year will see a further decline.

Still, New Zealand’s population grew last year by 2.8%, with net migration gain accounting for the bulk of it (2.4%). This is a very high annual growth rate compared to most OECD countries.

But the other side of the story is the surge in New Zealanders leaving. In the 12 months to March 2024, 78,200 New Zealand citizens migrated to another country, leaving a net loss of 52,500.

As Stats NZ notes with a degree of understatement, this exceeds the previous record of 72,400 departures and net loss of 44,400 citizens in the year to February 2012.

It is not unusual to see a net departure of New Zealand citizens. There was an average annual net migration loss of 26,800 from 2002 to 2013, when numbers were at the previous high. But the causes of the latest outflow deserve further analysis.

Māori near the million mark

Stats NZ confirmed the Māori ethnic population (those who self-identify as Māori) reached 904,100 in December 2023. The annual population increase for Māori was 1.5%. If this trajectory continues, Māori will number one million sometime in the early 2030s.

Māori fertility differs significantly to that of Pākehā. Māori have a much lower median age overall, Māori women have children at a younger age, with more children per mother born on average.

Stats NZ anticipates that by 2043, 21% of all New Zealanders will identify as Māori, up from 17% at the moment. For children, however, 33% will identify as Māori.

The so-called “kohanga reo generations” will be more immersed in tikanga and te reo, with major implications for New Zealand society and the political landscape.

Asian communities are growing and changing

The high levels of inward immigration will add to those identifying as one of the many Asian communities in Aotearoa New Zealand. (And we really do need to find another way of referring to these communities other than with the catch-all “Asian”).

Pre-COVID, the largest number of arrivals came from China. In the past two years, India has become the largest source country, followed by the Philippines and then China. To March 2024, there were 49,800 arrivals from India compared to 26,800 from China.

These immigration trends mean the next two decades (to 2043) will see the number of New Zealanders who identify with one of the Asian communities grow to 24% of the total population (25% for children).

For the moment, three-quarters of Asian community members are immigrants (born in another country), and quite a lot is known about them from past research. But it will be interesting to see how those born and educated in New Zealand forge their path, and what they will contribute.

The census tends to briefly focus attention on New Zealand’s changing population. But we need to spend more time putting the pieces together to understand how much the country is really changing. That includes looking at the trends between censuses – a lot can happen in five years, after all.

Paul Spoonley received funding from MBIE to look at New Zealand’s population in 2038 as part of a project labelled Nga Tangata Iho Mairangi plus CADDANZ.

– ref. NZ is changing faster than the census can keep up – the 4 big trends to watch – https://theconversation.com/nz-is-changing-faster-than-the-census-can-keep-up-the-4-big-trends-to-watch-230537

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Keith Parry, Head Of Department in Department of Sport & Event Management, Bournemouth University

The annual Indigenous rounds in the Australian Football League (AFL) and National Rugby League (NRL) celebrate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures.

These events highlight the contributions of Indigenous players and aim to promote cultural awareness and foster reconciliation.

Some non-Indigenous sports fans, however, do not appreciate these initiatives. Some, in fact, continue to hurl bigoted abuse at players.

While many people would assume spectator racism is becoming rarer, our new study suggests the opposite is true among Australia’s major male-dominated sporting codes.

Spectator racism may be getting worse

Some Australian football spectators use the stadium to vent hostile attitudes towards people of colour, whether Indigenous, Pacific Islander, African or Asian.

This realisation prompted us to conduct the first large-scale study of spectator racism in the three major men’s leagues.

In 2021, we surveyed 2,047 participants from across the AFL, NRL and A-League Men, focusing on those who self-identified as white. We wanted to gather insights on racism as they witnessed and understood it while attending matches.

We found sobering evidence of the persistence of racism within these spectator communities, despite efforts by sports to combat it: 50% of AFL fans, 36% of NRL spectators and 27% of A-League Men fans had witnessed racist behaviour during their lifetimes.

We asked respondents when they had witnessed racism and, as the table below shows, fans of all codes reported they had seen it at greater levels in the past two years compared to periods before this time.

This finding suggests fan racism is getting worse in all three sports and in the A-League Men, this reported racism is growing at the fastest rate of the three codes.

Acknowledging the problem

Spectator racism has long been an issue in Australian men’s sports.

