Sea Shepherd founder and anti-whaling activist Paul Watson has been arrested in Greenland and awaits potential extradition to Japan.
The arrest relates to incidents in the Southern Ocean in February 2010. The charges against Watson include “accomplice to an assault” and “ship trespass”. Both relate to the boarding of the Japanese vessel Shonan Maru No 2 by Pete Bethune, who was captain of the Sea Shepherd vessel Ady Gil. Bethune was detained on the Shonan Maru No 2 and returned to Japan for trial, where he received a suspended sentence. An international arrest warrant was issued for Watson in 2012.
At the time of the recent arrest on July 21, Watson’s ship had stopped for refuelling while en route to intercept a Japanese whaling vessel, the Kangei Maru. He was on board the John Paul DeJoria, owned by the Captain Paul Watson Foundation he founded two years ago.
Watson left Sea Shepherd in 2022, following disputes with directors over the value of direct action and confrontation. He originally founded Sea Shepherd after falling out with Greenpeace for similar reasons.
His arrest brings the issue of whaling back to the fore. Despite a flurry of activity in the courts a decade ago, the issue hasn’t gone away. That’s because Japan withdrew from the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling and its decision-making body in 2019 and resumed commercial whaling.
What is an international arrest warrant?
An international arrest warrant, also referred to as a “Red Notice”, is a request to law enforcement all over the world to locate and provisionally arrest a person.
The Red Notice for Watson is based on an arrest warrant or court order issued by Japan. Importantly, a Red Notice is not a finding of guilt and the presumption of innocence still applies.
Now the arrest has been made, Japan is seeking extradition. The request went to Denmark because Greenland is an autonomous Danish territory.
What is the basis for the charges?
Two international treaties provide Japan with a legal basis for the charges laid against Watson.
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea, Japan can grant its nationality to ships, as it did with the Shonan Maru No 2. Nations have exclusive jurisdiction over ships flying their flag when that ship is on the high seas (international waters). This means Japan can treat the boarding of the Shonan Maru No 2 as if it happened on Japanese territory.
Japan may also argue the boarding of the Shonan Maru No 2 was an act of piracy. Under the convention, Japan would need to show the boarding was a case of:
illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed […] on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship.
The sticking point for Japan may be whether or not the boarding can be considered to be for “private ends”.
The convention for the suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of maritime navigation may also apply. In short, this grants jurisdiction over certain types of offences when they occur on board a ship flying the nation’s flag. For example, Japan may argue the alleged conduct of Watson and/or his colleagues was “an act of violence against a person on board a ship if that act is likely to endanger the safe navigation of that ship”.
Will Denmark extradite?
Extradition is often governed by a specific extradition agreement between two nations, as well as by a nation’s own domestic law. For example, the Extradition Act in Denmark permits extradition in certain circumstances. However, it also has limitations on that power, including to prevent double prosecutions, where a person faces trial more than once for the same conduct.
Extradition will not apply to prosecutions of crimes that are not also an offence in Denmark, abandoned prosecutions, or where a court accepts there is a risk that the person concerned:
will be subjected to persecution affecting his life or freedom or otherwise of a serious nature because of his or her origin, membership of a particular ethnic group, religious or political beliefs or otherwise because of political circumstance.
The relevant court in Denmark can also decide that extradition is temporarily suspended on serious humanitarian grounds.
Extradition is as much political as legal
In many ways, extradition is a fusion between “executive power” and the powers of the courts and the prosecutors, as well as involving foreign policy considerations. For this reason, it can be as much political as legal. This is why we have seen calls from other countries, such as France, for Denmark to abandon the arrest and not agree to extradition.
Political pressure can sometimes be effective in such cases, particularly in countries where there is ministerial discretion around whether to extradite.
What next?
Ultimately, Japan may choose to abandon its interest in prosecuting a warrant that is more than ten years old.
Or it may choose to exercise its full legal power in pursuing Watson, with the goal of deterring anti-whaling advocacy. However, this would likely attract criticism from other nations, given very few support whaling activity, and reduce willingness to cooperate with Japan on other extradition matters.
Either way, the tension between environmental advocacy and other commercial and legal interests is obvious. The law can – and should – find better ways to balance these interests, especially in the midst of an environmental crisis.
Tamsin Phillipa Paige has previously received funding from the Australian Government.
Danielle Ireland-Piper 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cassandra Cross, Associate Dean (Learning & Teaching) Faculty of Creative Industries, Education and Social Justice, Queensland University of Technology
For many, tax time is an exciting part of the year – there’s the potential for a refund. However, it’s also an attractive time for fraudsters looking for ways to get money and deceive unsuspecting victims.
Each year Australians lose large amounts of money to scams. In 2023, Australians reported losses of more than A$2.7 billion. While this is a slight reduction from the $3.1 billion in 2022, there are still millions of victims who’ve suffered at the hands of scammers.
Impersonation scams are one common approach. Scamwatch reports that in 2023, 70% of reports to them involved impersonation.
A large number of these were linked to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and myGov.
What is an impersonation scam?
Impersonation scams are what they sound like: when an offender pretends to be someone or something they are not. Offenders may pretend to be family members or friends in our contact lists.
In many cases, they will say they’re from an organisation such as a bank or a well-known retailer, or a government department – like the ATO.
Offenders take on the identity of a known and trusted organisation to increase the chances of success. While we may ignore communications from unknown entities and strangers, we’re more likely to engage with what’s familiar.
Additionally, the ATO has a powerful status as a government agency, and we are unlikely to ignore its messages – especially at tax time.
What are they trying to get out of my myGov account?
myGov is the gateway to a range of government services, including Medicare, Centrelink, My Health Record, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and of course, the ATO.
Being able to log in to myGov gives offenders access to a wide range of your personal details. This can help them build a fuller profile of you to potentially commit identity theft (such as opening new accounts in your name).
There’s also the potential for direct fraud. With access to myGov, offenders can change your bank account details and redirect any refunds into their accounts, whether from the ATO or other linked services.
They can even submit false tax returns, medical claims or other forms to obtain fraudulent funds. As the legitimate owner of the account, you may not immediately notice this.
There have been recent reports of people’s myGov accounts receiving repeated login attempts. The Conversation
What does a myGov scam look like?
In most instances, a myGov scam will look like one of the many phishing attempts we all receive on a daily basis. While each approach can be worded differently, their desired outcome is the same: to acquire your personal information.
Fraudsters are sending text messages and emails pretending to be from the ATO, advising you there’s a refund available if you click the provided link.
Another approach is to flag a “problem” with your tax return or bank account, and direct you to take immediate action via a link. Creating a sense of urgency can trick users into acting in the moment, without thinking through the request.
The text or email may also be very neutral, simply stating there’s a new message waiting – with a link to where you can read it.
Regardless of what the message says, the goal is to direct you to a website that looks genuine, but is fake. If you enter your myGov details into such a fake site, the offender can capture your login details and use them to log into your actual myGov account.
What to do if you’ve been a victim?
If you have clicked on a scam link and provided your personal details, there are steps you can take.
Change your password and review your account settings if you still have access to your myGov account.
Check your bank accounts, to see what, if anything, has been lost. Contact your bank or financial institution immediately if you notice any withdrawals or suspicious transactions.
Contact any other organisation linked to your myGov account to see if any unauthorised actions have been taken.
For anyone who has lost personal information and experienced identity crime, IDCARE is the national support centre for identity crime victims. They will be able to assist with a personalised response plan to your specific situation.
How do I keep my account safe?
Never click on links in text messages or emails that direct you to log in to your accounts. Always access your accounts independently, through details you have found independently of any text or email.
Review your security settings. There have been recent reports of people’s myGov accounts being targeted with repeated login attempts. Using your unique eight-digit myGov username for logging in can be safer than using your email address.
Enable multi-factor authentication where possible. myGov uses two-factor authentication in the form of a text message in addition to an online login. While this is not foolproof, it offers an additional layer of protection and can stop offenders accessing your account with only partial pieces of your information.
Be vigilant on all communications. Always keep in mind that all may not be what it seems and the person you are communicating with may not be who they say they are. It is okay to be sceptical and do your own checks to verify details of what is presented to you.
Remember, fraudsters thrive on the silence and shame of those who respond or fall victim to their scams. We need to communicate openly about these schemes and talk to family and friends, to increase everyone’s knowledge and awareness.
Cassandra Cross has previously received funding from the Australian Institute of Criminology and the Cybersecurity Cooperative Research Centre.
Claude Raschella/State Theatre Company South Australia
A blind dinner date in a small high-rise apartment between a blandly dressed neat-freak with a professed admiration for alt-right male online celebs, and a colourful gender studies grad with a strong sense of social justice is falling apart.
It is about to be over – when an unnamed emergency causes the building and city to go into lockdown.
We follow the hilarious consequences of these two political polar-opposites being thrust together, with surprising outcomes.
The Questions is a gorgeous and joyful piece of new Australian musical theatre. Van Badham (book and lyrics) and long-term collaborator Richard Wise (music and lyrics) have created a stunning two-hander about an ultimate first-date disaster and finding connection despite differences.
Nestled amid the many hilarious moments in the rom-com musical are profound questions about what is really needed for two seemingly opposite people to really connect.
A beautiful construction
As “Visitor” and “Resident”, Chaya Ocampo and Charles Wu are a delight. They are adorable and mesmerising as the ill-met-by-lockdown odd couple. Their voices are stunning, and their playful and feisty engagement is electric.
They build the relationship between the two mismatched Gen Xers with an unwavering sense of playful connection: their development of the gradual intimacy and resulting fights and flare-ups is wonderful to observe.
Chaya Ocampo and Charles Wu are adorable and mesmerising as the ill-met-by-lockdown odd couple. Claude Raschella/State Theatre Company South Australia
The band is located onstage in an adjoining apartment. As the neighbours/house-and-band-mates, musicians Sam Lau (keys, guitar), James Bannah junior (keys) and Jackson Mack (drums) are just fabulous. Their playing and backing vocals are sharp, lively and well woven through the play.
Badham and Wise’s lyrics are delicious and devilishly clever with clever rhymes and quirky metaphors. They have a razor-sharp sense of the pulse of pop culture, and the songs and dialogue revel in those moments. The sudden moments of intimacy and of conflict are a joy.
Badham’s book is beautifully constructed with hilarious twists and starkly honest observations about the reality of dating when someone else is doing the matching – whether friend, app or random noodle server.
There are moments of recognition of the world of dating in an online world; sparks and sparring; the awkward and euphoric.
Navigated with energy and ease
The musical takes its title from the “36 questions to fall in love” developed by psychologist Arthur Aron in 1997. The device of the questions is used sparingly, the spotlight given to examining the developing relationship between the Resident and the Visitor.
Wise’s music effortlessly conveys the exciting-but-nervous first-date energy, pressure-cooker arguments and vulnerable, deep truth moments of love.
Wu’s solos have moments of breath-taking lyricism. His excellent voice and phrasing give nuance and depth to each moment.
Wu’s excellent voice and phrasing give nuance and depth to the moment. Claude Raschella/State Theatre Company South Australia
Ocampo’s voice changes effortlessly from overexcited patter to reflective to no-holds-barred excitement or anger. Everything she sings is right in the middle of the note and sparkles with clarity and intention. They both navigate the often complex vocal lines with ease.
Mitchell Butel directs with wit and verve. His sense of the joy and fun of this piece is evident. His skill at conveying the sense of energies exploding in the contained space, while also giving the characters room to expand and steer their storytelling, is masterful.
The set by Jeremy Allen is a wonderful realisation of the world of Nordic-inspired neutrals, the interior of tiny, densely packed modern apartments repeated ad-infinitum. The slightly cartoonish style of the high-rises in the background (complete with lighted windows) evokes manga and keeps us located in the world of musical comedy.
The band’s room is a tiny glass box encroaching on the living room space of the Resident’s apartment. Claude Raschella/State Theatre Company South Australia
The band’s room is a tiny glass box encroaching on the living room space of the Resident’s apartment. Clever use of micro venetians as actual room blinds screens the band from the action. The proximity of the neighbours and their observation of everything that happens in the fishbowl apartment next door is used to wonderful comic effect by the actors.
Gavin Norris’ lighting creates beautiful moments, isolating the actors during a solo, or abruptly changing the mood during a tense moment. The lighting gives the neutral tones of the set depth and colour, reflecting the changing moods of the characters and their inner emotions.
State Theatre Company South Australia has nurtured and developed this premiere piece with such care and joy. I left the theatre completely elated and my heart was full of beautifully made music and lyrics. I wanted to go back in and see it all again.
The Questions is at the State Theatre Company of South Australia until August 17.
Catherine Campbell 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.
Around 3.2 million Australians live with depression.
At the same time, few Australians meet recommended dietary or physical activity guidelines. What has one got to do with the other?
Our world-first trial, published this week, shows improving diet and doing more physical activity can be as effective as therapy with a psychologist for treating low-grade depression.
Previous studies (including our own) have found “lifestyle” therapies are effective for depression. But they have never been directly compared with psychological therapies – until now.
Amid a nation-wide shortage of mental health professionals, our research points to a potential solution. As we found lifestyle counselling was as effective as psychological therapy, our findings suggest dietitians and exercise physiologists may one day play a role in managing depression.
What did our study measure?
During the prolonged COVID lockdowns, Victorians’ distress levels were high and widespread. Face-to-face mental health services were limited.
Our trial targeted people living in Victoria with elevated distress, meaning at least mild depression but not necessarily a diagnosed mental disorder. Typical symptoms included feeling down, hopeless, irritable or tearful.
We partnered with our local mental health service to recruit 182 adults and provided group-based sessions on Zoom. All participants took part in up to six sessions over eight weeks, facilitated by health professionals.
Half were randomly assigned to participate in a program co-facilitated by an accredited practising dietitian and an exercise physiologist. That group – called the lifestyle program – developed nutrition and movement goals:
limiting discretionary foods, such as those high in saturated fats and added sugars
doing enjoyable physical activity.
The second group took part in psychotherapy sessions convened by two psychologists. The psychotherapy program used cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), the gold standard for treating depression in groups and when delivered remotely.
In both groups, participants could continue existing treatments (such as taking antidepressant medication). We gave both groups workbooks and hampers. The lifestyle group received a food hamper, while the psychotherapy group received items such as a colouring book, stress ball and head massager.
Lifestyle therapies just as effective
We found similar results in each program.
At the trial’s beginning we gave each participant a score based on their self-reported mental health. We measured them again at the end of the program.
Over eight weeks, those scores showed symptoms of depression reduced for participants in the lifestyle program (42%) and the psychotherapy program (37%). That difference was not statistically or clinically meaningful so we could conclude both treatments were as good as each other.
There were some differences between groups. People in the lifestyle program improved their diet, while those in the psychotherapy program felt they had increased their social support – meaning how connected they felt to other people – compared to at the start of the treatment.
Participants in both programs increased their physical activity. While this was expected for those in the lifestyle program, it was less expected for those in the psychotherapy program. It may be because they knew they were enrolled in a research study about lifestyle and subconsciously changed their activity patterns, or it could be a positive by-product of doing psychotherapy.
There was also not much difference in cost. The lifestyle program was slightly cheaper to deliver: A$482 per participant, versus $503 for psychotherapy. That’s because hourly rates differ between dietitians and exercise physiologists, and psychologists.
What does this mean for mental health workforce shortages?
Psychologists, who provide about half of all mental health services, can have long wait times. Our results suggest that, with the appropriate training and guidelines, allied health professionals who specialise in diet and exercise could help address this gap.
Lifestyle therapies can be combined with psychology sessions for multi-disciplinary care. But diet and exercise therapies could prove particularly effective for those on waitlists to see a psychologists, who may be receiving no other professional support while they wait.
Many dietitians and exercise physiologists already have advanced skills and expertise in motivating behaviour change. Most accredited practising dietitians are trained in managing eating disorders or gastrointestinal conditions, which commonly overlap with depression.
There is also a cost argument. It is overall cheaper to train a dietitian ($153,039) than a psychologist ($189,063) – and it takes less time.
Potential barriers
Australians with chronic conditions (such as diabetes) can access subsidised dietitian and exercise physiologist appointments under various Medicare treatment plans. Those with eating disorders can also access subsidised dietitian appointments. But mental health care plans for people with depression do not support subsidised sessions with dietitians or exercise physiologists, despite peak bodies urging them to do so.
Increased training, upskilling and Medicare subsidies would be needed to support dietitians and exercise physiologists to be involved in treating mental health issues.
Our training and clinical guidelines are intended to help clinicians practising lifestyle-based mental health care within their scope of practice (activities a health care provider can undertake).
Future directions
Our trial took place during COVID lockdowns and examined people with at least mild symptoms of depression who did not necessarily have a mental disorder. We are seeking to replicate these findings and are now running a study open to Australians with mental health conditions such as major depression or bipolar disorder.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Adrienne O’Neil receives funding support from the National Health and Medical Research Council (#2009295). The CALM Trial was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council’s Medical Research Future Fund – COVID-19 Mental Health Research Australian Government Department of Health (GA133346).
Sophie Mahoney’s position is funded by a Medical Research Future Fund grant (2006296). The CALM Trial was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council’s Medical Research Future Fund – COVID-19 Mental Health Research Australian Government Department of Health (GA133346). Sophie has previously received payment from Red Island.
The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has just released its much-anticipated landmark statement advocating for sex, gender, variations of sex characteristics and sexual orientation to be routinely considered in health and medical research.
This means the NHMRC is asking funding applicants to think about questions such as whether their research will include data from both males and females, whether the outcome measures are appropriate for different sex and gender groups, and how potential differences in these groups will be measured and reported.
Setting the standard this way has the potential to overhaul sex-and-gender-based biases and health disparities in medicine. But only if the next steps are implemented effectively.
Why sex, gender and sexual orientation matter
Although related, these terms have different meanings:
sex means one’s biological characteristics and is also a legal status
gender means one’s identity, expression, experiences and behaviours, and is a social construct, meaning it’s an idea created and shaped by people and their interactions
sexual orientation refers to a person’s sexual identity and attraction, such as gay, bisexual, heterosexual or asexual.
These aspects of a person fundamentally influence their health. Differences related to sex, gender and sexual orientation have impacts on disease susceptibility, diagnosis, severity, prognosis and management. These impacts apply to a wide range of acute and chronic conditions.
For centuries, health and medical researchers have not routinely considered sex, gender or sexual orientation in the design, analysis or interpretation of their research.
Most medical research in non-human animals (also called “pre-clinical research”, where drug treatments are developed and tested for safety and effectiveness) is conducted only in males. In human clinical trials, participation rates are often higher among males than females.
The outcomes of research are rarely reported or analysed separately according to specific sex and gender groups. This prevents detection of potential sex and gender differences in treatment safety and effectiveness.
This affects everyone, particularly marginalised groups including women and girls, people born with variations of sex characteristics (intersex), trans and non-binary people, and people with diverse sexual orientations.
But not considering sex, gender and sexual orientation also affects the health of cisgender men and boys. Traditional masculine gender norms can dissuade help-seeking and access to clinical care for conditions including cancer and mental illness.
Why does Australia need an NHMRC statement?
Over the past two decades, the main health and medical research funding bodies in Europe and North America have introduced policies and mandates with the aim of correcting sex-and-gender-based bias in research practices.
These policies typically require applicants for research funding to demonstrate how they have adequately considered sex and gender (where relevant) in their study design and analysis.
Australia has lagged in establishing sex and gender policy – until now. The NHMRC statement is an important first step in bringing Australia into line with leading international research standards.
As the NHMRC is one of the major funders of Australian health and medical research, this signals Australia is at last wanting to overturn decades of entrenched sex and gender disparities in taxpayer-funded research.
The statement is a commitment to encourage publicly funded health and medical research to consider sex, gender, variations of sex characteristics and sexual orientation at all stages of research. This stretches from design through to implementation.
So Australian researchers now have a strong foundation for more inclusive and equitable research practices. But there is not yet a mechanism in the funding review process to evaluate how well researchers have considered these variables.
Without enforcing its policy and evaluating its application, the NHMRC has no means to keep track of improvements, or lack thereof, in sex and gender equity in health and medicine.
Universities, medical research institutes, ethics approval boards, Australian medical journals and health services all have a role to play by aligning their practices with the NHMRC statement and auditing their implementation. Incentives such as sex-and-gender-relevant training and priority funding might help.
The NHMRC’s gender equity strategy, which seeks to improve gender diversity among researchers who are awarded funding, may also help.
There is no silver bullet to end all sex-and-gender-related equities in health. But the statement could provide the foundation for cascading changes across different sectors to address gaps in our knowledge about the health of underserved sex and gender groups.
Bronwyn Graham receives funding from the NHMRC and ARC. She is the Director of the Centre for Sex and Gender Equity in Health and Medicine, a partnership between the George Institute for Global Health, Deakin University, The Australian Institute for Human Rights, and UNSW. She participated in a workshop to inform the drafting of the NHMRC statement as the first step of a broader community consultation process.
Rachel Huxley receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is an Honorary Professorial Fellow, The George Institute, UNSW.
Severine Lamon receives funding from the ARC. She is the Co-Director of the Centre for Sex and Gender Equity in Health and Medicine (Victoria). She participated in a workshop to inform the drafting of the NHMRC statement as the first step of a broader community consultation process.
SPECIAL REPORT:By Stephen Wright in Kingston, Jamaica
The obscure UN organisation attempting to set rules for the exploitation of deep-sea metals is facing a potential shake-up as more nations call for a mining moratorium and a new candidate for its leadership vows to address perceptions of corporate bias.
The number of countries against the imminent start of mining for metallic nodules on the seafloor has jumped to 32 during the International Seabed Authority’s annual assembly this week in Kingston, Jamaica after Austria, Guatemala, Honduras, Malta and Tuvalu joined their ranks.
“We are running ahead of ourselves trying to go and extract minerals when we don’t know what’s down there, what impact it is going to have,” said Surangel Whipps, president of the Pacific island nation of Palau.
As governments become more aware of the risks, “hopefully we get them motivated to say let’s have a pause, let’s have a moratorium until we understand what we are doing,” he told BenarNews.
Tuvalu delegates Monise Laafai and Demi Afasene declared their country’s support for a precautionary pause on deep-sea mining, pictured on July 30, 2024. [IISD-ENB]
Ten members of the 18-nation Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), including the territories of New Caledonia and French Polynesia whose foreign policies are set by France, are now opposed to any imminent start to deep-sea mining.
Mining of the golf ball-sized nodules that litter swathes of the sea bed is touted as a source of metals and rare earths needed for green technologies, such as electric vehicles, as the world reduces reliance on fossil fuels.
Irreparable damage Sceptics say such minerals are already abundant on land and warn that mining the sea bed could cause irreparable damage to an environment that is still poorly understood by science.
Palau President Surangel Whipps . . . making a point during an interview with BenarNews in Kingston, Jamaica. Image: Stephen Wright/BenarNews
Brazil has nominated its former oil and gas regulator Leticia Carvalho, as its candidate for ISA secretary-general, challenging the two-term incumbent Michael Lodge. He has been criticized for his closeness to The Metals Company, which is leading the charge to hoover up the metallic nodules from the seabed.
Carvalho, a former oceanographer and currently a senior official at the UN Environment Program, said a third consecutive term for Lodge would be inconsistent with “best practices” at the UN
Leticia Carvalho, Brazil’s candidate for secretary-general of the International Seabed Authority. . . pictured at the 14th Ramsar Convention on Wetlands agreement. Image: IISD-ENB/BenarNews
“I would be guided by integrity as a value,” she told BenarNews. “Secondly the secretary-general function, it’s a neutral function. You are a civil servant, you are there to set the table for the decision makers, which are the state parties.”
“I have learned in my life as a regulator that you try to find by consensus, balances – what you agree collectively to protect and what you agree to sacrifice,” Carvalho said.
Lodge has been nominated by Kiribati, one of three Pacific Island nations that The Metals Company is working with to harvest vast quantities of nodules from their areas in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.
The 4.5 million square kilometer [1.7 square million mile] area in the central Pacific is regulated by the ISA and contains trillions of polymetallic nodules at depths of up to 5.5 kilometers. All up, the ISA regulates more than half of the world’s seafloor.
Dropped out Carvalho said she was present at a meeting at the UN in New York last month, first reported by The New York Times, when Kiribati’s ambassador to the UN. Teburoro Tito, proposed to Brazil’s ambassador that Carvalho drop out of contention for secretary-general in exchange for another senior role at the ISA.
Lodge has said he was not involved in that proposal and also denied the concerns of some ISA delegates that his travel this year to nations including China, Cameroon, Japan, Egypt, Italy and Antigua and Barbuda was a re-election campaign using ISA resources.
A campaign pamphlet of incumbent ISA secretary-general Michael Lodge who is standing for a third term with the support of Kiribati. Image: IISD-ENB/BenarNews
“Mr Lodge has no comment on any questions concerning hearsay,” the ISA said in a statement. “Mr Lodge was not privy to the discussions referenced and is not party to the alleged [Kiribati] proposal.”
Deep-sea mineral extraction has been particularly contentious in the Pacific, where some economically lagging island nations see it as a possible financial windfall, but many other island states are strongly opposed.
Nauru President David Adeang told the assembly that its mining application currently being prepared in conjunction with The Metals Company would allow the ISA to make “an informed decision based on real scientific data and not emotion and conjecture”.
Nauru in June 2021 notified the seabed authority of its intention to begin mining, which triggered the clock for the first time on a two-year period for the authority’s member nations to finalise regulations.
Through deep-sea mining, Nauru, home to some 10,000 people and just 21 square kilometers in area, would contribute critical metals and help combat global warming, Adeang said.
The International Seabed Authority assembly . . . pictured in session last month in Kingston, Jamaica. Image: Diego Noguera/IISD-ENB/BenarNews
‘Necessity’ for our survival “The responsible development of deep sea minerals is not just an opportunity for Nauru and other small island developing states,” he said. “It is a necessity for our survival in a rapidly changing world.”
Still, a sign of how little is understood about deep sea environments came earlier this month when scientists published research that showed the metallic nodules generate oxygen, likely through electrolysis.
It was an own-goal for The Metals Company, which partly funded the research in Nauru’s area of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. It quickly attacked the results as based on flawed methodology.
“Firstly it’s great that through our funding this research was possible. However we do see some concerns with the early conclusion and will be preparing a rebuttal that will be out soon,” chief executive Gerard Barron told BenarNews.
Among the other 32 nations at the 169-member ISA supporting a stay on deep-sea mining are Brazil, Canada, Chile, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, Germany, Mexico, New Zealand, Palau, Samoa, United Kingdom, and Vanuatu.
It’s been a depressing year for regional aviation. Rex airlines has just become the second Australian airline to go into voluntary administration this year, after Bonza’s collapse in April.
Is Qantas’ Chief Executive Vanessa Hudson right – that there simply aren’t enough passengers in Australia to support more than three airlines?
That’s certainly a convenient narrative for the members of our domestic airline duopoly, Qantas and Virgin Australia, who now face even less competition.
Or did Rex fall victim to other airlines’ strategic management to limit the number of airport slots available to them to successfully fly between the capital cities? This practice is known as “slot hoarding”.
On Thursday, the former chair of the the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Rod Sims, seemed to think so, telling ABC radio:
The government outsources the management of the slots at Sydney airport to a company that’s majority-owned by Qantas and Virgin, it is just unbelievable.
It’s certainly not a new allegation. Rex, Bonza, and the ACCC have all previously raised concerns.
So how exactly do airline slots work, and does the system need reform?
Back in the 1970s, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) developed the airline slot system to reduce airport congestion. The aim was to improve the traffic flow during peak travel times at “level 3” high traffic density airports – a category that includes Sydney and Melbourne.
Under the system, airlines are allocated a daily number of slots they can use. Importantly, there is a set amount of slots available, as they represent specific time windows for aircraft to take off or land.
Airlines schedule their slots ahead of time as part of a yield management program. This plan looks across the whole calendar year, taking into account projected peak and off-peak travel times for business and leisure travellers.
An airline owns the time slot it is designated by the airport infrastructure capacity, whether it gets used or not.
The IATA system relies on what’s called the “80/20 rule”, which states an airline must use 80% of its allocated slots or it will loose its unused slots. The 20% is a buffer. But it has been criticised as overly generous.
Airlines can also buy sell or lease, slots they are not using due to slow demand or the need for financial gain. These can sell for huge sums.
Can slots be hoarded?
Broadly speaking, slot hoarding is the practice of booking slots for use only to cancel them in bad faith, preventing other airlines from getting access to premium travel times.
In June last year, Rex’s then-deputy-chairman John Sharp accused Qantas of engaging in the practice:
It’s as plain as the nose on your face that Qantas is hoarding slots by cancelling sufficient flights to remain within the 80/20 rule.
Slot availability is a particular issue for Sydney Airport, because takeoffs and landings are capped at 80 per hour.
Sydney Airport Corporation’s executive general manager of aviation, Robert Wood, as well as the airport’s then-chief-executive Geoff Culbert also both expressed serious concerns about slot use last year.
In February this year, the federal government unveiled a range of reforms for Sydney airport’s slot system. These included requirements for increased transparency on how slots are used, and new independent audits.
Notably though, the government made no change to the 80/20 rule.
What needs to change?
A number of further reforms could help make the airport system friendlier to new entrants and more equitable.
One possibility is to sell a predefined number of slots to the major participating airlines. Airlines would have to make a business case outlining their proposed needs over the next calendar year.
Currently, airlines request slots from the airport slot management team at no cost to the airline, a system which favours established airlines that have met the 80/20 rule.
But a key criticism of this proposal is that the cost of purchasing slots would be passed down to the flying public, likely resulting in higher airfares. Bidding for slots would also add new cost barriers to entry for would-be startup challengers.
Airlines that had historically used 80% of their allocated slots would be given priority bidding on up to 50% of the following year’s total airport slot allocation.
The remaining 50% of slots could be prioritised for new airlines without an established history, with the goal of awarding them take off and landing times that aren’t necessarily premium, but close enough.
Airlines that didn’t achieve this 80% target or were found to be abusing the slot hoarding rules would be removed from the top-tier fairness status and placed in a slot allocation “sin bin” until their performance measures were brought up to standards.
Australia has challenges ahead for domestic flights that are already at capacity. Government reforms that provide better oversight of airport usage of the 80/20 rule could help mitigate the risk of anti-competitive behaviour.
Australian airlines have the right to compete without feeling unfairly held back, and we as consumers have the right to reasonable airfares.
Doug Drury 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.
Ever since Polynesian pioneers took to the ocean on wooden rafts, people have been hooked on riding waves. Today, surfing is one of the world’s fastest-growing sports and one of the latest additions to the Olympic games.
Surfing is especially valuable to Australia. My new research shows surf-related expenditure contributes nearly A$3 billion to the Australian economy every year. And the mental health benefits to Australian surfers are in the order of $6 billion a year.
Yet many surf breaks are subject to coastal erosion, water pollution and other threats. The surfing event in Tahiti for this year’s Olympics is a case in point: it involved drilling into delicate coral reef to build a new judging tower.
It’s vital to recognise and measure the true benefits of surfing in dollar terms, so decision-makers realise it makes sense to invest in protecting Australia’s surf breaks.
Both surfer and scientist, author Ana Manero volunteers for Surfing Mums. Ana Manero
The economics of surfing
Waves are essentially free. All you need is a surfboard and you’re set. Well, you might want to grab yourself a leg rope and a wetsuit too.
If you have a wave virtually at your doorstep, it’s likely you’re paying a real estate premium. Otherwise, you’re probably spending your weekends chasing waves up and down the coast. You may even have your family in tow. The costs soon add up.
Using an online survey of 569 Australian surfers, my team and I explored the influence of recreational surfing on the economy and people’s wellbeing. We found the average Australian surfer spends more than $3,700 a year, within Australia, on surfing-related purchases. Half goes on equipment, while the rest is spent on domestic travel. A further $1,975 is spent on international travel.
There are an estimated 727,000 Australian adult surfers, which brings the total spend to $2.71 billion every year being pumped into the domestic economy. If we factor in flow-on effects, such as business-to-business spending, the overall contribution of recreational surfing comes to $4.88 billion.
Economic impacts can inform government priorities and public decisions affecting coastal management. For example, the 2023 Margaret River Pro drew $8 million and 3,500 visitors to the region. These figures, as well as local and international support, encouraged the organisers to renew the contest until 2028.
Mental health and wellbeing
Besides direct economic impacts, surfing contributes to participants’ wellbeing in multiple ways.
In our survey, more than 94% of respondents reported improvements in their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to deal with stress and difficulty in their lives.
More than 75% of surfers reported an improvement in their sense of belonging to a community and ability to foster positive relationships.
One way to measure wellbeing in economic terms is by comparing workplace productivity and healthcare costs between groups. Previous research has quantified the benefits of being in nature to mental health, using data from national parks visits. When applying this approach to surfing, the researchers found gains in surfers’ mental health worth $7,650 per person per year – or $5.6 billion across Australia’s surfers.
Deadly but delicate
The first-time inclusion of surfing in the 2020–21 Tokyo Olympics was hailed as a landmark recognition of the sport’s cultural significance. A year later, surfing was admitted as a permanent Olympic sport.
But built infrastructure, such as ports and sea walls, human-induced climate change, coastal erosion and water pollution are endangering waves around the world.
The tiny village of Teahupo’o, in Tahiti, is home to one of the world’s “heaviest” waves. But some residents feared the Olympics would irreversibly damage their pristine environment. In response, visitor numbers were capped and construction minimised.
The world-renowned wave of Mundaka, in Spain’s Basque Country, disappeared in 2005 as a result of dredging activity in the nearby rivermouth. The wave eventually came back, but the area had already suffered a slowdown in economic growth, including the cancellation of a professional contest.
In Australia, three surf breaks were lost to construction of Perth’s Ocean Reef marina in 2022. Local residents’ calls for an artificial reef are now being considered.
Highlights from the Men’s Surfing at the 2024 Olympics.
Protection for a precious resource
Australia is blessed with more than 1,440 surf breaks and a surf-loving culture.
But if we want those waves to exist for future generations, we must look after them now.
A good starting point could be to include surf breaks in the Australia State of the Environment Report. The review already evaluates pressures on recreational fishing, snorkelling and scuba diving – but not surfing, despite it attracting more participants than the other three sports combined.
Form a legal standpoint, only a few of our waves are protected: the iconic Bells Beach in Victoria comes under the Heritage Act 2027. A dozen of “surfing reserves” in New South Wales are safeguarded by the Crown Lands Act 1989. In Queensland, coastal protection policies are being developed for the Noosa and Gold Coast World Surfing Reserves.
Across the world, more countries are adopting protections for surfing’s recreational and environmental values. In Brazil, the waves at Doce River Mouth were recently granted special protection, as a new bill acknowledged the ocean as a living being with intrinsic rights.
The goal to better understand and protect the value of surf breaks is in line with the 2021–30 Oceans Decade, a United Nations initiative to leverage scientific knowledge for ocean sustainability.
It’s often said “only a surfer knows the feeling” of riding a wave, but research quantifying the benefits of surfing can help decision-makers appreciate the need to preserve a truly irreplaceable resource.
Ana Manero is a volunteer with not-for-profit Surfing Mums.
The photo of returning prisoners in an American plane, all grinning from ear to ear, says it all: the joy, the relief and the success of an incredibly complicated mission.
The freeing of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, Radio Free Europe journalist Alsu Kurmasheva, former US Marine Paul Whelan and a host of others is the biggest prisoner exchange since the end of the Cold War.
In all, 26 people from seven different countries were freed in a mindbogglingly complex agreement that took years to negotiate. They included 16 imprisoned in Russia: the three Americans, a host of Russian political prisoners, and a 19-year-old Russian-German national jailed for taking photographs of a Russian military base.
In return, eight Russians were also released – the most notorious among them, Vadim Krasikov, a colonel in the Federal Security Service jailed in Germany for murdering a former Chechen rebel in Berlin in 2019.
Freedom for those unjustly imprisoned is indisputably wonderful news, even if it is way overdue, and the Biden administration deserves credit for its work in negotiating the deal. But this case could also set up an international precedent: journalists can be used as geopolitical bargaining chips.
Journalists as leverage
Gershkovich had the highest profile of those detained by Russia. From the day the journalist was arrested in March 2023 on espionage charges, it was clear the only way out would be through some kind of negotiation.
From the outset, Russia failed to produce any evidence to validate their claims that he was a spy and not a highly competent journalist simply doing his job. And in February, Russian President Vladimir Putin told Fox News’s Tucker Carlson:
the special services are in contact with one another. They are talking […] I believe an agreement can be reached.
Because of their role, foreign correspondents are tempting fodder for governments looking for easy victims to use as leverage. Reporters carry cameras and notebooks, talk to political opponents and gather information in ways that are easily presented as espionage.
They are generally high-profile, working for companies with the ability to pressure their own governments to make deals. And their arrest sends a chilling message to other journalists, both local and foreign: challenge the official narrative at your peril.
This was the case with The Washington Post’s Tehran Bureau Chief Jason Rezaian, who was imprisoned in Iran, and the Al Jazeera Three (including myself), detained in Egypt on terrorism charges.
But this deal also makes it more likely that in future, journalists and other civilians will be caught and traded between governments as bargaining chips.
Russia has got what it wanted: the return of what The Economist colourfully described as, “assassins, smugglers, hackers and the deep-cover agents known as ‘illegals’.”
The United States, then, has to live with the fact it helped free people serving time for crimes as severe as murder.
How do governments navigate this?
It is an almost impossible dilemma for governments trying to free innocent detainees. Do they stand firm and refuse to negotiate, risking anger at home for abandoning their own nationals? Or do they do a deal as the US did, and risk more detentions and more negotiations in future?
While the deals are impossibly complex, the long-term solution lies in a straightforward calculus: the price of detaining foreign hostages must ultimately be made higher than the value those hostages represent as prisoners.
In simple terms, the declaration is creating a coalition of states committed to stopping the practice. Currently, it is a rather bland set of bullet points expressing “grave concern about the use of arbitrary arrest or detention by States to exercise leverage over foreign governments, contrary to international law”. It also reaffirms “the fundamental importance of the rule of law, independence of the judiciary, (and) respect for human rights […]”
But behind it lies the seed of a potentially powerful strategy. If enough governments agree to collectively act against any state that grabs a foreign hostage, it raises the price of keeping them while avoiding the need to start one-on-one negotiations.
Those actions don’t need to be dramatic. Placing the status of a hostage at the top of the agenda of every diplomatic meeting is a good start. Making the issue a point of friction in trade deals is another. So too is making visas difficult for official visits.
No single action needs to be expensive for those countries that are part of the coalition, but for a rogue state holding hostages, all those points of pressure add up to make the practice more trouble than it is worth.
The idea can’t guarantee there will never be another innocent like Gershkovich or Whelan unjustly imprisoned for political leverage, but it might reverse an awful trend. As Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly declared:
Hostage diplomacy is an unacceptable and abhorrent practice. It threatens international peace and security and contravenes international law. It inflicts immeasurable harm on victims and their friends and families. It must stop.
Peter Greste is Professor of Journalism at Macquarie University, and the Executive Director for the advocacy group, the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom.
Virginia Woolf always maintained that, of all of the great writers, the British novelist Jane Austen “is the most difficult to catch in the act of greatness”.
To my mind, the groundbreaking Russian playwright Anton Chekhov gives Austen a close run for her money. He is also, as one tends to find when seeing his work performed live, very hard to get right.
This difficulty stems from the subtlety and nuance of Chekhov’s writing, which, on the surface, appears to trade exclusively in the trivialities and minutiae of everyday existence.
Nothing, however, could be further from the truth.
Chekhov’s genius lies precisely in his ability to achieve a great deal with seemingly very little. He conveys emotional depth and intellectual profundity through subtle, almost imperceptible, shifts in tone and characterisation, all while eschewing conventional dramatic action.
With that in mind, it is heartening to be able to report the Ensemble Theatre’s exceptional and engaging production of Uncle Vanya successfully captures the essence of Chekhov’s work.
A storied history
The history of Uncle Vanya, which was written in 1897 and first staged in 1899, is complex. Born on January 29 1860, Chekhov grew up in Taganrog, a port city in Southern Russia. He started writing in school and finished a full-length play by the age of 17.
Anton Chekhov, left, with his brother Nikolay in 1882. Wikimedia Commons
In 1879, after moving to Moscow to study medicine, Chekhov supported his family by writing humorous sketches and stories for various journals. This work provided him with a crucial source of income.
At the same time, he continued to hone his skills as a dramatist. In 1888, he began work on what would become his third play, The Wood Demon.
Written in collaboration with his friend and publisher, Alexi Survorin, Chekhov finished the script in October 1889. The play premiered at the Abramov Theatre in Moscow on December 27 1889. It was a resounding flop. The reviews were overwhelmingly negative and the production ground to a halt after only three performances.
Bruised but undeterred, Chekhov kept chiselling away at the play. Nearly a decade in the making, the eventual result was Uncle Vanya, which differs drastically from The Wood Demon in terms of running time, formal structure and tonal affect. While The Wood Demon unfolds across multiple venues, Uncle Vanya, a work about unrequited love and thwarted ambition, is set in a single location.
This change in setting afforded Chekhov the opportunity to intensify his focus on the internal conflicts and interpersonal dynamics of his cast of characters. They represent, as the cultural theorist Raymond Williams says, “a generation whose whole energy is consumed in the very process of becoming conscious of their own inadequacy and impotence”.
Conflicts and comedy
The plot of the tragicomic play centres on a dilapidated rural estate, where the eponymous Vanya and his niece Sonya toil to maintain the property for the benefit of Vanya’s brother-in-law, Professor Serebryakov, whose unexpected visit with his young wife, Yelena, disrupts the daily routine of the disgruntled household.
Tensions mount, passions flare and tempers threaten to boil over.
The plot of the tragicomic play centres on a dilapidated rural estate. Prudence Upton/Ensemble Theatre
Adapted by the award-winning Australian playwright Joanna Murray-Smith and directed by Mark Kilmurry, the Ensemble Theatre’s production excels in rendering these escalating conflicts, leavened by moments of genuine comedy.
This is no mean feat. In many interpretations of Chekhov, as Murray-Smith has acknowledged, “the comedy is missing because it just doesn’t translate to now”.
By the same token, Murray-Smith expresses doubts about pandering to contemporary tastes when it comes to theatrical adaptation:
In a good production of a Chekhov, you really don’t need to make any changes if you don’t want to: you can present it in the world at the end of the 19th century […] I’m not doing very well at selling my own job here, but a lot of the time I think the modernising is completely unnecessary.
Happily, this production – which also makes excellent use of the Ensemble Theatre’s intimate theatrical setting – proves Murray-Smith correct.
The performances are all outstanding. Abbey Morgan gives us a preternaturally stoical Sonya. Chantelle Jamieson’s portrayal of Yelena blends passion and irony. Deftly shifting between satire and sincerity, the cast evokes both laughter and real sympathy from the audience.
Abbey Morgan gives us a preternaturally stoical Sonya. Prudence Upton/Ensemble Theatre
When handled with due care and proper attention, as it is here, Chekhov’s play is simultaneously timeless and timely.
It addresses themes of ecological degradation, intergenerational strife and societal upheaval – just as relevant today as it was in 1899.
Uncle Vanya is at Ensemble Theatre, Sydney, until August 31.
Alexander Howard 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.
Mass protests have rocked Bangladesh over the past few weeks. The military was deployed to the streets with shoot-on-sight orders. News agencies have reported some 266 deaths, with 7,000 people injured and more than 10,000 arrested.