National sport governing bodies acknowledge there is a problem, but have for many years struggled to effectively combat it, either failing to respond resolutely or doing so too slowly.

In 2021, the Australian Human Rights Commission provided sports with guidelines for addressing spectator racism, and since then penalties for transgressions have become more consistent.

However, poor behaviour from some fans has hardly disappeared.

Our new research, published in the International Review for the Sociology of Sport, found spectator racism continues to be present in three major Australian men’s leagues: the AFL, NRL and A-League Men.

The impact on athletes

The impact of fan racism is brutal for players.

In recent years, Indigenous footballers Adam Goodes and Latrell Mitchell and Cody Walker have borne the brunt of vitriol like this.

By comparison, the A-League Men has featured few Indigenous players, but racism towards athletes from migrant backgrounds has certainly been obvious, along with neo-Nazi expressions of white supremacy.

Fan explanations for racism

Many survey respondents contended that spectator racism is learned behaviour, passed down through families or like-minded fans. In that sense, racism is normalised, especially in public places like sports stadiums where barrackers may feel anonymous.

Most of those surveyed strongly criticised racial prejudice, acknowledging Australia’s history of racism and ongoing examples of bigotry at sport events, with some pointing to even worse behaviour among fans online via social media.

Some fans who opposed racism explained it as a moral failing of individuals, whom they perceived to be “bad apples”. But by focusing solely on individuals, they overlooked wider social influences.

Racism is acquired behaviour, not just a personal choice, and it arises via institutions such as sport and social practices like barracking at the footy.

Some respondents from our study were comfortable with “casual bigotry” whereby racist comments made in the “heat of the moment” are deemed “banter”. They seemed unaware this permissive attitude allows racist discourses to remain alive.

A minority of respondents were unfazed by any of this, freely admitting their own racist views, declaring a belief that sports, and society, are best served by white power.

Sport’s response to racism

In the football codes, there is now better awareness of what constitutes racist barracking at games. Greater media coverage of racist incidents, especially via its capture on digital devices, has improved the chance of offenders being exposed, along with potential consequences.

Just as importantly, the three football leagues have improved their detection measures, such as by anonymous reporting hotlines within stadiums. Indeed, our study showed most fans are aware of mechanisms to report racist (or other discriminatory) behaviour.

Yet, despite a significant proportion of our survey respondents indicating they had observed inappropriate crowd conduct, just 3% of AFL fans, 2% of NRL fans, and 1% of A-League Men supporters reported using the hotlines.

So, there is a gap between some white fans witnessing and reporting racist incidents.

Therefore, while sports leagues have introduced penalties for racism, the effectiveness of these measures is limited by their reliance on witness responses and the complexity of observers providing proof.

What more can be done?

In the context of anti-racism and Australian society, the fight against bigotry must not be left to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and people from culturally diverse backgrounds.

Prime responsibility lies with white Australians who, after all, are generally privileged to not be objects of racial bigotry. Therefore, white sports fans who reject the ideology of white supremacy, like racist barracking at a game, have the opportunity to demonstrate a sense of solidarity with those who have been the subject of abuse.

It is often said education can alter racist attitudes. After all, if racism can be learned, surely it can be unlearned.

That process is certainly worth pursuing but in the short term, the imposition of consequences for inappropriate fan conduct is vital.

The football codes are finally getting serious about penalties, with lengthy or even life-time bans.

What is urgently needed, though, is a greater commitment by fans, especially white fans, to report racism when they observe it. Otherwise they’re giving a free kick to bigots.

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. Spectator racism is still rife in Australia’s major football codes – new research shows it may even be getting worse – https://theconversation.com/spectator-racism-is-still-rife-in-australias-major-football-codes-new-research-shows-it-may-even-be-getting-worse-230198

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kayla Mildren, PhD Candidate in the politics of school uniform policies, Griffith University

A Queensland dad recently took his four-year-old son out of the Gold Coast’s A.B. Paterson College because the school had ordered the boy to cut his long hair.

“Like other private schools, we have a uniform policy,” school principal Joanne Sheehy said. “Ours is intended to encourage all our students to be well-presented, respectful and unified.”

The story is a familiar one. Disputes over school uniform policies are repeatedly making the media. Frequently, these disputes concern hair.