In addition, a near-total communications blackout cut all internet and mobile phone services for more than a week. A nationwide curfew locked down 170 million people, at first for up to 22 hours a day.
These restrictions have eased somewhat, but troops still patrol urban areas and the curfew remains in force for half the day.
For the Rohingya refugees in the country, the security measures and curfew have made their plight even more desperate.
Despite the initial hospitality of the Bangladeshis, the influx of refugees has put an enormous strain on the country’s social and political systems.
The Bangladesh government has become increasingly impatient with the situation, while locals have become more vocal in expressing their frustration and resentment.
With no international resolution to the refugee crisis in sight, Bangladeshi authorities have progressively increased restrictions on the Rohingya to curtail their movement and prevent them from trying to earn a living in Bangladesh.
With no legal options for paid employment or running a business, World Food Programme vouchers are essential. Yet international aid for the Rohingya refugees has declined sharply, resulting in a US$125 million (A$190 million) shortfall last year. This cut the value of food vouchers to just US$0.27 (A$0.41) per person per day, despite record-high food prices.
People are hungry and desperate, and the shortfall looks worse this year.
Spiralling crime and violence
At the same time, violence has spiralled in the refugee camps. Even before the latest unrest in Bangladesh, armed criminal gangs and insurgent groups had proliferated both inside and surrounding the camps, comprised of both Rohingya and Bengali members.
Drug trafficking, kidnappings for ransom, extortion and murder have been rife. When aid workers and local authorities go home for the evening, the armed gangs inside the camps effectively take control after dark. They are known as the “night government” in the camps.
Repatriation to Myanmar is all but impossible for the Rohingya trapped in Bangladesh. A civil war is raging across the border. The UN said in May that Rohingya had been targeted in reported shootings, beheadings and the torching of villages.
Meanwhile, third countries like Australia, the UK and US have accepted very few Rohingya refugees from the Bangladesh camps. There are currently no pathways for refugees to apply for asylum in another country. It is thus hardly surprising that thousands are turning to people smugglers to try to escape on boats.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees has recorded more than 7,700 people boarding 77 boats in the past two years to try to escape to elsewhere in South-East Asia and beyond. Over 800 have been reported dead or missing.
Concerted action by the Bangladeshi authorities and international aid agencies has reduced the number of people trying to flee on boats to just 700 so far this year (with 104 missing or dead). However, the recent unrest in Bangladesh makes the situation in the camps increasingly precarious.
Curfews have trapped the Rohingya
The curfews have not only confined the Rohingya to their tiny huts for up to 22 hours a day, but have also prevented aid workers from entering.
Some crisis support has been provided in the camps, such as emergency health services and food distribution. But otherwise there were almost no aid workers or Bangladeshi authorities present, other than extra security forces.
Some programs are resuming as curfews ease, but the absence of aid workers has made the refugees more vulnerable. Without a doubt, the armed criminal gangs have only strengthened their “night government” power during this period.
Many refugees will likely either turn to people smugglers for a way out or join the armed groups as a way to guarantee security for their families.
Either outcome is dire for the Rohingya, Bangladesh and the region.
What can Australia and other donor countries do?
Australia has been a major donor to the Rohingya, via the Australian Humanitarian Partnership (AHP)—Bangladesh. The government also recently reversed last year’s cuts to aid for the camps.
But Australia and other donor countries can do more. They can:
1) Urgently increase aid in real terms. The recent reversal of cuts is welcome, but significant new funding is urgently needed not only for food and basic services, but also to address crime, people smuggling and security more broadly.
2) Work with Bangladesh to stop people smuggling. It is in Australia’s national interest to stop people smuggling, not just turn back the boats. This will require additional funding to meet the needs of the Rohingya in the camps, guarantee their security and create pathways that provide hope for the future. It is cheaper than keeping asylum seekers in detention once they arrive in Australian waters.
3) Help Bangladesh target crime. Australia can provide more support and co-operation with the Bangladeshi government to target the gangs and crime in and around the camps. Again, this is a significant challenge, but Australia could offer technical and financial support, officer training and expertise, and additional personnel and funding.
4) Guarantee multi-year funding to aid and security programs. Funding to the camps has been disjointed. There have been long gaps between “phases” of aid. This has led to programs ceasing, aid workers finding new jobs and leaving, and discontinuity of support and programs for vulnerable refugees.
Anthony Ware receives funding from the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s Australian Humanitarian Program-Bangladesh, via Alinea International and Plan International Australia, for work on strengthening everyday peace between the Rohingya refugees and their host community.
In fact, four of the five United States athletes who took team gold in Paris were women in their 20s attending their second Olympics.
And after picking up the all-around gold, 27-year-old Simone Biles is the oldest winner in 72 years.
The last time a non-teenager took that title was in 1972. And even then, 20-year-old Soviet Ludmila Turischeva’s win was upstaged by the electric performances of her younger teammate Olga Korbut, aged 17.
Korbut would be the first in a line of “teenage pixies” who emerged after the women’s discipline took an acrobatic turn in the 1970s, favouring a smaller physiology and younger athletes.
The media, ever enamoured with prodigious children, fuelled an enduring cultural fascination with these gymnast wunderkinds.
Young athletes, big pressure
Girls’ acrobatic feats were often seen as charming play or superhuman acts, instead of the product of intense labour undertaken by children.
By the late 1990s, however, journalist Joan Ryan’s book, Little Girls in Pretty Boxes, raised significant questions about the treatment and disposable careers of girls in gymnastics and figure skating.
In 1997, the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) raised the minimum competitive age from 15 to 16 to protect girls’ health.
Since then, developments in competition formats and training approaches resulted in longer careers.
Despite the gradual rise in the ages of gymnasts since the turn of the century, paternalist attitudes lingered both within and outside of the sport.
One study found coaches and officials were slow to stop viewing gymnasts as children. My own study observed how broadcasters often clung to the cute, disciplined girl-child as a gymnastics behavioural ideal well into the 2000s.
Contrary to this was a “diva” stereotype, used by reporters and commentators to describe athletes who defied the ideal.
Svetlana Khorkina, a hugely successful Russian gymnast who competed into her 20s, was labelled as such for her mercurial, outspoken personality.
In the 2024 Athens games, the 25-year-old was pitted against ponytailed teen Carly Patterson for Olympic gold. Some portrayed it as a battle between youthful zest and aged arrogance.
Later, world champion Aliya Mustafina and her teammates were similarly labelled for their self-assured and headstrong attitudes. These attributes were often treated as factors in losses or mistakes.
At the 2011 American Cup, when Mustafina made a competitive decision against her coach’s advice that didn’t work out, commentators treated it like a cautionary tale.
It was as if autonomy and self-possession were out of place in a sport for little girls.
Then, in 2016, came the sport’s greatest reckoning.
A torrid history of abuse
The Larry Nassar sexual abuse case ignited waves of present and former gymnasts worldwide to speak out about the silencing, abuse and toxic training environments they’d endured.
Over the next few years, athletes recounted the cost of childhood sporting careers.
Australia, too, confronted its past. A former national coach was sanctioned.
An Australian Human Rights Commission review concluded a “win at all costs” culture created “unacceptable risks” to young athletes.
The national governing body, Gymnastics Australia, apologised to survivors of abuse.
Gymnastics Australia apologised to athletes who suffered abuse.
Age is by no means the only factor in vulnerability to abuse, but research shows that age and international-level training are significant risk factors in forms of interpersonal violence.
There are also child labor concerns, as well as health and wellbeing risks — something figure skating has been forced to grapple with following a doping case involving a 15-year-old at the Beijing Winter Olympics.
In this context, the newfound emergence of older gymnasts is reassuring. But what is more reassuring is that athletes are now being treated as adults.
A change in attitude
Before the Paris games began, USA Gymnastics technical lead Chellsie Memmel told reporters Biles would have the option to not compete on every apparatus during the team competition.
“If that’s what she needs to continue to be at her best for her team and for herself, then that’s what we’re going to do,” Memmel said of their highest scorer.
In 2021, Biles also chose to withdraw mid-competition during the Tokyo games for mental health and safety reasons.
For longtime gymnastics followers, the notion of gymnasts being able to decide how and when they compete is still alien and refreshing.
So too is gymnasts eating pizza (an act former US Olympian Aly Raisman once feared might cost her career) and making sideline TikToks in Paris.
It’s a world removed from gymnastics’ recent, oppressive past.
A seismic outcome of gymnastics’ reckoning has been a culture change that appears to finally privilege autonomy. Choice may be becoming these athletes’ new normal.
Brigid McCarthy 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karinna Saxby, Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne
A majority of Australians voted “no” to an Indigenous Voice to Parliament. But if we dig deeper into the data from the 2023 referendum, there is more to learn, especially about the health of Indigenous Australians living in communities with strong opposition to the Voice.
It is a picture both striking and urgent.
In research published today we show for the first time that Indigenous Australians living in regions more strongly opposed to the Voice had poorer health.
When we mapped community-level opposition to the Voice to Australians’ health, we found Indigenous Australians were more likely than non-Indigenous Australians to report poorer general and mental health. But Indigenous Australians were less likely to access health care. These inequalities were larger in areas with higher opposition to the Voice.
Our results likely reflect underlying negative attitudes towards Indigenous Australians and fewer culturally sensitive options for accessing health care in some regions. Both impact Indigenous Australians’ health in numerous ways.
What we did and what we found
We started with the national map of voting patterns to identify
regions with the highest level of opposition to the Voice (defined in this study as regions of Australia where more than 72% of community members voted “no”).
Next, we compared regions with high versus lower levels of opposition to the Voice with Australians’ health. We did this using a 2021 national survey, which included information on self-reported general health, mental health, and use of health care in the past year.
Our study showed that compared to Indigenous Australians living in areas with low opposition to the Voice, Indigenous Australians living in communities with the highest opposition to the Voice were more likely to report poor general and mental health, and were less likely to have visited any health care provider in the past year.
We did not see the same disparities for non-Indigenous Australians.
For example, in areas with the greatest support for the Voice, Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians reported similar levels of poor mental health (16% for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous). Whereas in areas with the strongest opposition to the Voice, 27% of Indigenous Australians reported poor mental health compared with 15% of non-Indigenous Australians.
In areas with the greatest support for the Voice, the proportion of Indigenous Australians who had seen any health care provider was 78%, which was higher than the proportion for non-Indigenous Australians, at 71%. But in areas with strongest opposition to the Voice, the proportion visiting any provider was markedly lower for Indigenous Australians (54%) but not for non-Indigenous Australians (68%).
Altogether, this suggests that despite being in poorer health, Indigenous Australians living in areas with stronger opposition to the Voice are less likely to access health care.
Why is this happening?
There are several possible explanations for these results.
A strong possibility, which aligns with recent research, is community-level opposition to the Voice could capture underlying negative attitudes towards Indigenous Australians. So what we’re seeing may reflect the impact of such negative attitudes over time on people’s health.
This aligns with much international research showing how community-wide stigma and discriminatory environments lead to poorer health among minority and historically marginalised groups. Generally, we see this play out in higher rates of smoking and drinking, and reduced access to health care.
These attitudes could impact Indigenous Australians’ experiences of health care. For example, we know previous experiences of racism while accessing health care deters Indigenous people from engaging with mainstream health care. Alternatively, there may not be enough culturally safe health care options in regions with the highest opposition to the Voice.
Indigenous leaders in Australia have continued to share their experiences of racismbefore, during and after the Voice referendum. While the direct impact of racism is evident in the testimony of these individuals, relatively little attention has been paid to the impact of structural racism at the community level.
But we cannot say from our research what motivated people to vote “no” and a “no” vote cannot be taken as evidence of racism. But whatever the motivation for voting “no”, it is Indigenous Australians’ health that is uniquely impacted in these high-opposition regions.
Where from here?
Our results suggest that when it comes to future health policy and programs, we need to consider multiple, community-level solutions. In particular, we should pay particular attention to areas where there was greater opposition to the Voice, as these are the areas associated with the worse health and less use of health care.
In these areas, in particular, we need more culturally safe health care, tailored care that is inclusive and free of racism. This is so patients can access relevant and appropriate health services to improve their health.
We also need to look more broadly to change community attitudes about Indigenous Australians if we are to reduce systemic racism, stigma and its impacts on health.
Our results are just a snapshot
The Voice referendum opened our eyes to the fundamental struggle Indigenous Australians face in advancing Indigenous self-determination as the ultimate way to improve life opportunities and health.
But our findings reflect just one moment in time. So we need more research to better understand the systemic nature of the observed health disparities.
Health and social policy needs to account for these systemic issues and ultimately place greater attention on how community-level attitudes can shape the health of Indigenous Australians.
Karinna Saxby has previously received funding from the Department of Health and Aged Care.
Luke Burchill draws strength and pride from his Yorta Yorta, Dja Dja Wurrung, and English Australian heritage. He co-leads Darak for the Australian Stroke Alliance, which embeds Indigenous governance in Indigenous health research. In 2021, he played a leading role in Australian physicians voting in favour of Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, and Māori people, receiving constitutional recognition within the Royal Australasian College of Physicians. He receives funding from National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia and currently works as an adult congenital heart disease specialist at Mayo Clinic.
Yuting Zhang receives funding from the Australian Research Council (future fellowship project ID FT200100630), Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the Victorian Department of Health, and National Health and Medical Research Council. In the past, Professor Zhang has received funding from several US institutes including the US National Institutes of Health, Commonwealth fund, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Zoe Aitken receives funding from the Australian Research Council (Early Career Industry Fellowship IE230100561), the National Health and Medical Research Council (2010290), the Medical Research Future Fund (2024940 and 2022600), and Suicide Prevention Australia. She has previously received funding from the Department of Social Services and the Department of Health and Aged Care.
INVESTIGATIVE REPORT:By Aubrey Belford of the OCCRP
High in the forested mountains of Papua New Guinea’s Bougainville Island lies an abandoned, kilometer-wide crater cut deep into the earth.
Formerly one of the world’s largest gold and copper mines, the open pit now serves as an unsightly monument to the environmental and social chaos that underground riches can create.
Run for years by a subsidiary of Anglo-Australian giant Rio Tinto, the Panguna mine earned millions for Papua New Guinea (PNG) and helped bankroll its newfound independence. But it also poured waste into local waterways and fuelled anger among locals who felt robbed of the profits.
When an armed uprising ultimately shuttered the mine in 1989, the impoverished island was left reeling.
Nearly three decades later, in late 2022, human rights activists, the local government, and the mine’s former operators joined forces to produce a definitive assessment of the mine’s toxic legacy.
Their report, due to be released later this month, will become the basis for negotiations aimed at getting the mining companies to finally clean up the mess and compensate affected communities.
But its supporters now worry their efforts will be undermined by a class-action lawsuit launched in May against the mine’s erstwhile operators. The legal effort is being championed by former rebel leaders — and backed by anonymous offshore investors who stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars if it succeeds.
Worldwide litigation boom The lawsuit is part of a worldwide boom in litigation financing that seeks to take multinational companies to task for ecological or social damage while potentially reaping a fortune for lawyers and funders.
Critics in Bougainville worry the lawsuit will reopen old wounds at a time when the island is making a push to break free of Papua New Guinea and become the world’s newest sovereign nation. Many Bougainvilleans are hoping to reopen the mine, using its wealth to fund their own independence this time around.
The region’s government and many local leaders believe the class action could put the mine’s revival at risk. There are also concerns the lawsuit would leave many Bougainvilleans empty handed, while the anonymous foreign investors would walk away with a significant share of the payout.
Unlike the official assessment, which seeks to identify everyone who needs to be compensated, the class action will only share its winnings — which could potentially be in the billions of dollars — with the locals who have signed on. Others will get nothing.
“There’s already fragmentation in the community and families are already divided,” said Theonila Roka Matbob, who represents the area around Panguna in the local Parliament and has helped lead the government-backed assessment process as a minister in the Autonomous Bougainville government.
She speaks from personal experience. The chief litigant in the class-action lawsuit, Martin Miriori, is her uncle. The two are no longer on speaking terms.
A losing deal Gouged from Bougainville’s lush volcanic heart, the Panguna mine in its heyday supplied as much as 45 percent of PNG’s export revenue, providing it with the financial means to achieve independence from Australia in 1975.
The windfall, however, did not extend to Bougainvilleans themselves. Ethnically and culturally distinct from the rest of PNG’s population, they saw Panguna as a symbol of external domination.
The mine delivered only a miserly 2-percent share of its profits to their island — along with years of environmental havoc.
Locals walk by buildings left abandoned by a subsidiary of Rio Tinto at the Panguna mine site. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford
During the 17 years of Panguna’s operation — from 1972 to 1989 — over a billion metric tons of toxic mine waste and electric blue copper runoff flooded rivers that flowed downstream towards communities of subsistence farmers. The result was poisoned drinking water, infertile land, and children who were drowned or injured trying to cross engorged waterways.
In 1989, enraged Bougainville locals launched an armed rebellion against the PNG government. The mine was shut down, closing off a vital source of revenue for the national government in Port Moresby.
A brutal civil war raged on for nearly a decade, leaving more than 15,000 people dead, while a naval blockade by PNG’s military obliterated the island’s economy.
A peace deal in 2000 granted Bougainville substantial autonomy. But nearly a quarter-century later, the legacy of Panguna and the war it provoked is still deeply felt.
Few paved roads, bridges There are few paved roads and bridges in the island’s interior. Residents earn a modest living through cocoa and coconut farming, or by unregulated artisanal mining in and around the abandoned Panguna crater.
Rivers polluted by years of runoff are still an otherworldly shade of milky blue.
At least 300,000 people are estimated to live on Bougainville, including as many as 15,000 who live downstream of the mine. Of those, some 4500 have joined Miriori — Roka’s estranged uncle and a tribal leader whose brother, Joseph Kabui, served as the first president of autonomous Bougainville — in seeking restitution through the class-action suit.
“We’ve got to make people happy,” Miriori said. “They’ve lost their land forever, environment forever. Their hunting grounds. Their spiritual, sacred grounds.”
Martin Miriori, the primary litigant in the class action lawsuit. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford
‘Alert to opportunities’ Miriori took many by surprise when he became the public face of the suit filed in PNG’s National Court in May against Rio Tinto and its former local subsidiary, Bougainville Copper Limited.
While the tribal leader and former rebel is a well-known figure in Bougainville, the funders of the lawsuit are not. They have managed to keep their identities secret in part because the company behind the suit, Panguna Mine Action LLC, is registered on Nevis, a small Caribbean island that does not require companies to publicly disclose their shareholders and directors.
Miriori declined to comment on who was behind the company, saying, “I will not tell you where the funding is based … you can source that from our people down there [in Australia].”
James Sing, an Australian based in New York, is Panguna Mine Action’s chief public representative. He initially agreed to an interview, but later referred reporters back to a London-based public relations agency, Sans Frontières Associates.
The agency declined to reveal Panguna Mine Action’s investors.
Litigation funding documents obtained by OCCRP, however, shed some light on the history of the case. The documents show that Panguna Mine Action began to investigate the possibility of a class-action suit as early as July 2021.
The Bougainvillean claimants, led by Miriori, were formally brought into an agreement with the company and its Australian and PNG lawyers in November 2022. The suit was publicly announced this May.
Handsome profit The lawsuit’s investors stand to profit handsomely from any eventual settlement: Panguna Mine Action is poised to receive a cut of 20 to 40 percent of any payout resulting from the suit, with the percentage increasing the longer the process takes, the funding documents show.
In interviews and statements, both Miriori and Panguna Mine Action have put the potential value of any award in the billions of dollars.
The lawsuit’s financiers defend their substantial share of the potential benefits as standard practice.
“The costs of launching and running the class action against a global miner are significant, and almost certainly could not be met from within Bougainville without funding from an external party,” the company said in its statement.
Panguna Mine Action added it would bear sole responsibility for costs if the lawsuit is unsuccessful.
According to Michael Russell, a Sydney-based class action defence lawyer, such funding arrangements are typical in the burgeoning world of litigation finance, where investors seek out cases that promote virtuous social causes while offering huge potential payoffs.
A similar case is unfolding in Latin America, where more than 720,000 Brazilians are seeking $46.5 billion as part of a gargantuan class action against mining giant BHP and its local subsidiary for their role in a 2015 dam collapse.
In such cases, funders can justify walking away with significant cuts of any winnings because of the substantial risk they face of losing their investment if a case fails, Russell said.
Such cases were rarely initiated at the grassroots level by the victims themselves, he added.
“Most of the time, either the plaintiff firms or the funders will be the catalyst for a claim,” he said. “They are very alert to opportunities.”
Rival restitution plans Government officials including Miriori’s niece, Roka, say the class-action case, which is due to hold opening arguments in October, threatens to derail the ongoing impact assessment aimed at calculating the full cost of the mine’s environmental impact and developing recommendations for addressing the damage.
The assessment, which counts community members among its stakeholders and bills itself as an independent review, is supported by Australia’s Human Rights Law Centre, which has hailed the project as “an important step” towards rectifying the mine’s devastating impact on thousands of Bougainvilleans.
However, while Rio Tinto and Bougainville Copper are both funding the project, they have not yet committed to paying for any compensation or cleanup. Roka said she was concerned the lawsuit could reduce the company’s willingness to engage with the process, since it could view the assessment as a tool that could be used against them in the courtroom.
Bougainville President Ishmael Toroama backs the impact assessment and has lambasted the class action suit as the work of “faceless investors . . . taking advantage of vulnerable groups.” (His office did not respond to an interview request.)
He also expressed concern that the court proceedings threaten to “disrupt” his government’s efforts to reopen the mine, which still holds an estimated $60 billion in untapped deposits.
Bougainville’s leaders see the mine as key to securing the island’s economic future as it sets out to form an independent state — a dream that drew overwhelming public support in a 2019 referendum.
Exploration licence Earlier this year Toroama’s government granted Bougainville Copper a five-year exploration licence for the Panguna site.
The lack of media and polling in Bougainville make it hard to measure public opinion on plans to reactivate the mine, but many locals appear to support reopening it under local control as an essential tool for achieving independence.
Bougainville Copper’s brand is still toxically associated with Rio Tinto and its past abuses, despite the fact that the international mining giant gave away its majority stake for no money in 2016.
The publicly traded company is now majority co-owned by the governments of PNG and Bougainville, and Port Moresby has pledged to hand over all its shares to the autonomous region in the near future.
Panguna Mine Action acknowledges that its effort could stand in the way of the mine’s reopening — but the company says that is a good thing.
“It is our understanding that the people of Bougainville do not wish mining to be recommenced under any circumstances or, alternatively, unless Rio Tinto and Bougainville Copper acknowledge the past, pay compensation and remediate the rivers and surrounding valley,” the company said in a statement.
Rio Tinto declined to comment. Mel Togolo, the chairman of Bougainville Copper, told OCCRP that the lawsuit was the work of “a foreign funder who no doubt is seeking a return on an investment.”
View of the tailings located downstream of the Panguna mine. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford
View of the tailings located downstream of the Panguna mine.Photo: OCCRP / Aubrey Belford
‘Only those who have signed will benefit’ The fight over Panguna adds even more uncertainty to long-running anxiety over Bougainville’s future.
With global copper prices soaring on high demand for renewable energy and electric vehicles, the Panguna mine would be an attractive prize for both Western mining companies and firms from China, which is dramatically expanding its influence in the South Pacific.
Since a future Bougainvillean state would be economically dependent on the mine’s revenue, some have raised concerns that control of the mine could become a proxy battle for geopolitical influence in the broader region.
For his part, Miriori expressed little concern that a multibillion-dollar payout might stir resentment by reaching only a fraction of the people affected by the mine’s environmental destruction.
“Only those who signed will benefit,” he said, adding that the opportunity was made “very clear to people” through awareness campaigns.
“Those who have not signed, it’s their freedom of choice.”
An aerial view of the abandoned Panguna mine pit. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford
Among those who did not sign is Wendy Bowara, 48, who lives in Dapera, a bleak settlement built on a hill of mine waste. Bowara said she is looking to the government-backed assessment, not the lawsuit, to deliver compensation and clean up Panguna’s toxic legacy.
“We are living on top of chemicals,” she said. “Copper concentration is high. I don’t know if the food is good to eat or if it’s healthy to drink the water.”
But while it may seem odd given her grim surroundings, Borawa says she strongly supports reopening the mine.
“It funded the independence of Papua New Guinea,” Bowara said. “Why can’t we use it to fund our own independence?”
Allan Gioni contributed reporting.
Aubrey Belford is the Pacific editor for the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting project (OCCRP). Republished with permission.
The recent failure of a deal to deliver hydrogen-powered trucks to New Zealand, and the removal of a NZ$100 million government rebate scheme for green hydrogen users in the 2024 budget, make a transition to the much-lauded energy technology increasingly less certain.
The government had invested $6.5 million for the purchase of up to 25 heavy freight hydrogen trucks as part of a wider energy strategy due by the end of the year. But the US company Hyzon, which makes hydrogen fuel-cell trucks and had been modifying diesel trucks to use hydrogen, pulled out at short notice.
Nonetheless, interest in hydrogen for future transport and energy systems has soared globally, and New Zealand is no exception. But we argue that critical voices have been largely missing from the debate here.
In New Zealand, green hydrogen (which is produced with electricity from renewable sources) has attracted government support of $186.3 million from 2017 to 2023. This provided funding for a hydrogen refuelling network, vehicle conversions and purchases, research, and the establishment of the New Zealand Hydrogen Council (now Hydrogen New Zealand).
Proponents of green hydrogen argue it is essential for fuelling economic sectors they believe will be hard to decarbonise by direct electrification. As well as heavy road transport, this includes shipping and fertiliser production.
But opinions differ considerably on which sectors to focus on, and whether hydrogen is the best choice.
Government funding supported the development of a hydrogen refuelling network such as Hiringa Energy’s $7 million station in Palmerston North. Robert McLachlan, CC BY-SA
Evolution of the narrative
In the wake of the previous government’s ban on new offshore oil and gas exploration, the 2019 H2 Taranaki roadmap outlined a vision for the region as a leader in hydrogen production.
Former energy minister Megan Woods reinforced this, indicating her government would be interested in any associated economic opportunities. This largely positive narrative continued in two further government reports.
Hydrogen is poised to fulfil its potential as a clean alternative to hydrocarbons in the global pursuit of decarbonisation to address climate change.
Development of green hydrogen was largely implicit in the second report, the Interim Hydrogen Roadmap, which aimed to:
optimise the potential for green hydrogen to contribute to New Zealand’s emissions reductions, economic development, and energy sector to the extent compatible with our broader electrification goals.
We analysed these reports using a content analysis approach focused on identifying how often strengths, weaknesses, opportunities or threats are mentioned. This revealed the words “opportunities” and “challenges” were used frequently, while “weaknesses” and “threats” were absent.
The use of “strengths” was confined to perceived advantages of New Zealand as a location for hydrogen production. Where difficulties were identified, they were framed as challenges rather than weaknesses.
This optimistic tone is generally reflected in descriptions of several government-funded projects, including green hydrogen research at GNS Science, and international collaborations such as the German-NZ Green Hydrogen alliance.
Media reports have typically reflected the enthusiastic narrative. Of 83 articles on green hydrogen published in New Zealand between 2019 and 2023, only 15 (18%) contained any critical analysis.
Critical voices need to be heard
While some experts have voiced serious concerns about green hydrogen, this has not featured prominently in the debate in New Zealand.
For example, research by University of Cambridge engineering expert David Cebon shows battery electric vehicles are superior to hydrogen vehicles for heavy transport.
The emergence of fast (five minutes or less) automated and manual battery-swap systems, which provide an alternative to high-powered fast-charging systems, supports this point.
Since 2000, application after application of hydrogen has found it to be inefficient, ineffective and expensive compared to obvious alternatives.
A German rail company which launched the world’s first hydrogen line last year has since opted for cheaper all-electric trains. Rising costs have also forced one Austrian state to abandon plans to introduce hydrogen buses.
Recent research suggests developments in battery-run and fast-charging electric trucks could soon make hydrogen fuel cells superfluous in road transport in most cases.
UK energy analyst Michael Liebreich has quantified the immense scale, significant impracticalities, enormous subsidies and costs associated with green hydrogen.
Liebreich’s “hydrogen ladder” ranks both actual and potential uses. It provides an evidence-informed guide on where to best focus attention and resources. Based on this, the previous government’s funding for the manufacture of green fertiliser (for which hydrogen is an input) was a sensible allocation.
The hydrogen ladder provides a guide on where to focus attention for the use of hydrogen. Michael Liebreich, CC BY-SA
The previous government’s commitment to finalise New Zealand’s hydrogen strategy, and to deliver an overall energy strategy, remains in place. But we need a more nuanced perspective.
This must start with an acknowledgement that hydrogen is an energy carrier (which has to be produced from other sources of energy), and not an energy resource like solar radiation, wind or hydro.
We need an approach that can continue to adapt to changes in “hard to abate” sectors of the energy system. Critiques of green hydrogen need to enter the discussion if we are to make informed choices.
Government policy on this topic must be informed by independent advice free from commercial interests. A new green hydrogen narrative will enable us to focus our limited resources on applications with the best chance of delivering on New Zealand’s decarbonisation and sustainability aspirations.
The authors are grateful to Paul Callister for his helpful comments and suggestions.
Ian Mason is affiliated with the NZ Offshore Wind Working Group.
Robert McLachlan 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.
Globally, many Indigenous people want to help protect their traditional lands and waters, drawing on knowledge stretching back millenia. Indigenous people have an obligation to look after species and habitat which are culturally important to them.
But how can Indigenous voices be supported to make land management decisions? And how do we ensure the process is Indigenous-led and culturally safe? New research by myself and colleagues can help.
We engaged Indigenous people from Bundjalung Country on Australia’s east coast. In a process they led, the Bundjalung people identified which culturally significant species they considered priorities for “collaborative management” – that is, management built on mutual respect for both Western science and Indigenous knowledge systems.
We hope this process might be used elsewhere, to give Indigenous people a genuine say in decisions about managing Country.
‘They hold the stories’
Bundjalung Country stretches from Grafton in northern New South Wales to the Logan River in Queensland and inland to Warwick.
The term Country describes the lands, water and seas to which Indigenous people are connected. Country contains complex ideas about lore, custom, language, spiritual belief, culture, material sustenance, family and identity.
For Indigenous Australians, some plants, animals and habitats hold special cultural significance. This may be, for example, because they are used in ceremonies, they feature in Creation stories or are used as a traditional food source.
The importance of this concept was was summed up during our project by Bundjalung man Oliver Costello, who said:
[Culturally significant entities] are the teachers of Country, they hold the stories and are the indicators for the health of Country. If you look after Country, it will look after you.
Our study set out to establish a process by which Indigenous people can come together to identify culturally significant species. The list of priority species would then be used to inform collaborative land and sea management with governments, conservation groups and others.
The process should be led by Indigenous people themselves, and aligned with their obligations and values.
We partnered with the Bundjalung-owned Jagun Alliance. This was crucial to ensuring the project was conducted in a culturally safe manner and developed with an Indigenous lens.
Our project adhered to cultural protocols and protected Indigenous cultural and intellectual property at all times.
What we did
First, we convened a meeting of five non-Bundjalung Indigenous experts with extensive experience in Indigenous-led work biodiversity work.
They identified six objectives for decision-making around culturally significant species. The objectives involved not just environmental values, but also social, spiritual, economic and cultural values.
We hosted several on-Country workshops with Bundjalung people and distributed an online survey, to determine which species might be prioritised for collaborative management. Of the responses we received, 32 yielded usable data.
The culturally significant plant and animal species identified as the top priority by Bundjalung respondents were:
koalas
goannas
platypuses
echidnas
wedge-tailed eagles
coastal emus
pipis
long-necked turtles.
Participants were also asked which habitats were most important for collaborative management. Some 70% identified wetlands, followed by grasslands and big scrub (a mosaic of lowland rainforest, swamp forest and wet eucalypt forest extensively cleared by colonists).
Once the results were in, Bundjalung knowledge-holders identified threats to these species, as follows:
the lack of Bundjalung decision-making in land management actions
lack of cultural burns
impacts on Country such as dams, roads, housing and farming
invasive species
climate change.
The Bundjalung also identified management actions which should be integrated into Western management under a collaborative approach:
community gathering on Country, such as holding ceremonies and harvesting traditional resources
regular cultural burns
releasing water into catchments to support cultural objectives
active management of cultural sites and pathways.
Unlike the current threatened species approach, which largely manages only parts of the problem, the actions identified by Bundjalung people were holistic and landscape-wide. This means these actions can benefit many species and habitats.
Bundjalung people were then invited to a meeting to share findings from the work. This provided an opportunity to heal from past trauma over a shared vision for Country.
Community gatherings were a key management action identified in the study. Pictured: Bundjalung people on Country. Teagan Goolmeer
Spotlight on the koala
In Bundjalung language, the koala is known as the boorabee.
The boorabee is the only culturally significant species identified by Bundjalung people with an active “national recovery plan”. This plan guides and coordinates conservation efforts by governments and others.
The koala recovery plan calls for Indigenous-led action, which offers Bundjalung people an avenue for collaborative management. Likewise, many management actions proposed by the Bundjalung are clearly aligned with the plan.
The koala and coastal emu are listed as threatened species under various pieces of state and federal legislation. However, a species need not be imperilled to be central to Indigenous-led management.
Where to now?
Our process helped a group of Bundjalung people agree on their conservation priorities, and how to act on them.
It’s important to note, however, that the Bundjalung community consists of ten clans – it is not a homogeneous group. As such, our findings may not be supported by all Bundjalung people.
We hope our findings help policymakers understand what Indigenous-led action could look like, if integrated into biodiversity management. The structured process we undertook may benefit other groups – although applied elsewhere, it may involve different objectives, modes of engagement and results.
Indigenous Australians are ready to sit at decision-making tables to improve the management of Country. They intimately understand our precious environment – and their contribution could be transformative.
Teagan Goolmeer receives funding from the Resilient Landscapes Hub of NESP. She is affiliated with Biodiversity Council and the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karinna Saxby, Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne
Community-level opposition to marriage equality and the stress that came with it is still making some Australians in same-sex relationships sick years after the vote, our study suggests.
In research published today in the American Journal of Public Health, we show people in same-sex relationships living in areas more strongly opposed to marriage equality had higher rates of chronic health problems after the vote compared to those living in areas with less opposition.
There were, for example, more long-term heart, respiratory and mental health conditions in people in same-sex relationships in areas with the most opposition to marriage equality.
Our study is the first to show the link between opposition to marriage equality and health in this way.
It’s also a reminder of how underlying community attitudes can magnify stigma, which can have long-term consequences for people’s health.
What we did
We used two main sets of data in our study. One was from the 2017 marriage equality postal vote, which gave us a measure of the opposition to same-sex marriage in each electorate. Although we couldn’t see how individuals voted, the data gave us a percentage “no” vote per electorate.
The other data came from the 2021 census, the first year Australians were asked about their long-term health conditions, such as asthma, heart disease, and mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety. The census data covered the health of Australians in same-sex and different-sex relationships.
We then mapped the two to show the link between opposition to marriage equality and people’s health four years after the vote.
We looked at the health of Australians in same-sex relationships four years after the marriage equality debate. JLco Julia Amaral/Shutterstock
What we found
As community-level opposition to marriage equality increased, long-term health conditions were more common among Australians in same-sex relationships compared with those in different-sex relationships.
In areas with the lowest opposition to marriage equality (about a 13-26% “no” vote), individuals in same-sex relationships had a 56% higher odds of reporting any long-term health condition compared to individuals in different-sex relationships.
But in the areas with highest opposition (about a 34-56% “no” vote), this increased to 63%.
The health of young people, men, and people living in areas with more socioeconomic disadvantage was particularly affected. These same-sex couples were among those with higher rates of mental health, respiratory and heart-related conditions. All of these have been stronglylinked to stress.
These effects remained even after controlling for other factors that could impact health, such as age, income and education.
This suggests community-level attitudes – in this case votes against marriage equality – are likely to represent stigma towards sexual minorities.
How does stigma affect health?
International studies show sexual minorities living in more stigmatising environments are more likely to experience stressors due to their sexual orientation. This includes harassment or bullying.
In more stigmatising environments, sexual minorities are also more likely to turn to risky behaviour, such as smoking and drinking to help “cope” with these stressors. The larger effects we see for lung, mental health and other stress-related conditions supports this theory.
Previous research has shown lesbian, gay and bisexual Australians living in areas with higher opposition to marriage equality use less preventive and primary health care (such as seeing a GP) than their counterparts living in areas with less opposition.
So overall, we can say delayed access to preventative health care and heightened social stressors could lead to deterioration of health and eventually the development of long-term conditions.
Such chronic conditions can be costly for the health system. This means the health disparities we’ve highlighted are not only a human rights issue, but also an economic one.
What can we do?
Unfortunately, discrimination against sexual minorities remains widespread in Australia.
For instance, religious organisations can still discriminate against LGBTQ+ students and staff. Conversion practices, which try to change or suppress someone’s sexuality or gender identity are still legal in some states and territories.
Structural discrimination could also impact access to health care for sexual minorities. For example, in more stigmatising regions, sexual minorities may be less willing to disclose their sexual orientation to health care providers due to fear of discrimination.
Finding inclusive health care might also be more difficult in regions with higher stigma, and harder still in areas with few health care options.
So we need to urgently invest in inclusive and responsive health care. The federal government has committed to a ten-year action plan for LGBTQ+ health and wellbeing. But we also need funding for LGBTQ+ community-controlled health organisations. These could help support sexual minorities to access necessary and valuable culturally appropriate health care.
In particular, our research suggest resources should be targeted to areas with higher opposition to marriage equality and young people living in more socioeconomically disadvantaged regions.
We need more data
Our research only explores health inequities for Australians in same-sex relationships. We cannot draw any conclusions about the health of non-partnered sexual minorities nor any effects among the broader LGBTQ+ community. We just don’t have reliable, comprehensive data.
Better data would allow us to pinpoint which policies and interventions can reduce stigma and, in turn, reduce the health inequalities sexual minorities in Australia face.
We would like to thank Ian Down from LGBTIQ+ Health Australia for his feedback on this article.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, anonymous and free peer support is available through QLife (ph: 1800 184 527). A list of services and supports is also available via LGBTIQ+ Health Australia.
Karinna Saxby has previously received funding from the Department of Health and Aged Care.
Yuting Zhang has received funding from the Australian Research Council (future fellowship project ID FT200100630), Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the Victorian Department of Health, and National Health and Medical Research Council. In the past, Professor Zhang has received funding from several US institutes including the US National Institutes of Health, Commonwealth fund, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Zoe Aitken receives funding from the Australian Research Council (Early Career Industry Fellowship IE230100561), the National Health and Medical Research Council (2010290), the Medical Research Future Fund (2024940 and 2022600), and Suicide Prevention Australia. She has previously received funding from the Department of Social Services and the Department of Health and Aged Care.
New Zealand Post and Kiwibank shop at The Palms shopping centre in Shirley, Christchurch. Image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martien Lubberink, Associate Professor of Accounting and Capital, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington.
To sell, or not to sell – that is the question various governments have asked since Kiwibank was established in 2002. Now it’s the turn of the current National-led coalition to examine the bank’s state ownership.
Ministers have asked Kiwibank’s board to explore avenues for the bank’s expansion, potentially including private sector or Crown entity investment.
This comes just two years after the previous Labour government spent NZ$2.1 billion to secure complete ownership of Kiwibank, and is part of the coalition’s drive for productivity, growth and public sector efficiency.
The latest attempt to help the bank prosper while staying fully New Zealand-owned should also be seen in the context of the recent Commerce Commission draft report on banking services, which identifies Kiwibank as a market disruptor.
If properly capitalised, the report says, Kiwibank should make New Zealand banking more competitive. Supporters of partial privatisation or publicly listing a proportion of Kiwibank shares agree. They also argue it would boost the stock market and funnel profits back to New Zealanders.
The government has not proposed anything specific yet. But any plans to part-privatise Kiwibank so soon after the state effectively bailed it out deserve close scrutiny. Such a move could well do more harm than good, for four main reasons.
1. Banking concentration is normal
New Zealand’s historical banking concentration and the market domination of four large Australian-owned banks is not going to change any time soon.
But a concentrated banking sector is not at all bad, or even abnormal, and occurs in many countries. Three banks in the Netherlands, for example, currently own 84% of total banking assets. The smallest, ABN AMRO, is larger than all of New Zealand’s banks combined.
Despite this, the Dutch are less vocal about lack of competition and associated high profit margins. There is an acceptance, especially among European Union bank regulators, that the alternative of more small banks is not a panacea.
Small banks in EU countries such as Spain and the Netherlands have failed more often than large ones. Moreover, innovation in banking and finance comes mainly from large banks.
Relative scale: the smallest of the Netherlands’ three big banks, ABN AMRO, is larger than all NZ banks combined. Getty Images
2. Capital investment and growth
The notion that more capital will foster growth puts the cart before the horse. As fans of TV investment shows Shark Tank or Dragons’ Den will know, only firms with a compelling value proposition attract funding.
Kiwibank’s track record leaves something to be desired. For example, the press release accompanying its 2023 results listed the introduction of Apple Pay as an important highlight. Other banks began offering this service in 2016.
Furthermore, at 7.5%, the bank’s return on equity is the lowest of the largest six banks. And its core capital ratio has not increased since 2018, making it harder to meet increasing Reserve Bank capital requirements.
After a minor capital injection of $225 million last year, Kiwibank chief executive Steve Jurkovich said the bank’s loan book could significantly increase. According to the Reserve Bank’s financial strength dashboard, however, the value of Kiwibank’s net loans and advances grew by 2.7% and 1.8% respectively in the quarters ending December 2023 and March 2024.
That was not significantly different from growth in previous quarters going back to 2018, which averaged 2.3%. In other words, Kiwibank’s own experience shows flaws in the capital-before-growth narrative.
3. Foreign ownership by stealth
In an ideal world – with deep and liquid capital markets, and a large, growing and productive economy – having a 100% Kiwi-owned contender bank would work.
In reality, New Zealand lacks these features. In fact, Kiwibank’s ownership restrictions – which preclude floating or selling shares directly – have seen previous owners surrender their holdings to the government.
Part-privatisation would therefore require shares to be sold at a deep discount. And, as the sale of Kiwi Wealth to Fisher Funds in 2022 suggests, this may ultimately be financed by foreign private equity.
This could be achieved by way of a leveraged buyout, where a foreign private equity firm lends large sums of money to, say, a KiwiSaver fund to buy shares. Technically, the KiwiSaver fund would be the 100% New Zealand-owned firm holding the Kiwibank shares. But that ownership would be largely in name only.
The New Zealand owner would pay hefty interest expenses to the private equity firm. And it’s likely the private equity firm would want to tear Kiwibank apart to cut costs and improve efficiency.
By comparison, perhaps the current arrangement – four dominant banks owned by parent banks in a geographically and culturally close country – is not that bad.
4. Unintended consequences
Finally, there is the problem of reputation and moral hazard. Investors would be sceptical if Kiwibank were to be partly privatised, as history shows its ownership seems to depend on the government of the day.
Given that uncertainty, investors might only buy shares sold at a deep discount, or if the shares offered a high return – the kind private equity firms require.
In turn, this could prompt the bank to engage in excessive risk taking, which creates the kind of disruption no one wants. Buyers may also want a guarantee they can put the shares back to the government if the bank fails to perform well.
Rather than rush to part-privatise, Kiwibank should focus on strengthening its capital base, improving performance, and establishing a clear track record of growth and innovation.