This includes students being barred from class photos for “unnaturally” coloured hair or a teacher cutting a student’s long hair. Students have also been disciplined for wearing cultural hairstyles such as braids, or turning up to school with styles such as mullets.

These stories are all part of a larger phenomenon I have examined in my new research: school policies on hair often enforce an idea of “good taste” that favour certain norms around gender, class and race.

My research

My research examines the hair polices of 50 senior high schools in Queensland (for students in Years 11 and 12).

It looked at what the policies are and how they are justified by schools.

This sample included government and independent schools. The independent or private schools were divided into Catholic and Protestant schools.

The schools came from a wide variety of locations, regions and socioeconomic contexts.

My findings

Hair policies are often a subset of a broader uniform policy that can cover makeup, jewellery, shoes, clothing and appearances in public areas.

Most schools had general justifications for their overall uniform policies, rather than specific discussion of their hair component.

These general justifications were around occupational health and safety, sun safety, school culture, school image, equality among students (through a uniform appearance) and legislative compliance or community endorsement (such as approval from their P&C association)

For example, one private Protestant school said:

[the school] recognises that during teenage years individuality is often desired and expressed through clothing choice. However, the uniform is a vital representation of the school and its ethos, value base and placement as a private school.

Where schools did talk specifically about hair, they emphasised “standards” and school image and tone.

As one government school said:

Undertaking a conservative hairstyle will ensure compliance with the high standards of dress and appearance in place at [this school] and thereby help to maintain a positive tone in the school community and ensure that our primary focus will be centred on learning.

The regulations for hair itself typically focused on acceptable length, colour and styling.

‘Appropriate’ lengths

There were regulations around hair being too long and too short, and about it being “appropriate” for male and female genders.

Of the government schools, 15 required long hair to be restrained and one required hair to be no shorter than a number two cut. Few sought to justify this regulation, although six schools did reference health and safety (for example, keeping long hair back during “practical” subjects or as a general safety measure). None explicitly connected this regulation to gender.

By contrast, private schools were heavily gendered. A total of 25 private schools (13 Catholic and 12 Protestant schools) required long hair to be restrained. Fourteen of these schools only applied this regulation to female students.

Thirteen schools (five Catholic and eight Protestant), required male students’ hair to be cut short. Appropriate length was often defined in exacting detail, specifying where hair may reach in relation to the student’s earlobes and eyebrows, the shortest blade permitted to cut hair, and whether tucking hair behind the ears was permissible. More lenient schools simply required hair to be clear of the collar.

If the requirement for female students to restrain long hair is cross-referenced with the requirement for male students to have short hair, there were 17 private schools that explicitly linked hair length with gender.

‘Natural’ colours

Schools were particularly concerned with keeping hair colour natural. Sixteen government schools banned “unnatural” hair colours, of which three additionally banned naturally coloured dye and two only permitted naturally coloured dye that “aligned” with the student’s hair.

As one government school said:

The hair styles not permitted include, but not limited to […] unnatural hair colours or awkwardly contrasting colours.

Of the 29 private schools that regulated hair, all banned “unnatural” hair colours, of which four additionally banned naturally coloured dye and four only permitted naturally coloured dye that “aligned” with the student’s hair.

As one Protestant school said:

Students are not permitted to dye, bleach or colour their hair to create stark contrasts, a colour or multiple colours away from their natural hair colour. All treatments must be subtle, aligned with the student’s natural hair colour and have the effect of being barely noticeable.

In “being barely noticeable”, a student can appear as part of a cohesive whole, united school community – a key value across the three school affiliations.

‘Conservative’ styles

Schools were also concerned to make sure hair was styled in certain ways. It was common to see a stipulation for students to either wear a “conservative” hairstyle or avoid an “extreme” one.

Government schools also listed a total of 24 unacceptable styles, Catholic schools provided 27 banned styles and Protestant schools listed 30. The table below details the most frequently banned styles, with regulations on length and colour for comparison.

My research found a noticeable difference between regulations on length and colour versus those on style. Across the three types of schools, 45 schools restrict hair colour, representing 90% of the sample. Similarly, 40 schools, or 80% of the sample, ban unrestrained long hair.