Only then should any change in ownership be considered. The path to a more competitive banking sector in New Zealand requires patience, strategic planning and a realistic assessment of market conditions, not hasty structural changes.
Martien Lubberink 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Phillips, Associate Professor, POLIS@ANU Centre for Social Policy Research, Australian National University
Pormezz/Shutterstock
Australia’s top marginal tax rate is 47% (45% plus Medicare levy), but some of us face a so-called effective marginal tax rate that’s much higher.
Effective rates include everything that is lost as a result of earning more, including personal income tax, government benefits and sometimes childcare costs and student loan repayments.
These rates can be high, resulting in so-called poverty traps in which people are reluctant to earn more because they will lose most of it.
The government’s Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce reported last year that for second earners in a two-child couple moving from three days’ employment per week to four or five, the rates were as high as 65% and 110% of the extra dollars they earned.
But it’s important to know how common these situations are.
I set out to find out. I used the Australian National University’s microsimulation model of taxes and welfare payments, PolicyMod and data about earnings, benefits and work arrangements as at December 2023.
Poverty traps are rare
The findings, just published in the Australian Journal of Social Issues, suggest very few of us face high effective marginal rates. Only 9% of Australians of traditional working age face rates exceeding 60%. Less than 1% face rates exceeding 80%.
The question I set out to answer was how much of an extra day’s pay would be kept (and how much would be lost) from an extra day’s work, taking into account tax, lost benefits, extra childcare costs and higher education contribution repayments.
In certain situations, the effective marginal tax rates can be high. For a privately renting single parent with one child in long day care, they approach 60%.
But these situations aren’t common.
The bulk of working-age Australians (more than half) face effective marginal tax rates of 20% to 40%. This means they keep 60% to 80% of what they earn from an extra day’s work.
About 15% of working-age Australians face effective marginal tax rates of less than 80%, meaning they would keep at least 80% of everything extra they earned from an extra day’s work. Many of them face an effective rate of zero.
Only 0.9% of the working-age population faces effective marginal rates of 80% or more. These people are more likely to be women than men facing the loss of various welfare payments and potentially child care costs as they increase their working hours.
I also calculated effective marginal tax rates using a different definition: the loss from earning one extra dollar rather than working one extra day. Even fewer working-age Australians turned out to face high effective marginal rates.
What matters most for most people (those in all but the lowest-earning 20% of households) is their income tax rate.
For those in the lowest-earning 20% of households what matters most is lost government allowances such as JobSeeker.
Lost family payments and pensions, childcare costs and student loan payments turn out to matter little for most households.
Even for families with children who are considering an extra day for paid employment, lost family payments and childcare costs turn out to be dwarfed by tax.
Across all Australians of working age, the average effective marginal rate comes in at 36%. This means the average working-age Australian keeps 64% of his or her earnings from an extra day’s work.
About 29% of the 36% comes from personal income tax. The rest comes from lost JobSeeker and other allowances (2.5%), family payments (1.9%), higher education repayments (1.2%), childcare 0.9% and pensions (0.7%).
Total effective rates low
Why are effective marginal tax rates so low? And why do things other than tax turn out to be of only minor importance?
Partly it is because of Australia’s tightly targeted welfare system. While it is true that targeting adds to the marginal tax rate for people facing the withdrawal of payments, withdrawals generally operate across a small income range, meaning not many people are affected at any one time.
The childcare result might seem surprising (and is at odds with the report of the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce) but the July 2023 increase in the childcare subsidy cut the contribution of childcare to the effective marginal rate quite a bit.
While it might also seem surprising that men and women face similar average effective marginal rates, the result for men is driven by them typically earning more than women and facing higher tax rates. The result for women is driven by them being more likely to be a second earner returning to work.
Women with children in formal childcare who increase their working days tend to face moderately high effective marginal tax rates but these are typically below 60% and more likely to be 40% to 60%.
Another reason the modelling finds poverty traps are rare is that relatively few working-age Australians are on welfare payments. (Age pensioners get the pension but they are not of working age.) Even fewer Australians of working age are in the income range in which payments are withdrawn.
These findings don’t mean everything is rosy with Australia’s tax and welfare system. Parts of it are overly complex and some people miss out on payments who should not. And some of the payments – particularly JobSeeker and Youth Allowance – are too low and the loss of some payments is arguably too steep as private earnings increase.
But the good news is worth noting. Most of us keep most of the extra money we earn.
Ben Phillips 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Seyedali Mirjalili, Professor, Director of Centre for Artificial Intelligence Research and Optimisation, Torrens University Australia
In the world of artificial intelligence (AI), a battle is underway. On one side are companies that believe in keeping the datasets and algorithms behind their advanced software private and confidential. On the other are companies that believe in allowing the public to see what’s under the hood of their sophisticated AI models.
Think of this as the battle between open- and closed-source AI.
In recent weeks, Meta, the parent company of Facebook, took up the fight for open-source AI in a big way by releasing a new collection of large AI models. These include a model named Llama 3.1 405B, which Meta’s founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, says is “the first frontier-level open source AI model”.
For anyone who cares about a future in which everybody can access the benefits of AI, this is good news.
The danger of closed-source AI – and the promise of open-source AI
Closed-source AI refers to models, datasets and algorithms that are proprietary and kept confidential. Examples include ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini and Anthropic’s Claude.
Though anyone can use these products, there is no way to find out what dataset and source codes have been used to build the AI model or tool.
While this is a great way for companies to protect their intellectual property and their profits, it risks undermining public trust and accountability. Making AI technology closed-source also slows down innovation and makes a company or other users dependent on a single platform for their AI needs. This is because the platform that owns the model controls changes, licensing and updates.
There are a range of ethical frameworks that seek to improve the fairness, accountability, transparency, privacy and human oversight of AI. However, these principles are often not fully achieved with closed-source AI due to the inherent lack of transparency and external accountability associated with proprietary systems.
In the case of ChatGPT, its parent company, OpenAI, releases neither the dataset nor code of its latest AI tools to the public. This makes it impossible for regulators to audit it. And while access to the service is free, concerns remain about how users’ data are stored and used for retraining models.
By contrast, the code and dataset behind open-source AI models is available for everyone to see.
This fosters rapid development through community collaboration and enables the involvement of smaller organisations and even individuals in AI development. It also makes a huge difference for small and medium size enterprises as the cost of training large AI models is colossal.
Perhaps most importantly, open source AI allows for scrutiny and identification of potential biases and vulnerability.
However, open-source AI does create new risks and ethical concerns.
For example, quality control in open source products is usually low. As hackers can also access the code and data, the models are also more prone to cyberattacks and can be tailored and customised for malicious purposes, such as retraining the model with data from the dark web.
An open-source AI pioneer
Among all leading AI companies, Meta has emerged as a pioneer of open-source AI. With its new suite of AI models, it is doing what OpenAI promised to do when it launched in December 2015 – namely, advancing digital intelligence “in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole”, as OpenAI said back then.
Llama 3.1 405B is the largest open-source AI model in history. It is what’s known as a large language model, capable of generating human language text in multiple languages. It can be downloaded online but because of its huge size, users will need powerful hardware to run it.
While it does not outperform other models across all metrics, Llama 3.1 405B is considered highly competitive and does perform better than existing closed-source and commercial large language models in certain tasks, such as reasoning and coding tasks.
But the new model is not fully open, because Meta hasn’t released the huge data set used to train it. This is a significant “open” element that is currently missing.
Nonetheless, Meta’s Llama levels the playing field for researchers, small organisations and startups because it can be leveraged without the immense resources required to train large language models from scratch.
governance: regulatory and ethical frameworks to ensure AI technology is being developed and used responsibly and ethically
accessibility: affordable computing resources and user-friendly tools to ensure a fair landscape for developers and users
openness: datasets and algorithms to train and build AI tools should be open source to ensure transparency.
Achieving these three pillars is a shared responsibility for government, industry, academia and the public. The public can play a vital role by advocating for ethical policies in AI, staying informed about AI developments, using AI responsibly and supporting open-source AI initiatives.
But several questions remain about open-source AI. How can we balance protecting intellectual property and fostering innovation through open-source AI? How can we minimise ethical concerns around open-source AI? How can we safeguard open-source AI against potential misuse?
Properly addressing these questions will help us create a future where AI is an inclusive tool for all. Will we rise to the challenge and ensure AI serves the greater good? Or will we let it become another nasty tool for exclusion and control? The future is in our hands.
Seyedali Mirjalili 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.
With the rise in e-commerce, 161 billion parcels were delivered worldwide in 2022, doubling in just four years. In Australia, more households are shopping online than ever before. In 2023, 5.6 million households made a monthly online purchase. This implies millions of parcels are being shipped each month.
High-emitting diesel vans or trucks undertake almost all last-mile or doorstop parcel deliveries. In cities, these vehicles add to traffic congestion, parking pressures, carbon emissions and air pollution. So how can we reduce the environmental impact of all these deliveries?
Using low-emission vehicles, such as electric delivery vans powered by renewable energy sources, can certainly help. However, electric delivery vans and trucks are still uncommon. Their global sales share in 2023 was just under 5%. Increasing the numbers of vehicle chargers powered by renewable energy will also take time.
To complement the transition to cleaner vehicles, shorter-term solutions can include optimising the organisation of deliveries, as well as more novel ideas. One of these ideas is crowdshipping.
The concept applies crowdsourcing to delivery services. Members of the public elect to deliver parcels in the course of their journeys. In this way, crowdshipping integrates passenger and freight transport to streamline movement in cities.
Crowdshipping is a form of crowdsourcing applied to delivery services.
How does crowdshipping work?
Crowdshipping taps into “the crowd” to fulfil parcel deliveries. Instead of having dedicated couriers, we can match people with parcels bound for destinations close to where they are already headed, with minimal detours.
The concept leverages existing transport capacity. “Crowdshippers” are already travelling privately in their own vehicles or by public transport, or even cycling or walking. Through a service-matching platform, such as Roadie or DoorDash, crowdshippers can be paid for taking a parcel along their way.
In cities with good public transport and high levels of use, passengers can hand-carry small parcels across the network. Automated parcel lockers installed at stations can serve as mini distribution centres, where passengers pick up and drop off parcels.
Automated lockers at stations could serve as mini distribution centres for parcels carried by passengers. Kecko/Flickr, CC BY
Algorithms were developed to match a selection of parcels to available passengers, considering their origins and destinations. The simulation used real-world datasets on daily parcel deliveries from the Singapore road network and public transport journeys.
The simulation showed crowdshipping can have multiple benefits. By outsourcing only 11% of parcel deliveries to crowdshippers riding public buses, an e-commerce carrier will require fewer delivery vehicles. Delivery vehicle distances fall by 20%, with matching cuts in emissions.
And even after paying crowdshippers, the carrier will enjoy cost savings.
Most passengers polled said they were willing to serve as crowdshippers for a fee. RossHelen/Shutterstock
What practical obstacles must be overcome?
There are several practical considerations.
For a start, would passengers be willing to deliver parcels? A survey of potential crowdshippers had a positive response.
Motivated by being able to earn some income while travelling, most passengers polled said they were willing to serve as crowdshippers. They were especially keen if paid one to two times their transport fare.
Next, might transporting parcels on public transport cause extra congestion or delay during peak-hour commutes? We should avoid adding more loads on crowded buses or trains.
We explored limiting crowdshipping to off-peak hours and found good availability of potential crowdshippers to deliver parcels. Many public transport systems tend to have excess capacity at these times, so making use of this to move parcels is feasible.
Finally, there’s a need to assure parcel shippers, carriers and receivers that the service is reliable. The service platform should be designed to develop and maintain accountability and trust among users. The system would have to be able to verify identity and track parcel status.
Crowdshipping using public transport would be ideal for cities with good public transport networks and high passenger numbers. Similar to outsourcing to a logistics provider, carriers can explore using people movements to complement their regular deliveries.
Cities need new solutions to make urban mobility sustainable. Integrating passenger and freight transport could make city logistics operations more efficient. By carrying out data-driven transport modelling and simulation, we can explore ideas such as crowdshipping, develop trials to test them and bring them closer to realisation.
This article draws on research conducted with Dr Meijing Zhang from Singapore University of Technology and Design.
Lynette Cheah receives funding from the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. She previously received funding from the Singapore National Research Foundation, Ministry of National Development, Land Transport Authority, Public Transport Council, Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART), and Daimler Mobility.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jua Cilliers, Head of School of Built Environment, Professor of Urban Planning, University of Technology Sydney
It’s been a rainy winter in many parts of Australia, wreaking havoc on kids’ sporting competitions. As mums, it has been frustrating to see so many of our kids’ sport matches (and training sessions) cancelled because of waterlogged grounds.
When footy, rugby, league tag, soccer or netball get cancelled because of ground closures, our kids miss out on valuable exercise and growth opportunities. It means less time to develop sport skills, practise teamwork, boost resilience and mental health, engage with positive role models and play with friends. It often means more time on the couch, and parents lamenting the money they spent on registration fees and sports uniforms.
With climate change predicted to bring more intense rainfall events, this situation isn’t going away. The good news is a growing body of research offers insights into how we can address this problem through smarter urban design and green infrastructure.
The term “green infrastructure” can mean many things but in this context it refers to nature-based infrastructure we can build to better filter and absorb rainwater.
The fundamental principle is that concrete doesn’t absorb water. Rain that falls on it just gets channelled to stormwater drains (which can quickly overflow), or to the nearest bit of green space. Often, that’s the local sporting field.
The solution? Create more soil-based or nature-based spaces that allow for rainwater to be absorbed into the earth well before it gets to the local sports grounds.
planting and preserving more street trees, which help absorb rainwater through their roots
using less concrete in our urban spaces
rain gardens, which are specially designed gardens that can rapidly absorb rainfall during wet weather
special vegetated channels called swales, which absorb rainwater.
Green infrastructure doesn’t just reduce flooding. It can also make our urban spaces more sustainable, cut urban heat, lower noise pollution and even reduce people’s stress.
Some cities and suburbs have made great strides in installing and tending to green infrastructure.
But why aren’t these principles of urban design more widely implemented?
Too often, governments do not advocate for investment in green infrastructure. According to the World Economic Forum, less than 0.3% of current urban infrastructure spending goes to nature-based solutions.
Yes, green infrastructure requires investment but our current concrete-based approach to cities is also enormously expensive. One study found:
Nature-based infrastructure costs around 50% less than equivalent built infrastructure while delivering the same — or better — outcomes. As well as the lower initial costs, nature-based infrastructure tends to be cheaper to maintain and more resilient to climate change.
Research has also found green infrastructure can deliver broader health benefits to the community that may represent savings to the public health bill.
New South Wales already has a planning framework, released last year, that aims to:
provide a standardised, robust and comprehensive approach to identify, quantify and monetise common costs and benefits associated with green infrastructure and public spaces.
That’s a strong start. But more could be done to embed green infrastructure principles into development application processes. This could encourage the development of green infrastructure that can absorb rain. That, in turn, could mean fewer closures of waterlogged sports grounds.
It is also possible to improve drainage on existing sports grounds. Managers of the Maryland SoccerPlex in the United States, for example, used a green infrastructure technique known as “sand slit drainage” – which involves installing special pipes and adding sand to the field – to vastly upgrade drainage. This allows people to play sports throughout the rain season.
Can’t we just make sports grounds out of artificial grass?
Sure, fake grass sports grounds would allow fields to accommodate some games when real grass fields wash out – but it would be a huge loss for biodiversity, quality of life, our health and the broader sustainability of our neighbourhoods.
Residents in some parts of NSW have already voiced concerns artificial grass can radiate heat on very warm days. It also produces plastic pollution.
Instead, we need to rethink the design of sport fields. We should view them as valuable green spaces. They are part of the green infrastructure network and help regulate urban temperatures and enhance ecological systems in and around our cities.
They should be seen as sponges to absorb rainwater – but they cannot be the only ones. Without more green infrastructure in our cities, our sports ground sponges will quickly become overloaded and waterlogged.
Jua Cilliers is the president of the Commonwealth Association of Planners. She is the Director of the UTS Green Infrastructure Lab.
Mehrafarin Takin is currently a PhD candidate at University of Technology Sydney. She has a research scholarship from Australian government.
Last week, presumptive US Democratic nominee Kamala Harris delivered one of the most important messages of her presidential campaign so far:
I’ve heard that recently I’ve been on the ‘For You’ page, so I thought I would get on here myself.
She wasn’t speaking to a typical crowd of supporters at a campaign rally, or to journalists at a White House press conference – but to an audience of 20 million TikTok users.
Following President Joe Biden’s dismal debate performance in early June, Harris has ignited an explosion of memes and viral content online.
And with fewer than 100 days until Americans cast their vote, it’s clear her campaign is trying to speak the digital language of Gen Z and harness youth-dominated social media platforms to gain traction with young voters.
Coconut trees and a ‘brat summer’
Harris is no stranger to viral moments. In her past three years as Biden’s vice president, she has been relentlessly mocked and meme-fied online for her so-called “word salads” and overuse of trademark phrases.
In recent weeks, however, her digital footprint has taken on a life of its own. Harris’s passionate online fandom is dubbed the “K-Hive” in a nod to the name of Beyoncé’s dedicated fanbase, the “BeyHive”.
The K-Hive is embracing Harris’s personality and political style in a wave of viral videos inspired by Gen Z trends and cultural touch points.
Let’s take Harris’s coconut tree comment as an example. Last year at a White House event in May, the vice president jokinglysaid, quoting her mother, “you think you just fell out of a coconut tree?”
“You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.”
This now-viral quote has resurfaced and spawned endless online content. Many online users (and particularly young people) are referencing the quote in their posts, describing themselves as “coconut pilled” and lining their social media bios with coconut emojis.
The clip of Harris speaking has been stitched and reposted thousands of times by TikTok users, remixed to the music of iconic Gen Z artists such as Chappell Roan and even used as a soundtrack to a viral dance associated with Charli XCX’s song, Apple.
Harris’ campaign appears to be leaning into the joke, with the bio of the official Kamala HQ TikTok and X accounts now being just two words: “Providing context.”
Even the header image of Kamala’s X account (pictured at the top of this article) is a reference to British pop singer Charli XCX’s recently released album Brat. According to the singer – who sent the internet into a frenzy when she tweeted “kamala IS brat” last week — the archetypal brat is
just like that girl who is a little messy and likes to party and maybe says some dumb things sometimes, who feels herself, but then also maybe has a breakdown, but kind of parties through it, is very honest, very blunt. A little bit volatile.
You’d be forgiven for thinking these might be undesirable traits for a presidential candidate. But by leaning into the “brat summer” brand and tapping into trending audios, Harris’s campaign is leveraging youth culture to position herself as a relevant and contemporary candidate for Gen Z.
Young social media users have largely embraced Harris’s chaotic and excitable energy. In a way, the very personality quirks that Republicans have tried to construe as baggage to take Harris down have emerged as one her greatest assets in connecting with younger voters.
Injecting new life into the Democrats’ campaign
In recent months, poll after poll found young Americans were switching off from a redux of the Trump–Biden matchup.
While Biden was still in the race, polling showed an overwhelming 82% of voters below age 30 thought he was too old to be an effective president – more than any other age group.
Harris could not strike a stronger contrast with Biden in her public persona. With her relative youth and engagement with meme culture, she has injected fresh life into the presidential race and the Democrats’ campaign platform.
Since entering the race, Harris has reinvigorated young Americans – a key Democratic voter base Biden was struggling to hold onto.
In the 48 hours after Biden stepped aside and formally endorsed Harris, almost 40,000 people registered to vote. This is the largest spike reported this election cycle. Most of these newly registered voters (83%) were aged 18–34.
Harris has also raked in celebrity endorsements from massive pop culture names, including rapper Megan Thee Stallion, who performed at her first presidential campaign rally in Atlanta – coining the slogan “Hotties for Harris”. Other star endorsements have come from rapper Quavo, pop singer Olivia Rodrigo and actor Kerry Washington, to name a few.
From online popularity to the polls
Harris’ campaign is harnessing social media to drill down on campaign messages in a way that might appeal to young audiences online.
In tweets and interviews, Democrats are branding Donald Trump and his running mate JD Vance as “weird” for their views on issues such as abortion access and women’s rights. They are adopting the bite-sized, quick-witted humour that defines Gen Z to mount policy attacks.
Beyond making the case against Trump, Harris is also positioning herself as a younger candidate with a vision for the future. For instance, her first presidential campaign ad strikes an optimistic tone set to the soundtrack of Beyoncé’s song Freedom, as Harris embraces the rallying cry of “we choose freedom”.
It’s this future-focused messaging that Harris’s camp hopes will appeal to younger voters — and an angle Biden struggled to articulate, given his age and deteriorating public speaking skills.
That said, the real test for Harris will be whether she can convert this groundswell of momentum into votes come election day in November.
Ava Kalinauskas 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.
Media publisher NZME has come under fire for admitting it used artificial intelligence to create editorials that ran in the Weekend Herald and other publications, with a media commentator saying it “can only damage trust”.
A statement from NZME editor-in-chief Murray Kirkness said AI was used in a way that fell short of its standards and “more journalistic rigour would have been beneficial”.
NZME’s standards don’t mandate disclosure but do say stories should be attributed to “the author and/or the creator/provider of the material” in accordance with the company’s Code of Ethics.
A co-author of the annual AUT Trust in News report, Dr Greg Treadwell, told Midday Report it was a poor experiment in AI use.
“I think New Zealanders have to be realistic about the fact AI is going to work its way into the production of news, but I think the Herald has kind of admitted this was a pretty poor experiment in it for a number of reasons, I think.”
Treadwell said the role of the editorial in any major news publication was to be an opinion leader.
‘Not world-shattering’ “I don’t know how many of your readers have actually gone back to have a look at the editorial that the Herald published, but it was sort of a generalist round-up of the arguments for and against Reiko Ioane at centre in the All Blacks back line — not a world-shattering issue, but a really good example of how AI doesn’t really, can’t really do what an editorial should do, which is to take a position on something.