Yet the most frequently banned style, a rat’s tail, was only banned by 14 schools or 28% of the sample. The next most common – undercut and mohawk – were only banned by 13 and 12 schools, respectively. Mullets were specifically banned by nine schools.

So while there is a general consensus on inappropriate colour and length, there is only minimal consensus on what exact styles are “wrong” for school.

What do these rules really mean?

These policies are presented as objective “rules” and yet hair styles are imbued with social and cultural meanings. Dreadlocks or braids are common ways to wear hair in African cultures, for example.

The sociocultural connotations are further complicated by who has that haircut. For example, an undercut on a male student may be seen as trendy, on a female student it could be interpreted as a signifier of queer identity.

Then there’s the mullet. While it may be celebrated in national competitions and even seen as fashionable again, it can also signify bogan culture which many schools seem to find undesirable. Elite private schools, in particular, have repeatedly made headlines for banning the style.

Few of the commonly banned styles are easy to alter around school hours – a student cannot dye, remove dreadlocks, or grow out their hair each morning. So through these policies, the school also controls the students’ hair outside of school hours and in doing so, their gender, sexual, political or cultural identity.

What should schools do instead

Recent Australian research has called for school policies to be flexible when it comes to gender and culture so all students feel like they belong.

When schools are reinforcing inflexible ideas about gender, sexuality, culture, race and class they are not including all students. Schools should review their hair policies to:

• remove gendered restrictions

• remove culturally exclusionary regulations

• question what norms are being privileged and

• limit their impact on student’s bodily autonomy outside of school hours.

While schools maintain they want to project a certain standard we have to ask what that standard is and why it is projected as an ideal for our communities.

Kayla Mildren 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. No mullets, no mohawks, no ‘awkwardly contrasting colours’: what are school policies on hair and why do they matter so much? – https://theconversation.com/no-mullets-no-mohawks-no-awkwardly-contrasting-colours-what-are-school-policies-on-hair-and-why-do-they-matter-so-much-229810

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Asked to grade Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ third budget on his own criteria of delivering on “inflation in the near term and then growth in the medium term”, most of the 49 leading economists surveyed by the Economic Society of Australia and The Conversation have failed to give it top marks.

On a grading scale of A to F, 17 of the 49 economists – about one-third – give the budget an A or a B. Two have declined to offer a grade.

The result is a sharp comedown from Chalmers’ second budget in 2023. Two-thirds of the economists surveyed conferred an A or a B on that budget.

The economists chosen to take part in the post-budget Economic Society surveys are recognised by their peers as leaders in fields including macroeconomics, economic modelling, housing and budget policy.

Among them are a former head of the Department of Finance, a former Reserve Bank board member and former Treasury, International Monetary Fund and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development officials.

Thirteen of those surveyed – more than a quarter – give the budget a low mark of D or an E. None have given it the lowest possible mark of F.

Asked whether the budget was likely to achieve its aim of getting inflation back within the Reserve Bank’s 2-3% target band by the end of this year, and back to 2.75% by mid next year, 17 thought it would not. Only ten thought it would.

A greater number – 21 – were not sure.

In his budget speech, Chalmers predicted inflation would come back to the Reserve Bank’s target band sooner than the 2025 expected by the Reserve Bank itself, “perhaps even by the end of this year”.

The budget papers forecast an inflation rate of 2.75% by mid-2025, well within the target band and a half a percentage point lower than the bank’s forecast.

The papers say two measures in the budget, not known to the Reserve Bank when it produced its forecasts in early May, explain why the budget forecast is half a percentage point lower.

They are an extra year of energy bill relief of $300 per household and $325 for eligible small businesses and a further 10% increase in the maximum rate of Commonwealth Rent Assistance.

If the lower budget forecast is correct, and if the Reserve Bank sticks to the letter of its agreement with the treasurer that requires it to aim for consumer price inflation between 2% and 3%, the bank is likely to cut interest rates late this year or early next year as inflation approaches its target zone.

But economists including Flavio Menezes from The University of Queensland say while the budget measures might “mechanically” suppress measured inflation, they are:

unlikely to alleviate underlying inflationary pressures and may even exacerbate them; for households not experiencing financial strain, lower energy bills could simply lead to increased spending in other areas.

Former Reserve Bank board member Warwick Mckibbin says the bank is likely to “see through” (ignore) the largely temporary mechanical price reductions and “raise interest rates to where they should be”.