“If you ask it to take a position, it will, and if you ask it to take another position, it will take that position.
“What is lacking here, even if you ask [AI] to take positions, is the original argument we would look to our senior journalists to put into the public domain for us about important issues.”
The editorial in the Weekend Herald on 20 July 2024. Image: Weekend Herald/NZME/RNZ
Public trust in the media was falling and media companies needed to reassure the public it could be trusted, he said.
“When the public hears that AI is being used in places — and perhaps most importantly here is that it wasn’t acknowledged that was being used to create this editorial — then that can only damage trust.
“I think there’s a lot of issues here including that AI can be incredibly useful for data analysis and other things in journalism, but we just have to be incredibly transparent about how we’re using it.”
‘Another world first’ Former Herald editor-in-chief and prominent media commentator Tim Murphy joked on social media the editorial may “have achieved another world first for NZ”.
On the upside, this has got to have achieved another world first for NZ https://t.co/e6UvHMRwXg
The revelation was also panned by some competitor publications, with the National Business Review’s official X account noting that “NBR journalists are intelligent. Not artificial.”
RNZ also approached New Zealand Rugby to ask their thoughts on NZME using AI to analyse the All Black team selection.
In a statement, NZR said it recognised the need for media organisations to have well-established editorial policies and standards.
“These ensure high quality sports journalism and play an important role in telling rugby’s stories.
“NZR is satisfied that the New Zealand Herald has made the appropriate steps to amend the story in question.”
“The Herald and other NZME publications use AI to improve our journalism. In some cases, we also create stories entirely using AI tools,” says an explanatory article headlined NZME, NZ Herald and our use of AI.
“We believe that smart use of AI allows us to publish better journalism. We remain committed to our Code of Ethics and to the integrity of our journalism, regardless of whether or not we use AI tools to help with the production or processing of articles.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Israel’s assassination of the head of Hamas’ political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran, on yesterday is part of Tel Aviv’s overall desperate search for a wider conflict. It is a criminal act that reeks of desperation.
Almost immediately after the start of the Gaza war on October 7, Israel hoped to use the genocide in the Strip as an opportunity to achieve its long-term goal of a regional war — one that would rope in Washington as well as Iran and other Middle Eastern countries.
Despite unconditional support for its genocide in Gaza, and various conflicts throughout the region, the United States refrained from entering a direct war against Iran and others.
Although defeating Iran is an American strategic objective, the US lacks the will and tools to pursue it now.
After 10 months of a failed war on Gaza and a military stalemate against Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel is, once more, accelerating its push for a wider conflict. This time around, however, Israel is engaging in a high-stakes game — the most dangerous of its previous gambles.
The current gamble involved the targeting of a top Hezbollah leader by bombing a residential building in Beirut on Tuesday — and, of course, the assassination of Palestine’s most visible, let alone popular political leader.
Successful Haniyeh diplomacy Haniyeh, has succeeded in forging and strengthening ties with Russia, China, and other countries beyond the US-Western political domain.
Israel chose the place and timing of killing Haniyeh carefully. The Palestinian leader was killed in the Iranian capital, shortly after he attended the inauguration of Iran’s new President Masoud Pezeshkian.
The Israeli message was a compound one, to Iran’s new administration — that of Israel’s readiness to escalate further — and to Hamas, that Israel has no intentions to end the war or to reach a negotiated ceasefire.
The latter point is perhaps the most urgent. For months, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has done everything in his power to impede all diplomatic efforts aimed at ending the war.
By killing the top Palestinian negotiator, Israel delivered a final and decisive message that Israel remains invested in violence, and in nothing else.
The scale of the Israeli provocations, however, poses a great challenge to the pro-Palestinian camp in the Middle East, namely, how to respond with equally strong messages without granting Israel its wish of embroiling the whole region in a destructive war.
Considering the military capabilities of what is known as the “Axis of Resistance”, Iran, Hezbollah and others are certainly capable of managing this challenge despite the risk factors involved.
Equally important regarding timing: the Israeli dramatic escalation in the region, followed a visit by Netanyahu to Washington, which, aside from many standing ovations at the US Congress, didn’t fundamentally alter the US position, predicated on the unconditional support for Israel without direct US involvement in a regional war.
Coup a real possibility Additionally, Israel’s recent clashes involving the army, military police, and the supporters of the far right suggest that an actual coup in Israel might be a real possibility. In the words of Israel’s opposition leader Yair Lapid: Israel is not nearing the abyss, Israel is already in the abyss.
It is, therefore, clear to Netanyahu and his far-right circle that they are operating within an increasingly limited time and margins.
By killing Haniyeh, a political leader who has essentially served the role of a diplomat, Israel demonstrated the extent of its desperation and the limits of its military failure.
Considering the criminal extent to which Israel is willing to go, such desperation could eventually lead to the regional war that Israel has been trying to instigate, even before the Gaza war.
Keeping in mind Washington’s weakness and indecision in the face of Israel’s intransigence, Tel Aviv might achieve its wish of a regional war after all.
Republished from The Palestine Chronicle with permission. The Chronicle is edited by Palestinian journalist and media consultant Ramzy Baroud, author of The Last Earth: A Palestine Story, who visited New Zealand in 2019.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Linda J. Graham, Professor and Director of the Centre for Inclusive Education, Queensland University of Technology
We have just received the long-awaited response from the Australian government to the disability royal commission’s final report.
One of the most controversial aspects of the final report was a split between the commissioners on the issue of school segregation – or students with disability being sent to special schools.
The three commissioners with close experience of disability recommended the phasing out of special schools. They said segregation is “inherently linked with the devaluation of people with disability”. The three commissioners without such experience said we should retain a dual-track system, with more interaction between special and mainstream schools.
In its national response, released on Wednesday, the federal government sidestepped this debate, noting schools are the responsibility of states and territories. That said, it then opened the door to keeping the current system by acknowledging “differing views”, as well as the “ongoing role” for special schools and the importance of families having a choice.
While running schools is indeed a state responsibility, this does not mean the federal government has nothing to do with students with disability.
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities says signatories need to ensure an “inclusive education system at all levels”.
It also says
children with disabilities are not excluded from free and compulsory primary education, or from secondary education, on the basis of disability.
This should be “on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live”.
Importantly, a child’s right to an inclusive education is not subordinate to a parent’s right to choose the type of school they attend.
In ratifying the convention in 2008, the Australian government agreed to uphold these rights. And yet, in 2024, it has not even provided an aspirational statement about special schools – it passed the issue to the states.
What do the states and territories say?
The states and territories have also responded individually to the royal commission. Here we have a range of responses, with most jurisdictions pointing back to the national response (which notes the different community views).
In Western Australia, the government said it would give the issue of phasing out segregated schools “further consideration”. It talks positively of change and says it will set up “timelines” and supports “fully inclusive” education.
The response from Queensland also keeps options open, saying it wants to strengthen inclusive education in all Queensland state schools and “provide a real choice for parents”.
At the other end of the spectrum is Victoria, which has the highest number of students in special schools of all the states and territories (unlike New South Wales, it does not have segregated support classes in mainstream schools). Victoria categorically said it does “not accept” the call to end special schools and “values” their role in its education system.
NSW also said special schools play a “crucial role” in meeting the diverse needs of students, in a sign it does not support a change.
What happens now?
Researchers have long noted the importance of leadership when it comes to inclusive education. This typically places focus on school principals, but they are limited by the political and policy context in which they work. So we also need political leadership, at both the federal and state levels.
During the royal commission hearings we heard a lot about the failure of the status quo – the current situation is not working for people with disability. And genuine inclusive education is crucial because it is the gateway to employment, independence and inclusion later in adult life.
But as this response to the issue of special schools shows, we are in danger of being stuck with the status quo.
It is very difficult to make the mainstream school system inclusive when human and financial capital is flowing to another system. And as long as there is another system to take “those kids”, there isn’t a real incentive for local schools to get inclusion right. And there isn’t a genuine choice for families.
Linda J. Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Queensland government’s Education Horizon scheme.
A Kanak great chief has announced his resignation from New Caledonia’s customary Senate.
Hippolyte Sinewami Htamumu once presided over the 16-member traditional Senate of chiefs, which was set up as part of the implementation of the Nouméa Accord signed in 1998.
Sinewami, in announcing his resignation, said he wanted to denounce what he termed “inefficiency” and the “politicisation” of the Senate.
The institution is presented as being dedicated to New Caledonia’s indigenous Kanaks issues, including affairs related to customs, land and identity.
But Sinewami said one of the motivations leading to his resignation was that the Senate was not representative of all of New Caledonia’s chiefly areas; and that it was also too dependent on New Caledonia’s government and its Congress (Parliament).
“So now, more or less, it is as if it was just a government department because we’re depending on the government,” he told public broadcaster NC la Première TV.
The 47-year-old chief also said the institution had remained “silent” since violent unrest and riots broke out in the French Pacific archipelago and were still ongoing since May 13.
Sinewami, himself a great chief of the La Roche district (on Maré island, part of the Loyalty Islands group, north-east of New Caledonia’s main island) is also the leader of an alternate chiefly assembly, the Inaat ne Kanaky (Kanaky Great Council of Chiefs), which he set up in late 2022.
He also said many in the indigenous Kanak community believed that “the trust is no longer there, whether at the level of the customary institutions or at the level of our politicians”.
Widening Senate rift “I didn’t see myself pursuing the work I have started with the youths while still being a member of such an institution,” he said, putting emphaisis on what is locally described as a widening rift within the customary Senate.
He called for New Caledonia’s institutions to ensure decisions made on the traditional level were “taken into account”, including in future political talks on New Caledonia’s long-term future.
A “Kanak people’s general assembly” is scheduled to be held on September 24, which, symbolically, is also the date in 1853 when France officially “took possession” of the territory.
Future talks: challenging politicians and France Sinewami told local media that in view of the September meeting, his Inaat Ne Kanaky movement was now working to “reaffirm and reappropriate” Kanak rights.
“So September 24 is the declaration of sovereignty of the chiefdoms . . . This includes challenging the [French] state and even our elected politicians here, so that there is a place for our traditional people in future discussions.
“It is important that our voice is represented.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
More than 10% of children and young people worldwide have a diagnosable mental health problem. If these problems are not detected and treated, children may suffer the same or other mental health problems in adulthood.
So, preventing mental health problems in children is a global priority.
At the same time, the number of immigrants in Western countries such as Australia is rising – and they face many culture-related challenges in a new country. These challenges can affect parenting and their children’s mental health.
Parents have an important role in children’s mental health. They can help them develop positive self-esteem and manage stress, which can prevent anxiety and depression. So immigrant parents may benefit from tailored parenting support as they adjust to a new country, so they can support their children’s mental health.
Parenting programs reaching where they are needed
Governments worldwide are recognising the importance of preventing mental health problems in children and are setting aside money for mental health promotion and treatment.
In 2022, the Australian government invested A$40.6 million to make the evidence-based online parenting program Positive Parenting Program (Triple P) more widely available to support children’s mental health and wellbeing (aged up to 11 years).
Australia’s headspace National Youth Mental Health Foundation also made the individually tailored Partners in Parenting online program available in 2023 for parents of adolescents aged 12–18.
Parents can sign up for these online programs and work through the modules, which include interactive reflection activities and videos, in their own time.
Similar programs are available in other Western countries.
Our research explored how immigrant parents raise their children and how it affects immigrant children’s mental health. With that knowledge, we can adapt parenting programs to better support migrant parents as they get used to parenting in their new home country.
For example, when parents are more caring and supportive, and are aware of what their children are up to when they’re not with them, children are more likely to have good mental health.
On the other hand, children may be more likely to develop mental health problems in families with frequent conflict between parents, or between parents and children, and where parents are not available for their children or have poor mental health themselves.
There is, however, a specific problem called “acculturative conflict”, where children and parents clash over cultural differences, including how to parent according to their culture of origin versus Australian expectations. These clashes pose a specific risk for poor mental health for immigrant children.
What is acculturation?
Acculturation happens when people are exposed to a new culture (such as values, beliefs, language, customs and practices) and attempt to adjust and incorporate them into their daily lives.
Parents and children go through the acculturation process of adjusting to a new culture. Parents do this through work or interactions with adults.
But children do this differently. Immigrant children tend to pick up the language and values of Western countries more quickly than their parents. This may be because they are taught these things in daycare or school.
Children want to feel like they belong and fit in with their friends. This is usually a bigger deal for them than it is for adults.
Children are quicker to pick up the language and values of Western countries than their parents. pics five/Shutterstock
What happens when parent and child acculturation rates differ?
Some of the ways these parent-child acculturation conflicts can play out include:
parents showing love for their children by providing shelter, food and a good education. But their children see their friends’ parents expressing physical and verbal affection and wish their own parents would do the same, or feel hurt or resentful that they don’t
parents setting high expectations and strict boundaries to ensure their children do not bring shame upon the family, while their offspring find this excessive and unreasonable
parents expecting their child to behave according to the “proper” standards for people of their cultural background, but young people feel their parents are being too traditional or conservative.
How can we better support parents?
Developers of parenting programs need to work with immigrant communities to adapt their existing programs. This could increase parents’ interest in seeking support and benefit immigrant children’s mental health.
Tailoring existing evidence-based parenting strategies can help immigrant parents minimise acculturative conflicts with their children and better support their children’s mental health and wellbeing.
This would require greater government support and investment in these programs.
In the meantime, immigrant parents can honestly discuss with their children how they would like their parents to express their love and care, and make the effort to do so. For example, does their child feel most loved when the parent says “I love you”, buys them a gift they like, or shows interest in what interests them?
Immigrant parents can help their children understand the reasons behind rules and boundaries, and involve them in shaping expectations. Parents can try to validate their children’s perspectives, even if they don’t always agree with them. Have a family discussion where both parent and child have input into what the expectations are (for example, about screen use or bedtimes) and what the consequences would be if expectations are not met.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, you can call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or the Kids Helpline on 1800 551 800 (for people aged 5 to 25).
Marie Yap receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Medical Research Future Fund. She is affiliated with Monash University’s School of Psychological Sciences and Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health. She is on the Board of Directors for the Parenting And Family Research Alliance, and co-chair of the Scientific Advisory Committee and member of the Steering Committee of Growing Minds Australia. Marie is also the founder and lead researcher for the Parenting Strategies Program and the Partners in Parenting program.
Sunita B Bapuji works for the Australian Health Regulation Agency (Ahpra) as a Research and Evaluation Officer.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tapani Rinta-Kahila, ARC DECRA Fellow / Lecturer in Business Information Systems, The University of Queensland
Artificial intelligence (AI) is enjoying a long moment in the spotlight. But debate continues over whether it’s a “shortcut to utopia” or possible harbinger of the end of the world.
Meanwhile, one group has quickly leapt on both the technology and all the hype – consulting firms. And they’ve been spending big.
Advocates of the technology are heralding a new era of professional efficiency for consultants. Once-tedious emails, presentations and reports can now be completed in a flash.
Many consulting firms have also already leapt at the opportunity to professionally advise other businesses on making the most of new generative AI tools.
So why does the consulting industry see such potential for transformation – and is hurling ourselves headfirst at this technology a good idea?
The consulting industry is notoriously shrouded in mystique, despite regularly winning huge contracts from governments and major businesses.
But in simple terms, consultants aim to offer their clients expert advice and solutions to help improve their performance, solve problems and achieve certain goals.
They often possess specialised knowledge, skills or experience relevant to a particular client, so the nature of their work can vary significantly.
Clients often seek consulting services because they want help with problem-solving and decision-making on a particular project, or want external validation for their decisions and need an independent report.
A wide range of professional services firms offer consulting services, including the “big four”: Deloitte, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Ernst & Young (EY) and KPMG.
There are also many specialist consulting firms, including McKinsey, Bain & Company, Boston Consulting Group, Kearney and L.E.K. Consulting.
Much of the demand for consultancy services is driven by the increasing complexity of doing business, due to globalisation, digitalisation, changing regulations and many other factors.
However, growth in Australia’s consulting sector has slowed this year amid the fallout from the PwC tax leaks scandal and sluggish economic growth.
How can AI help?
Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has been around in a range of forms for a while now. But until recently, it was mainly used internally by organisations and required specific training. This changed with the public launch of “generative AI” models, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
These models differ from traditional AI in their capability to generate something new, such as text that is virtually indistinguishable from one written by human, or other types of output such as images, videos or sounds.
Large language models like ChatGPT were some of the first to give the general public a sense of what AI could be used for.
But this has had some specific implications for consulting businesses. The models can analyse large amounts of data quickly and cheaply to generate tailored feedback.
With generative AI offering such efficient services for business analysis and strategic planning, many would-be clients might now be questioning whether buying consulting services will remain worthwhile in the long run – particularly as these technologies improve.
Getting ahead of the curve
It should therefore come as no surprise that the consulting industry is investing heavily in generative AI. Just take the big four, for example.
Deloitte and EY have already deployed conversational AI assistants aimed at boosting staff productivity.
KPMG’s customised version of ChatGPT – KymChat – was launched in March to speed up the preparation of sales proposals for consulting work, by quickly identifying relevant experts.
In May, PwC became OpenAI’s biggest enterprise customer after purchasing more than 100,000 licences for the AI giant’s latest models.
Other players operating in the knowledge work space have also been hyping up the productivity-boosting potential of generative AI for similar tasks.
US finance behemoth JPMorgan Chase recently rolled out its own large language model called LLM Suite, which it says can “do the work of a research analyst”.
What does this mean for the business model?
To harness this technology’s potential, firms will need to use it effectively. This means ensuring they maintain a human-centred value proposition for clients that goes above what the technology alone can offer.
Generative AI tools will not replace the human trust that is often crucial for successful consulting, nor provide the depth of specialised knowledge (and access to relevant human experts) that a seasoned consultant currently can.
Seasoned, professional consultants often have access to a network of expert contacts, which is hard to replace with AI . Ground Picture/Shutterstock
But the technology will streamline a lot of everyday tasks. It can also provide a sounding board for decisions and business strategies, and suggest solutions.
At least in the near term, firms are likely to use AI to “augment” human consultants, rather than replace them.
What are the risks?
The uptake of generative AI also presents risks to the consultancy business.
One big one concerns creativity. Since the models produce their outputs based on past data, the range of potential solutions they can identify will always be limited to their training data.
Excessive reliance on the same models could start eroding consultant companies’ ability to innovate, by diluting their distinct competitive advantages and make them increasingly resemble each other.
Such a phenomenon has already been observed in research looking into generative AI’s effect on student creativity.
My own research has shown that excessive reliance on automation technologies like generative AI can lead to the erosion of professional expertise. In the long run, this effect could seriously organisations’ knowledge and business reputation.
If younger consultants still in training offload too much of their thinking and analytical work to generative AI, they may fail to develop their own analytical abilities.
And of course, the technology itself isn’t perfect. Generative AI is known to make mistakes and even “hallucinate” – that is, completely make things up.
All of this highlights the importance of using generative AI thoughtfully, and perhaps above all, not losing sight of the unique value humans can bring.
Tapani Rinta-Kahila is a recipient of the Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (project number DE240100269) funded by the Australian Government.
Rupert Murdoch’s attempt to continue controlling his company from beyond the grave would be better labelled Project Hegemony, than Harmony, because it’s designed to cement one sibling’s dominance over the others and shield the business from possible progressive reform.
But, in attempting to revoke the “irrevocable” family trust that sets out the company’s governance after his death, Murdoch has laid bare his own business. He has exposed what many observers have long suspected about the company, and revealed just how much is now at stake. Most of the revelations are not pretty, but some hint at a very different future for the global media empire.
We can now be certain that Rupert believes the company’s future is dependent on remaining trenchantly right-wing. This is most apparent in the US, where Fox News dominates cable TV ratings because it is the voice of MAGA Republicans. Murdoch now sees no other way to maintain that edge than by aligning with the reactionary wing of the party.
He wavered for a while when his New York Post championed Ron De Santis as an alternative Republican nominee to Donald Trump. But when the Florida governor failed in the early primaries, News Corp quickly circled back, fully committed to the Trump cause. Now Murdoch knows wavering could erode the loyalty of Fox viewers, perhaps sending a significant number to rival conservative media channels like NewsMax.
So much for Murdoch driving the right or steering the agenda. The 93-year-old has come to realise that if he was ever in charge, he isn’t anymore.
He may have lit the spark of reactionary politics and fanned the flames of anger in his audiences, but now it’s a movement and it’s raging like a Californian wildfire. In a sense, Murdoch has become captive to the masses who demand that their prejudices remain unchallenged. He has learnt that to lead he must follow.
Lachlan, and only Lachlan
All of this means there’s only one person in Rupert’s mind who can ensure the company’s ongoing success, and that’s his eldest son, Lachlan. In turn, this confirms at least one of two things; either Lachlan really is the most right-wing of Rupert’s four oldest children, or he is the most in sync with the company’s business model of serving up whatever content the audience demands to keep watching.
It appears Rupert thinks Lachlan is both.
Yes, many have long suspected Lachlan’s leanings, given his guidance of Fox in the lead-up to the January 6 insurrection. Lachlan was in charge when the network condoned the conspiracy-mongering and the big lie in the wake of Trump’s election loss in 2020.
He did little to curb the transphobia across the organisation or its obsession with “wokeism” as the latest frontier in the culture wars. He watched on as News smeared climate scientists and ridiculed Australian firefighters who linked the 2019/20 bushfires to climate change. The company’s coverage and support of Trump finally led James Murdoch to walk away from News in 2019.
Even though this much is known, it’s still shocking to realise that Murdoch has seen it too and that, after weighing up his children’s political views, has gone and driven a wedge between them because three of them aren’t right-wing enough.
Murdoch plans to rewrite the trust to “consolidate decision-making power in Lachlan’s hands and give him permanent, exclusive control”, even when he is in a minority of one against siblings Elizabeth and James and half-sister Prudence, who share power under the existing deed.
The Nevada probate commissioner has ruled that Murdoch can amend the trust if he can demonstrate he’s acting in good faith for the sole benefit of his heirs. When the matter goes to court next month, Murdoch will argue everyone will benefit because changing the trust will prevent endless power struggles resulting from the “lack of consensus” between the four children. If unchecked, Murdoch believes, the fighting “would impact the strategic direction at both companies including a potential reorientation of editorial policy and content”.
One suspects it’s not the endless fighting that worries Murdoch, so much as the fact that, without amendment, Lachlan may be quickly outvoted and ousted from company control.
The arrangement Murdoch wants is no less democratic than the provisions that have given the Murdochs control of the company with only 39% of the stock. But again, it’s shocking to see Murdoch wants to enshrine something so brazen within what is still essentially a family business.
On the other hand, similar rules already exist to shut out third wife Wendi Deng’s two children, Chloe and Grace. They hold equal shares in the company’s equity but don’t get a vote.
A more interesting question is what this tells us about Murdoch’s deepest fears. Has the emeritus chairman been spending sleepless nights fretting about Prudence, James and Elizabeth ganging up to relegate Lachlan to a non-executive role? Is he really worried that James will sack some of the many climate deniers who lurk around his publications? If so, he won’t need to sack the leading one in Australia, as Andrew Bolt has already promised to go of his own accord if James ends up in charge.
What is it that’s really driving Rupert?
If he’s thinking along these lines, then perhaps the three siblings are too. Perhaps they have gamed what they would do when – not if – they join forces? Maybe they’ve begun to imagine a different News Corp, based on a fresh business model, where balanced journalism is reinstated and respected and actually practised?
Now that’s an endlessly fascinating question, especially in this age of media disruption. Can a pluralist news outfit that practises good journalism create profits on the same scale as an outlet like Fox, which thrives commercially by serving one section of the market and dispensing with journalistic standards?
It’s not media economics that prevents reform. A channel like Sky News in Australia could easily alter its line-up so that after dark a wider range of views are canvassed and challenged. That would not imperil its bottom line, but it would make for better programming. Sky wouldn’t even have to stop being right-of-centre, it would just have to remember to be respectful to the other half of the population that has completely different views.
Another view is that Rupert just doesn’t want the empire he spent a lifetime building being broken up. Perhaps he thinks one-person rule will ensure it remains cohesive.
But what we know about Rupert suggests he is pragmatic on such questions and is prepared to merge and divest whenever it’s strategic or opportune. The fact that his business is now housed in two companies, Fox and News Corp, is testament to that.
If it’s not about the bottom line or the cohesion of the empire, then what is driving Rupert to act like this in his twilight years? This is a variation of the question Murdoch-watchers endlessly ask: why does Rupert do what he does, is it the money or the power? Some speculate it’s both, because making money creates ways to exert influence, which in turn lead to more ways to make money, and so on.
Keeping a winning formula, even beyond the grave
But impending mortality changes that equation. Even Murdoch knows his money won’t be much use to him after his death. Instead, this is about ensuring the legacy that now most matters to him.
He has spent seven decades building a reactionary force across three continents and he likes the effects it continues to create. Yes, it isn’t what it once was and sometimes the issues get away from him, but at least the debates are happening, and the so-called elites and the establishment continue to be rattled.
He watches his acolytes in action, such as Fox presenters Sean Hannity and Greg Gutfeld and columnists Miranda Devine and Bolt, and he likes what he sees. He likes that they sow division. He likes that they mock people who are progressive and bolster those who are cruel. He doesn’t agree with all their conspiracy theories, but he kind of likes that they’re out there creating hegemony, undermining harmony.
He likes it all and he doesn’t want it to end. Not now. Not even when he’s dead.
Andrew Dodd 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.
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has vowed to inflict “harsh punishment” on Israel in retaliation for the assassination of the top Hamas political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.
Haniyeh’s killing is a critical escalation in the already volatile and increasingly hostile region. But the severity of Iran’s response to Israel will depend on a number of factors. An all-out war is not a sure thing.
A strong, but calculated response
Ever since the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7 and Israel’s subsequent invasion of Gaza, Iran and Israel have demonstrated significant restraint towards one another, drawing nuanced red lines in their proxy conflict.
Neither side has wanted to escalate the tensions into a full-scale war that could engulf the entire region. Instead, they have sought to flex their muscles to avoid appearing weak, while stopping short of provoking a major conflict.
This was evident in April when an apparent Israeli strike on an Iranian diplomatic compound in Syria killed senior Iranian military commanders. Iran retaliated with a direct drone and missile strike against Israel. The attack was seemingly intentionally designed to not cause major casualities or harm to Israel. It was also telegraphed in advance, allowing Israel and its allies to shoot down the weapons.
Iran has mostly relied on its regional allies to keep the pressure on Israel as the Gaza war has continued. These allies include Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and its proxy militant groups in Syria and Iraq.
Israel, by contrast, has followed a dual strategy: responding forcefully to Iran’s allies and confronting Iran directly on its soil in targeted strikes.
The assassination of Haniyeh will necessitate retaliation from Iran and its proxies. Khamenei tweeted that avenging his death is Iran’s “duty”.
However, it’s unlikely this act has reached the point of justifying an open war. Iranian foreign policy has adopted a high level of pragmatism, carefully calculating the military’s actions and avoiding anything that might launch a costly war with economic, political and security implications.
This doesn’t mean there won’t be a strong response. Iran’s allies, in particular Hezbollah, possess the capability of inflicting serious damage on Israel, far exceeding what they have demonstrated so far. Their attacks could intensify significantly.
A balancing act for Iran’s new government
Iran has also recently elected a new moderate government under the presidency of Masoud Pezeshkian. He has said he wants to prioritise reforming Iran’s foreign policy to create a more amicable environment in the region. This could also pave the way for better relations with Western powers, including the United States.
His administration has signalled its intention to revive the nuclear deal that then-US President Donald Trump scrapped in 2018. Iran wants relief from the international sanctions that have significantly harmed its economy and the lives of the Iranian people.
However, the assassination of Haniyeh has created a precarious situation for Iran’s government. It must balance the need for a robust response with the desire to pursue diplomatic and economic reforms. There are two important aspects to this.
First, the attack occurred in Tehran, which compels the government to issue a strong response. Pezeshkian’s tweet after the incident demonstrates this:
Iran will defend its territorial integrity and honour and make the terrorist invaders regret their cowardly action.
Any retaliation would likely increase tensions with Western countries and could hinder Pezeshkian’s diplomatic aims.
Second, Iran’s hardliners will seize this opportunity to criticise the new government, questioning its policy of reconciliation with the West. They will argue that such policies are ineffective and advocate for a more confrontational stance, thereby undermining the government’s reformist agenda.
A tactical win for Israel with potential downsides
Even though Israel has not claimed responsibility for the assassination, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government may view it as a tactical win. It continues to showcase Israel’s ability to target high-profile adversaries.
Israel has either confirmed it has (or is believed to have) eliminated other Hamas leaders, such as deputy political chief Saleh al-Arouri, deputy chief of military operations Marwan Issa and potentially the commander of the al-Qassam Brigades, Mohammed Deif (though his death has not been confirmed).
This week, Israel also claimed responsibility for killing a senior Hezbollah commander, Fuad Shukr, in a strike in Lebanon.
However, given the significance of Haniyeh to Hamas and the fact the killing occurred in Tehran, it comes with significant risks and potential downsides.
The assassination will almost certainly hinder the ceasefire negotiations between Hamas and Israel. This will complicate efforts to secure the release of the remaining Israeli hostages. The Israeli public is already deeply divided, with the government facing criticism for its security failures in the October 7 attack and its inability to bring the hostages home.
In this context, the assassination of Haniyeh is unlikely to unite Israelis. Instead, it may exacerbate existing divisions, particularly if it leads to more conflict.
Where does Hamas go from here?
Haniyeh had a significant role in Hamas’s leadership. He facilitated strategic relationships with influential regional players, including Iran, Turkey and Qatar. He also played a crucial role in mediating between different factions within Hamas, and between Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups.
This is especially important due to the recent agreement struck in China between 14 Palestinian factions, including Hamas and its main rival, Fatah. This deal aims to unite them to create a strong political entity to pursue a potential peace process with Israel.
His absence will undoubtedly affect Hamas. However, it is not the first time Hamas has lost prominent leaders; Israel assassinated Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin in 2004, among others.
Despite these losses, Hamas has maintained strong leadership and regional backing, particularly from Iran, Turkey and Qatar.
It is still too early to determine who will replace Haniyeh, but his successor will need to possess a similar level of regional connections and public support.
A likely candidate could be someone like Khaled Mashal, who has previously held leadership roles within Hamas and has substantial regional influence.
Ali Mamouri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: Council on Hemispheric Affairs – Analysis-Reportage
by Leonardo Flores
Caracas
A massive cyberattack, a global disinformation campaign and armed gangs are key elements in an attempted coup in Venezuela following presidential elections on July 28. The results of those elections, in which 10 candidates competed, saw President Maduro win 51.2% of the vote against opposition leader Edmundo González’s 44.2%, with 80% of the vote counted. The remaining eight candidates combined for 4.6%, in a vote that has become controversial for all the wrong reasons. González and his far-right allies rejected the results and alleged fraud.
For months, the Venezuelan government has been denouncing the far-right’s strategy for these elections: use friendly pollsters to disseminate wildly inaccurate polls, favoring Gónzalez; denounce the elections before they were held; denounce the results before they were announced; and lead violent street protests similar to those of 2014 and 2017 (guarimbas).
As predicted, the far-right orchestrated a narrative of fraud on social and traditional media, while armed gangs and paramilitary actors sowed terror in the days following the election, attacking public institutions, security forces and innocent bystanders. Chavismo responded with a massive rally in Caracas to support the electoral results and oppose the violence.
Although tensions remain, the government appears to have snuffed out the coup. The situation is complicated by the fact that Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE, an independent branch of government solely responsible for elections) was hit by a massive cyberattack the night of the elections, that continues to affect its website as of July 31.
Venezuela’s Electoral Process and a Cyberattack
Anyone familiar with Venezuela’s electoral process would know to be skeptical about allegations of fraud in the vote count. This process, the same one lauded as the “best in the world” by Jimmy Carter twelve years ago, is renowned by independent observers for its safety and transparency. This two-minute video by Venezuelanalysis is one of the best explainers of why fraud is nearly impossible.
The CNE is led by a council of five rectors; currently, three are aligned with the government, while two are aligned with the opposition. If there was widespread fraud, why have the opposition members of the CNE stayed silent?
Key to understanding the claims of fraud is that once polls close, the voting machines print out the local results (actas) before transmitting them to CNE headquarters for a complete digital tally. Copies of the actas are given to witnesses from any political party present at each precinct.
Prior to the election, eight candidates – including President Maduro – signed a pact with the CNE agreeing to respect the results. González refused to do so and his party said it would not abide by the CNE results, but rather would solely recognize their own actas. The only way to ensure that a picture or scan of an acta is real is to compare it to actas published by the CNE or other political parties.
This is impeded by the cyberattack on the CNE. According to a CNE technician, the hack could not alter the vote count, but delayed the transmission of the results. This meant that the CNE published its first report on results later than expected, and delayed the publication of its actas, which in other elections appeared on its website within a day or so of the vote.
This delay was crucial in allowing the opposition to frame the elections as irregular and fraudulent. The New York Times published an analysis of the opposition’s alleged actas, in an effort to lend credence to their claims of fraud. However, at the moment there is no reason to believe those actas are real, and every reason to believe that the far-right opposition is lying about the results. They cried fraud in the 2004, 2013, 2017, 2018 and 2023 elections, without presenting credible evidence. No actual evidence has been presented to bolster their claims.
Disinformation Campaign
In the months prior to the elections, pollsters with links to the opposition claimed González had a huge lead. These pollsters have a history of bias in favor of the opposition. In the 2018 presidential elections, they were wrong by an average of 26 percentage points.
On election day, the opposition widely disseminated an exit poll by a U.S. funded firm with links to the CIA. Exit polls have been banned in Venezuela after they were used to destabilize the country following the 2004 referendum. This poll was cited by mainstream media, far-right operatives and political figures as “proof” that the CNE’s results were fraudulent. Note that a different exit poll by Hinterlaces, a firm seen as friendly to the Venezuelan government, came much closer to predicting the results.
As of July 31, the opposition claimed to have more than 81% of the actas, giving González a 67% to 30% victory over Maduro. They uploaded their alleged actas onto a slick website, further demonstrating that this was a coup long in the making. For its part, the pro Maduro coalition planned to release its actas on July 31.
The opposition figures fed a narrative of a landslide González victory and outright fraud committed by the Maduro government. This led to a social media campaign featuring the use of a major bot network and AI that amplified claims of fraud and engaged in making fake news go viral. Among those complicit in spreading disinformation were Elon Musk – whose own social media platform put disclaimers on several of his posts – and Argentine President Milei, who called for a coup in Venezuela.
The barrage of disinformation and fake news about the results set the stage for the next phase of the attempted coup: violence committed by fascistic paramilitary groups and armed gangs.
Violence and Armed Gangs
In the late hours of the 28th, opposition protesters were called to the streets by their far-right leaders. While some protests were peaceful, others were not; disinformation in social media painted a chaotic picture of Venezuela in which average citizens were being brutalized by security forces.
There are too many social media examples to choose from, but I will note two:
Several great threads are documenting some of the more egregious examples, including the one at this link.
On the day after the election, Venezuela experienced violence as paramilitary groups and armed gangs burned buildings, sacked and looted a regional CNE headquarters, blocked roads, attacked police and military, beat up people who looked “chavista”, attempted to attack a hospital, burned a community radio station and school, tore down statues of Chávez and Indigenous leaders, attacked local community leaders, military installations and food distribution centers, among others.
It is unclear how many people were killed as a result of this wave of violence.
Captured gang members claim to have received $150 to participate in “Maria Corina Machado’s activities in Caracas” (roughly at minute 31:40 in the link), including claiming fraud on July 28, and take to the streets on July 29 to cause damage and disturbances, leading to a “bloodbath.” Note that prior to the elections Maduro was widely condemned in corporate media for suggesting there would be a bloodbath if the far-right attempted to seize power.
The Venezuelan government reports that some of the violent actors were caught with Captagon, a stimulant used by mercenaries and terrorists throughout the world to maintain focus.
Maduro made even more serious claims about the U.S. role in the attempted coup. In a meeting of the Council of State, he said the perpetrators of violence “entered [Venezuela] on planes on which we allowed the United States to bring migrants . It was an operation of trickery in U.S. imperial diplomacy.” (As part of dialogue over the past year between the two countries, Venezuela allowed deportation flights from the U.S.)
President Maduro also noted that the violence was “financed by the United States and Colombian narcotrafficking.” Prior to the elections Colombian paramilitaries reported being approached by the far-right to carry out attacks in Venezuela. Moreover, last month opposition figure Carlos Prosperi said that right-wing operatives and politicians were getting up to $9,000 a month from funds stolen from the Venezuelan state by the U.S. government.
As of July 31, the violence has mostly ended but the disinformation campaign continues.
Why Maduro Won and the Far-Right Lost
Central to the idea of the disinformation campaign is the idea that Maduro could not possibly have won. A key element of this narrative has been the decades-long, systematic attempt to make chavistas invisible – to pretend that the biggest political force in the country simply does not exist.
Corporate media rarely shows us the massive demonstrations in support of the government prior to and after the elections. Western think tanks never analyze the depth of organization throughout the different layers of chavismo and the interactions between these layers that not only creates a formidable machine to get out the vote, but also to mobilize on the streets in moments of crisis (federal, state, municipal, political parties, communes and other expressions of people’s power).
This is one of the reasons that the opposition’s claim that Maduro only took 30% of the vote (3.2 million votes, per their figures) lacks credibility. In the 2018 presidential elections, Maduro won with 6.2 million votes. Since then, despite the continued hardships imposed by U.S. economic warfare, Venezuela has experienced: three and a half straight years of economic growth; inflation under control and at historically low levels; 96% of food consumed is now produced in the country; a huge boom in entrepreneurship; and an economy projected by the IMF to have among the highest growth in Latin America.
On top of that, social programs have been strengthened. The Great Housing Mission reached 5.1 million dignified public housing units delivered (assuming 3-4 people per household, that may be anywhere between 50-66% of the population). The local committees for supply and production (CLAP) continue to distribute discounted or free food to millions of families every month, which may well have prevented famine during the worst of U.S. sanctions.
The base of chavismo was energized and the PSUV itself has more than 5 million members. In fact, even the markets were betting on Maduro, as was Chevron, which inked another oil deal with the government in the run up to the election.
On the other side, the opposition ran a terrible campaign. Edmundo González was rarely on the campaign trail, and instead he was represented by his proxy Maria Corina Machado – the latest opposition figure to have Washington’s full blessing. Their plan to privatize everything from the oil industry to public housing did not resonate with a population deeply familiar with the neoliberal shock therapies of the 90s. Close ties to Argentina’s Milei and Israel, did not resonate amongst a population that is watching the economic disaster in Argentina and the genocide in Palestine.
Opposition leader Henrique Capriles – a two time presidential loser who continues to be a major player – characterized Gonzalez’s campaign as “the worst he’s ever seen.” Two opposition governors and nearly a dozenmayors flipped their support to Maduro in the days prior to the election. The aforementioned Prosperi, who actually participated in last year’s opposition primaries only to denounce them for widespread irregularities (primaries where Machado won a non-credible 92% of the vote), also flipped his support to Maduro. Why would opposition leaders do this if they believed a victory was within reach?
U.S. & International Response
The Maduro victory has been recognized by dozens of countries, including China, Russia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Honduras, and Qatar, among others, as well as multilateral organizations such as OPEC and Alba (Bolivarian Alliance for Our Americas). On the flip side, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Peru, among others, refused to recognize the elections. Peru – which is led by de facto dictator Dina Boluarte – went so far as to recognize González as the president (Guaidó 2.0, as Maduro called it).
Brazil, Colombia and – to an extent – Mexico, are playing a strategic role of “wait and see,” defending Venezuela’s sovereignty to greater (Mexico) and lesser (Colombia) degrees. They appear to be positioning themselves in such a way to try to influence the Biden administration to moderate its response.
It is not surprising that the chaos in the U.S. executive branch has led to differing statements from Biden, Harris and Secretary of State Blinken. The first to pronounce herself was Harris, who tweeted on Sunday that the U.S. “will continue to work toward a more democratic… future” for Venezuela, remarks widely interpreted as admitting the far-right had lost. Blinken then expressed “serious concerns that the result announced does not reflect the will or the votes of the Venezuelan people.” However, on July 30 Biden, following a conversation with Brazilian President Lula, called for the release of voting data, stopping short of endorsing the fraud narrative.
Possible Consequences of the Attempted Coup
This division within the U.S. government points at a possible reason for the attempted coup: the poisoning of relations between the U.S. and Venezuela. Over the past year, the United States engaged in dialogue with Venezuela and partially softened oil sanctions, in exchange for certain “electoral guarantees.” The coup attempt will make it difficult for the Biden administration to continue its policy of easing the pressure off Venezuela. It will also materially benefit Machado and her allies, who will keep receiving Venezuelan funds held in U.S. accounts to continue their regime change endeavors.
In Venezuela, independent election observers are confident that CNE results will match the ballot receipts, confirming the integrity of the election. Criminal elements are being captured, and military forces have repeatedly expressed their support for the Constitution and elections.
The coup appears to be over, though it would be shameful if it leads to a hardening or prolonging of sanctions. The real “irregularity” is the decade-long economic war Venezuelans have endured. They voted under threat of their lives being turned upside down again, of their family members dying of preventable conditions or leaving as economic refugees. Despite the threats, they rejected the far-right candidate and voted for peace. Hawks in Washington will do all they can to make them pay for their vote.
Leonardo Flores is a Venezuelan political analyst, activist and founding member of theVenezuela Solidarity Network.
Even if you weren’t lucky enough to spot the aurora light shows visible across southern Australia this week (and which may potentially reappear in coming days), you probably did encounter the onslaught of online news articles and photos that followed.
Just 35 years ago, however, this wouldn’t have been the case. Even digital cameras weren’t easily available until the mid-1990s, which means any dazzling aurora sightings would have been a privileged view for a select few.
According to Photutorial founder Matic Broz, about 1.94 trillion photographs will be taken globally over 2024 – with more than 90% of these taken by smartphones.
Taking photos is also increasingly becoming a part of our experience of the natural world. What was once just stargazing has branched off into the massive field of astrophotography. Our cameras enable a new way of experiencing nature that’s far-removed from how earlier generations would do so.
New technology brings new opportunities
In the case of auroras and other forms of astrophotography, night-friendly photo settings have allowed us to see the world after dark.
Improvements in “night mode” technologies have been in development since smartphones were invented. That said, Google could be considered the first company to have released technology that enables simple astrophotography, with its introduction of “night sight” for Pixel phones in 2018.
Then, in 2019, Apple released a similar “night mode” setting for the iPhone 11 – and for many smartphone users, the need to manually apply exposure settings on a camera suddenly disappeared.
In one of Apple’s night mode ads released in 2020, we see a montage of “before and after” images highlighting the difference in quality when the mode is applied. The montage is set against the Smashing Pumpkins song We Only Come Out At Night, as an aurora photo appears in the set.
Today, there are numerous official and unofficial guides (and even entire books) to help people harness their smartphone camera’s capabilities.
There are several reasons why you might want to capture the beauty of nature through your smartphone.
For one thing, doing so helps “democratise” our collective experience of the natural world. Sharing photos of nature gives many more people the ability to come across incredible natural sights. This is especially valuable for those who may be financially or physically unable to travel to the distant lands where these sights are found.
Then there’s the fact that photos and video allow us to watch and rewatch natural phenomena. Apart from being a cool thing to do, this provides opportunities for education and analysis of the natural world. Indeed, sharing photos to increase public interest in nature could even be considered a form of environmental communication.