Others surveyed, a minority, argue the economy is too weak for the extra spending in the budget to boost inflation through consumer spending. Former Finance Department Secretary Michael Keating says any stimulus is “likely to be swamped by the economic slowing well under way”.

Independent economist Saul Eslake said the subsidies for energy and rent would inject only $3 billion into the economy in 2024-25. This meant any boost they would give to underlying inflation would be hardly “material”.

Tax cuts matter more than energy rebates

More important for boosting the economy would be previously budgeted Stage 3 tax cuts. These are set to inject $23.3 billion per year from June, climbing to $107.2 billion over four years.

Eslake said the decision to reskew the tax cuts toward middle and lower earners had saved the government from the need to direct extra specific support to these people. Politically, the government could not have got away with doing nothing.

But Eslake was appalled to discover that the cost of the single biggest spending item in the budget, the untied grants to the states, had blown out even more than expected. The special top-up for Western Australia is now set to cost $53 billion over 11 years instead of the $8.9 billion over eight years expected in 2018.

How the national government could justify gifting $53 billion to the government of Australia’s richest state was beyond his comprehension.

Big issues unaddressed

A repeated theme among the economists was that the budget did very little to boost productivity or address persistent problems.

Several described it as an election budget, others a budget driven by polling.

Macquarie University’s Lisa Magnani said the lack of attention to home prices, the funding of public schools and the poor performance of Australian firms was concerning, given Chalmers’ claim it was a budget for “decades to come”.

Former Department of Foreign Affairs chief economist Jenny Gordon said the budget had failed to tackle the distortions in the housing market and the financial sustainability of needed services including health care, aged care and childcare.

Australian National University economist Frank Jotzo said crunch time for tax reform was coming, given the large baked-in increases in spending on defence, health and disability insurance and Australia’s over-reliance on income tax and company tax.

McKibbin said Australia’s main economic problems were its lack of productivity growth, the big changes needed to bring about the energy transition, the surge in artificial intelligence, the risk of much lower export prices and global geopolitical uncertainty.

The government should have tried to build a bipartisan consensus about how to fix these.

Private investors were hanging back knowing that whatever the government did could be reversed at the next election.

Although many of those surveyed welcomed the Future Made in Australia Act, some criticised its approach of “picking winners” and “wasting precious resources” by putting money into activities such as the manufacture of solar panels, which could be done more cheaply elsewhere.

Bigger government

Former Industry Department chief economist Mark Cully said it was in some ways one of the most consequential budgets in years.

It locked in a clear shift towards higher spending and revenue, which, at around 26% of GDP, was higher than any other time Australia had been near full employment.

Future Made in Australia was the most marked intervention by a government in shaping the future direction of the economy for decades.

Individual responses. Click to open:

Peter Martin is the economics editor of The Conversation and serves on the central council of the Economic Society of Australia.

– ref. Top economists give budget modest rating and doubt inflation will fall as planned – https://theconversation.com/top-economists-give-budget-modest-rating-and-doubt-inflation-will-fall-as-planned-230670

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Asked to grade Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ third budget on his own criteria of delivering on “inflation in the near term and then growth in the medium term”, most of the 49 leading economists surveyed by the Economic Society of Australia and The Conversation have failed to give it top marks.

On a grading scale of A to F, 17 of the 49 economists – about one-third – give the budget an A or a B. Two have declined to offer a grade.

The result is a sharp comedown from Chalmers’ second budget in 2023. Two-thirds of the economists surveyed conferred an A or a B on that budget.

The economists chosen to take part in the post-budget Economic Society surveys are recognised by their peers as leaders in fields including macroeconomics, economic modelling, housing and budget policy.

Among them are a former head of the Department of Finance, a former Reserve Bank board member and former Treasury, International Monetary Fund and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development officials.

Thirteen of those surveyed – more than a quarter – give the budget a low mark of D or an E. None have given it the lowest possible mark of F.

Asked whether the budget was likely to achieve its aim of getting inflation back within the Reserve Bank’s 2-3% target band by the end of this year, and back to 2.75% by mid next year, 17 thought it would not. Only ten thought it would.

A greater number – 21 – were not sure.

In his budget speech, Chalmers predicted inflation would come back to the Reserve Bank’s target band sooner than the 2025 expected by the Reserve Bank itself, “perhaps even by the end of this year”.

The budget papers forecast an inflation rate of 2.75% by mid-2025, well within the target band and a half a percentage point lower than the bank’s forecast.

The papers say two measures in the budget, not known to the Reserve Bank when it produced its forecasts in early May, explain why the budget forecast is half a percentage point lower.

They are an extra year of energy bill relief of $300 per household and $325 for eligible small businesses and a further 10% increase in the maximum rate of Commonwealth Rent Assistance.

If the lower budget forecast is correct, and if the Reserve Bank sticks to the letter of its agreement with the treasurer that requires it to aim for consumer price inflation between 2% and 3%, the bank is likely to cut interest rates late this year or early next year as inflation approaches its target zone.

But economists including Flavio Menezes from The University of Queensland say while the budget measures might “mechanically” suppress measured inflation, they are:

unlikely to alleviate underlying inflationary pressures and may even exacerbate them; for households not experiencing financial strain, lower energy bills could simply lead to increased spending in other areas.

Former Reserve Bank board member Warwick Mckibbin says the bank is likely to “see through” (ignore) the largely temporary mechanical price reductions and “raise interest rates to where they should be”.

Others surveyed, a minority, argue the economy is too weak for the extra spending in the budget to boost inflation through consumer spending. Former Finance Department Secretary Michael Keating says any stimulus is “likely to be swamped by the economic slowing well under way”.

Independent economist Saul Eslake said the subsidies for energy and rent would inject only $3 billion into the economy in 2024-25. This meant any boost they would give to underlying inflation would be hardly “material”.

Tax cuts matter more than energy rebates

More important for boosting the economy would be previously budgeted Stage 3 tax cuts. These are set to inject $23.3 billion per year from June, climbing to $107.2 billion over four years.

Eslake said the decision to reskew the tax cuts toward middle and lower earners had saved the government from the need to direct extra specific support to these people. Politically, the government could not have got away with doing nothing.

But Eslake was appalled to discover that the cost of the single biggest spending item in the budget, the untied grants to the states, had blown out even more than expected. The special top-up for Western Australia is now set to cost $53 billion over 11 years instead of the $8.9 billion over eight years expected in 2018.

How the national government could justify gifting $53 billion to the government of Australia’s richest state was beyond his comprehension.

Big issues unaddressed

A repeated theme among the economists was that the budget did very little to boost productivity or address persistent problems.

Several described it as an election budget, others a budget driven by polling.

Macquarie University’s Lisa Magnani said the lack of attention to home prices, the funding of public schools and the poor performance of Australian firms was concerning, given Chalmers’ claim it was a budget for “decades to come”.

Former Department of Foreign Affairs chief economist Jenny Gordon said the budget had failed to tackle the distortions in the housing market and the financial sustainability of needed services including health care, aged care and childcare.

Australian National University economist Frank Jotzo said crunch time for tax reform was coming, given the large baked-in increases in spending on defence, health and disability insurance and Australia’s over-reliance on income tax and company tax.

McKibbin said Australia’s main economic problems were its lack of productivity growth, the big changes needed to bring about the energy transition, the surge in artificial intelligence, the risk of much lower export prices and global geopolitical uncertainty.

The government should have tried to build a bipartisan consensus about how to fix these.

Private investors were hanging back knowing that whatever the government did could be reversed at the next election.

Although many of those surveyed welcomed the Future Made in Australia Act, some criticised its approach of “picking winners” and “wasting precious resources” by putting money into activities such as the manufacture of solar panels, which could be done more cheaply elsewhere.

Bigger government

Former Industry Department chief economist Mark Cully said it was in some ways one of the most consequential budgets in years.

It locked in a clear shift towards higher spending and revenue, which, at around 26% of GDP, was higher than any other time Australia had been near full employment.

Future Made in Australia was the most marked intervention by a government in shaping the future direction of the economy for decades.

Individual responses. Click to open:

Peter Martin is the economics editor of The Conversation and serves on the central council of the Economic Society of Australia.

– ref. Top economists take a modest view of the budget, and doubt inflation will fall as planned – https://theconversation.com/top-economists-take-a-modest-view-of-the-budget-and-doubt-inflation-will-fall-as-planned-230670