Technology also helps “enhance” our view of the natural world. Aurora photos, for instance, use prolonged exposure times to greatly enhance colours and lights in a way that can’t be seen by the naked eye. This provides an additional incentive to whip out your phone if you do come across one.
Similarly, prolonged exposure times allow us to take “flowing” photographs of waterfalls and surf waves. And time-lapse settings let us create stop-motion videos of slow-moving nature, such as cloud movements or flower buds opening.
Is nature tainted through the artificial lens?
As aurora photography and similar forms become increasingly common, we should also ask the following question: how is this new way of interacting with nature impacting our relationship with it?
Digitally enhanced images literally change what we would otherwise see with the naked eye. Might this distort our ideas of nature?
Taking photos of nature can take us out of the moment of experiencing it. Shutterstock
Many widely shared photos of auroras may not even be real. Post-editing techniques are often used to further enhance aurora shots, or to add an aurora to a shot that never even had one. Some striking images that circulated earlier this year were deliberately faked.
The increasing sophistication of artificial intelligence will only make it harder to distinguish between the truly phenomenal and the phony. As such, the large set of photographs that appear on social media carry with them a whole new set of representational concerns.
Visual culture professor Nicolas Mirzeoff suggests we are compelled to take photos as a “key part of our effort to understand the changing world around us and our place within it”. But photos risk becoming visual commodities when they are extraneously edited (or faked) and plastered online in the millions.
And then there is the concern that a cultural obsession with photographing nature might divert our focus from what’s truly in front of us, taking us out of the magical moment. So, as these new photo technologies enable new ways of connecting with nature, so too do we need to consider how they might be distracting or removing us from it.
Gemma Blackwood 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.
Wearable trackers and monitors (such as smartwatches) are increasingly popular and sophisticated. For people living with heart conditions, they can provide important information, including updates about abnormalities in heart rate and rhythm.
But a recent study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association found using wearables to monitor heart conditions like atrial fibrillation – an irregular heartbeat – can actually make people more anxious about their health.
It’s a catch-22 situation: the wearable device may help you better manage your chronic heart condition, but wearing it could make you anxious – which is bad for those conditions.
So what are the tradeoffs? And how can we get the most out of wearables, without unnecessary worry?
Atrial fibrillation affects around 2% of the general population, and about 5% of those aged over 55. Symptoms may include palpitations, fatigue and shortness of breath, although some patients may live relatively symptom-free. Self management is important to improve quality of life and prevent complications, such as stroke and heart failure.
People with atrial fibrillation also often experience high rates of anxiety linked to their condition. Psychological distress – including anxiety, depression and worry about symptoms – affects between 25% and 50% of those living with the condition.
Wearable devices can help people understand and monitor their condition by providing heart rate and rhythm data and alerts to detect atrial fibrillation episodes. This can be helpful to understand the impact of their disease, particularly for those living with paroxysmal (or episodic) atrial fibrillation.
Wearables such as smartwatches can monitor irregularities in heart rate and rhythm. Angus Gray/unsplash
One study found smartwatches were very effective at detecting irregular heart rhythms – and could help manage and even prevent them.
But any benefits of using wearables to monitor atrial fibrillation need to be balanced with the high rates of anxiety people with this condition experience, to make sure their use doesn’t exacerbate psychological distress.
Wearables can empower patients
For many people, the sense they are receiving reliable, objective and personalised health data can encourage feelings of confidence, safety and assurance, especially when combined with symptom trackers or patient diaries.
This may allow patients to self-manage their condition at home with their families, rather than spending time in hospital – reducing anxiety and stress.
Some people feel reassured by alerts and notifications from wearables. Rafa Fernandez/shutterstock
In a clinical setting, data may also encourage patients to take part in shared decision-making.
Interpreting health data together with doctors or other health-care professionals, they can develop goals and action plans, including when to seek help from a GP – and when to go to hospital.
Patients who understand their condition tend to report fewer atrial fibrillation symptoms.
But wearables can induce anxiety
The study published by the Journal of the American Heart Association examined the behaviour and wellbeing of 172 people with atrial fibrillation over a nine-month period.
It found the 83 people who used wearables to monitor their condition were more worried about their symptoms and treatment, with one in five experiencing “intense anxiety”.
Chronic anxiety can contribute to stress, burnout and poor physical health, which in turn can exacerbate heart conditions.
Previous research has also explored the impacts of wearables on patients with long-term conditions, including heart disease. Patients in this study similarly reported increased anxiety while using these devices, as one explained:
I am one of these people who do worry about things. I do get concerned about myself […] and I just thought this is silly. This is reminding me every day, […] I wonder what my reading is, how good it is or how bad it is […]. Every time as soon I started thinking about it, I started thinking about my illness.
Some people also describe being a “prisoner of the numbers”. They feel they “need to keep checking the device to know how they were doing, leading to the device dominating their lives”.
The volume and frequency of notifications, alarms and vibrations from wearable devices can be overwhelming and make people worry about their health.
Information overload can also discourage self-management, with notifications instead prompting people to seek health advice more often than they otherwise would. But this isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
For other people, low levels of health or digital literacy – not knowing how to use the devices or interpret the data – may make them feel so stressed or anxious they abandon wearables altogether.
The future of wearables
In the future, digital devices may help paint a holistic picture of health and wellbeing through a “digital phenotype” that combines data like sleep patterns, weight changes and physical activity.
But more research is needed to understand the effects of wearables – including their notifications and alarms – on patients’ anxiety levels.
If you already use a wearable device for health monitoring, it can be helpful to regularly review the data and notification settings. You may wish to discuss how you are using your device to help you self-manage your condition with your doctor or nurse.
With any chronic disease, having a management action plan is important. This includes discussing with your health-care professional when to seek care (such as attending the emergency department or GP).
Meanwhile, there’s still work to be done to help make nurses and doctors feel more confident integrating wearables – and the data they provide – into patient care.
Caleb Ferguson receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Government Medical Research Future Fund and the Stroke Foundation. He is affiliated with Western Sydney Local Health District. He was a co-author of the 2017 Stroke Guidelines (Australia) and the 2018 CSANZ/ Heart Foundation AF Guidelines. He is the Chair of the Cardiovascular Nursing Council and Board Member of the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand. He authored the Cochrane Review on clinical service organisation for atrial fibrillation.
There has been plenty of rain, sweat and tears shed at the Paris Olympics this week. But the pool at the heart of La Defénce Arena has suffered a drought of world records that has athletes and officials scratching their heads.
After five days, Paris 2024 has seen only a single world record fall in a swimming event. That compares with six new swimming world records set at Tokyo in 2021 and eight at Rio in 2018. Even the much-hyped women’s 400 metre freestyle – billed as the “race of the century” – failed to topple any personal bests from the three most recent world-record holders, Ariarne Titmus (Australia), Summer McIntosh (Canada) and Katie Ledecky (United States).
To earn a spot on the winners’ podium, of course, place – not pace – is what matters. But the near-absence of the letters WR alongside any of the finishing times on the Olympic scoreboard has coaches, competitors and commentators searching for a culprit.
It is undeniable that the pool at La Défence Arena is shallower than at recent Olympics. It’s 2.15m deep – deeper than the required minimum of 2m but quite a bit shallower than the standard 3m used at the Tokyo and Rio games.
Why would this make a difference? Well, when swimmers dive into the pool and power through the water, they naturally create waves that radiate outwards. Some of these waves will propagate along the surface of the pool and be damped by gutters at the edge. Others will travel downward, bounce off the bottom of the pool, and return to the surface to create turbulence.
Turbulence can slow a swimmer down in two ways. First, it creates a choppy pool surface that can disrupt a swimmer’s rhythm and reduce their speed.
Second, turbulence increases the effect of water drag by dissipating the swimmer’s momentum – the water motion literally “sucks” the speed from the swimmer.
The slow pool theory says the shallower pool means more waves bounce back to the surface, creating more turbulence and slowing swimmers down. But does it hold water?
Not according to Roberto Colletto, chief executive of the Italian company that constructed the pool in Paris. “On the technical side, there is no problem with the pool,” he told French broadcaster RMC Sport.
And scientifically speaking, the theory has some holes. One problem is that the waves bouncing off the pool bottom are quite different from the ones that travel across the surface. Subsurface waves are essentially sound waves generated by differences in water pressure.
Sound waves travel at about 1,500m per second in water. In a 2.15m-deep pool, a sound wave takes a little under 3 milliseconds to bounce off the bottom and return to the surface, compared with 4 milliseconds in a 3m pool. This millisecond difference in travel time likely has a negligible effect on the generation of turbulence at the pool surface.
On the surface
Water depth does have an effect on the waves at the pool surface, however. Surface waves travel more slowly in shallow water – which is why you see ocean waves piling up and breaking as they approach the beach.
So the waves the swimmers are creating at the surface of the competition pool in Paris will be travelling marginally more slowly than the waves in a 3m-deep pool.
Elite swimmers can take advantage of the surface waves they generate in the pool. By adjusting their swimming speed, they can create a wave that has a wavelength close to their own body length. This means the swimmer can position themselves between two crests to effectively “surf” the wave.
This critical speed, known as “hull velocity”, is well known in sailing. For elite middle- and long-distance swimmers, swimming at their own personal hull velocity can save energy – and win races.
The shallower pool in Paris shouldn’t create more turbulence – but it might affect the speed of waves at the surface. Nanashiz / Shutterstock
Because the competition pool at the Paris Olympics is shallower than a standard 3m pool, the hull velocity of each swimmer will be slightly slower. So it is possible that some of the swimmers – especially in middle-distance races such as the 400m freestyle – may unconsciously be adjusting their pace to match the slower hull velocity. But, since the effect is the same for all competitors, no one will have an unfair advantage.
That’s only one possible explanation for the dreaded “slow pool”. It’s also possible that the perception of a slow pool has a larger effect than the reality.
As some have pointed out, the Australian Olympic Trials at the Brisbane Aquatic Centre resulted in a new world record in the women’s 200m freestyle – despite the pool being only 2m deep.
Faster, higher, stronger
It’s also possible swimmers are approaching the limits of human performance – at least until we work out how to break those limits once again.
New technology, improved nutrition and training, and greater access to clubs and coaches have boosted elite performance. But each toppled record reduces the likelihood of another, even better performance.
It shouldn’t be surprising that the rate of record-breaking performances will decrease over time.
In marathon running, for example, the men’s world record fell by 12 minutes over the 1950s and ‘60s. But further progress has been slow: it has only dropped another 8 minutes in the past 60 years, and now stubbornly hovers just above the two-hour mark. A statistical study published in 2019 predicted there is only a 1 in 4 chance anyone would beat the two-hour threshold in a competitive event by 2027.
Compared to track events, swimming seems to still have plenty of capacity to shatter records.
At Tokyo in 2021, the winning times in three-quarters of the swimming events were faster than at the Beijing Games in 2008. This was despite the use of swimming suits in the Beijing games that were later banned by the sport’s governing body. Over the past decade, swimming world records have been broken 43% more often than in Olympic track races.
The desire to push our limits, to break the unbreakable barrier, is at the heart of the Olympic motto: “Faster, higher, stronger.”
It just might take a little longer to get there.
Shane Keating receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the NSW Defence Innovation Network. He has also receives funding from industry and government partners including the Bureau of Meteorology, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, and Naval Group Pacific.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Mesagno, Senior Lecturer – Sport and Exercise Psychology, Research Fellow – Institute for Health and Sport, Victoria University
Australia’s soccer team entered Paris with high hopes of notching their first Olympic medal but those aspirations came crashing down with defeat to the United States.
Even without star striker Sam Kerr, the Matildas – who enjoyed a famous run to finish fourth at the 2023 FIFA World Cup – were considered medal fancies but couldn’t progress past the group stage.
It was a devastating loss – but how do these athletes (and others who don’t achieve their goals in Paris) rebound from the disappointment?
The pressure of performing
Every four years, billions of viewers around the world unite in awe of the skill and perseverance of Olympians and Paralympians.
The athletes fortunate enough to compete in Paris 2024 will have done their best to put years of dedicated preparation into their performances.
Many will have performed well and some achieved their goal of claiming a medal. Others, though, will finish the games with the feeling they did not fully realise their potential when it counted most.
This leaves many athletes finishing the games with crushing disappointment.
Research has shown that many athletes report lower wellbeing after returning from the Olympics, including a sense of loneliness, disappointment, and lack of direction.
One of the reasons Olympic disappointment is so difficult is the deep ways in which an athlete’s identity gets wrapped up in their performance.
That is, after years of being seen as “an athlete”, many begin to feel who they are as a person is dependent on how they perform.
Athlete mental health and the role of self-criticism
The mental health challenges faced by many athletes are now well recognised. Research here in Australia has found elite athletes show rates of mental ill-health at similar, if not greater, numbers than the general public. Major performance disappointments are well known contributors to this.
Perhaps adding salt to the wound, one of the ways that elite athletes deal with disappointment is through self-criticism. This can include hostile ways of relating to oneself, which can lead to feelings of worthlessness and inferiority.
Being self-critical is seen in many pursuits as the only way to get ahead, in an attempt to remove weakness and demand self-improvement.
However, research repeatedly shows that most forms of self-criticism are associated with symptoms of mental ill-health. Moreover, harsh forms of internal judgement are far less effective at motivating growth and development than we might think.
Athletes, like the rest of us, need to find another way to handle the inevitable setbacks and disappointments as they arise.
A role for compassion
A growing body of research and practice has suggested self-compassion might fit the bill.
Compassion can be defined as the sensitivity to suffering in self and others, with a commitment to try to reduce or prevent the suffering.
It can be directed to others, received from others, or directed internally (self-compassion).
For an athlete experiencing post-Olympic distress, showing self-compassion involves turning towards that distress rather than avoiding, judging, or criticising, and then identifying what they need to address it.
This is harder than it may seem.
One of the reasons self-compassion is so difficult is because it goes against many of the ways in which we have learned to self-motivate. Indeed, many athletes will report a common worry: that being self-compassionate might lower their standards.
That’s just not the case. Research has shown self-compassion can motivate self-improvement and athletes with higher levels of self-compassion show positive performance outcomes in sport. This is in contrast to self-criticism.
Research has also shown athletes who engage in more self-compassion tend to report a range of benefits including better mental health, and more helpful responses to disappointment.
For this reason, there is a growing focus within clinical and sport psychology to help develop self-compassion among athletes as a resource for resilience.
Two-time Olympian Laurence Halsted says self-compassion helped improve his performance.
Building self-compassion
So, how can athletes (and the rest of us) build an ability to be self-compassionate?
There are lots of ways. A great start is using our inner wisdom to recognise how we would offer compassion to another person we care for, and then directing it inwards.
Perhaps ask yourself: “how would I respond to a close friend in this situation?”
Other strategies aim to trigger a soothing response in our bodies which can affect both our psychology and physiology. For example we can actively change the tone of our inner thoughts and outward facial expression to be friendly rather than neutral or hostile.
Additional practices involve mental imagery (or visualisation) to develop our “compassionate self”, which we can then learn to step into. These practices make up some of the key ingredients to compassionate mind training and compassion-focused therapy, which have been shown to reduce depression and self-criticism.
In this way, athletes can offer themselves the support they need to get through the difficulties of Olympic and Paralympic disappointment.
More than self-compassion
Just as important as an athlete’s self-compassion is the receiving of compassion from others.
Australians love winners — I felt like the only way I could endear myself to the Australian public was to come back with one of those shiny gold medals.
So during and after these Olympic and Paralympic Games, let’s come together and support our athletes, no matter their result.
For more on this topic, check out episode one of PsychTalks, a podcast by the University of Melbourne’s School of Psychological Sciences.
Courtney Walton receives funding through an MSPS Academic Fellowship at the University of Melbourne. He has advised a number of elite sports codes and organisations nationally.
Christopher Mesagno 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.
In recent years, the climate emergency has sparked a global response from children and young people. The School Strikes for Climate movement is a prominent example.
Through this activism, children express their frustration at political systems that exclude their voices. This situation is particularly important because children will bear the brunt of future climate catastrophes.
It seems their message might be getting through. Our recent research demonstrates adults in Australia and New Zealand generally support children being heard in government decisions about the environment.
So what has prompted this support, and how can it be turned into action?
Our study
Despite ongoing political debate about whether and how children’s voices should be incorporated in environmental decisions, we know surprisingly little about general public attitudes.
To address this, we added a question to national surveys in both New Zealand and Australia as part of the 2020 International Social Survey Programme. The surveys included roughly 1,000 respondents each, and sampling weights were applied for the results to be nationally representative.
We asked how strongly respondents support children and young people’s views being included in government decision-making about the environment. The question was asked in relation to four different age groups: 3–5-year-olds, 6–10-year-olds, 11–14-year-olds and 15–18-year-olds.
What we found
We found a majority of surveyed adults in both countries support 11–14-year-olds (62% in Australia and 59% in New Zealand) and 15–18-year-olds (79% in Australia and 80% in New Zealand) having opportunities to influence government decisions on the environment.
Our analyses also revealed that various population groups agreed more than others to children’s voices being included in environmental decisions. For example, across all child age groups, women were consistently more likely than men to express support.
Historically, women have felt the brunt of exclusion from political participation, while also being key in nurturing children via mothering and teaching roles. This context may mean greater respect and empathy from women and therefore greater support for children’s views being heard.
Green party voters, members of environmental organisations and 18–30-year-olds were also more likely than other population groups to support children’s views being included.
Attempts to be heard
Our finding of a high degree of public support for young people being heard aligns with lobbying to lower the voting age to 16 in both countries.
Young people in Australia launched the “Make it 16” campaign in June 2023. In New Zealand, the current National-led coalition government recently rejected steps to progress legislation to extend the voting age. This had been introduced by the previous government in response to a successful Supreme Court case taken by the New Zealand Make it 16 campaign to legislate to extend the voting age.
Rejecting this ruling is an undemocratic breach of human rights, as outlined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The UN published a “comment” in response to children’s calls for action. It clearly outlines what governments must do. It states that governments must ensure that children’s views are heard at all stages of environmental decision-making processes. This applies to decisions being made at the local, national and international level.
Winds of change
Our findings indicate the public in Australia and New Zealand is responsive to calls for greater involvement of children in environmental decision-making.
Indeed, our results reflect greater levels of public support than those observed in earlier researchstudy focused on a broader question seeking adult views on children and young people’s involvement in government decision-making.
School climate strikes may be having a positive influence on adult attitudes towards including children in the political sphere. Media coverage of young people being politicallyactive could also be shifting adults’ beliefs on young people’s political engagement.
In other words, the more adults hear and see stories of children and young people’s concerns and restorative actions for the environment, the greater potential there is for adults to understand and support their perspectives.
The way forward
How can we move towards greater consideration of children’s views in government decisions regarding the environment? There are some foundational courses of actions that could be pursued.
Members of parliament could do this by listening to children and youth in their electorates. Early childhood education centres, schools and arts, cultural and sports centres can support MPs’ access to child and youth forums.
Further, youth parliamentary programs such as the YMCA program could be officially embedded in the Australian parliamentary system. This would ensure that bills that youth table are heard and voted on. Similarly, the parliamentary system in New Zealand could take more heed of the triennial Youth Parliament.
Children and young people deserve to have their concerns heard and influence policies that will greatly impact their future lives – well beyond those of current politicians.
Louise Phillips receives funding from Australia Research Council, Queensland Education Department, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Spencer Foundation and Swedish Research Council. She is the Vice-President of the Australian Council for Human Rights Education. Louise acknowledges the significant work of the Australian Consortium for Social and Political Research in conducting the Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (AuSSA) 2020 survey. The views expressed here are not intended to represent those of any of these organisations.
Jenny Ritchie is a Research Associate with the Child Poverty Action Group, Aotearoa and with He Whenua Taurikura | A Land at Peace. She is a past co-president of the New Zealand Association for Research in Education. Jenny has previously received research funding from the New Zealand Teaching and Learning Research Initiative, the New Zealand Ministry of Education, the Spencer Foundation, and the New Zealand National Commission for UNESCO. She gratefully acknowledges support of COMPASS at Auckland University Waipapa Taumata Rau in conducting the New Zealand iteration of the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP). The views expressed here are not intended to represent those of any of these organisations.
Francisco Perales 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.
Aurora seen from the International Space Station.ESA/NASA
Few sights in the night sky are as awe-inspiring as aurora. The vibrant dancing lights – usually seen close to the planet’s poles – are produced by a wind of charged particles streaming from the Sun into Earth’s atmosphere. The resulting disturbances are called geomagnetic storms.
Earlier in 2024, the world was treated to an exceptional show of aurora borealis (northern hemisphere) and aurora australis (southern hemisphere). A particularly strong geomagnetic storm produced bright auroras visible at latitudes much closer to the equator than usual.
This has reignited public interest in aurora, and you might see more frequent headlines in the media promising auroras are returning to the night skies.
The Bureau of Meteorology has issued an ‘aurora watch’! What does this mean?
For hopeful aurora chasers in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, the Bureau of Meteorology’s Australian Space Weather Forecasting Centre issues regional aurora outlooks, watches and alerts:
aurora outlooks are warnings with lead times of 3–7 days
aurora watches are warnings with lead times of up to 48 hours
aurora alerts will follow if visible space weather activity at Earth actually occurs.
The space weather website has a lot of information, so here’s what you need to look out for.
On the first page you see the “K index”. This is a measure of the disturbance of Earth’s magnetic field, and the first point of info we need for aurora predictions.
The value shown on the page is a three-hour average:
less than 5 and green in colour means there’s only a mild disturbance to Earth’s magnetic field
up to 7 and yellow in colour is classified as a moderate geomagnetic storm
if it reaches 9 and is red in colour, this is a major geomagnetic storm.
The K index tells you what geomagnetic activity there has been in the last three hours. Bureau of Meteorology
Underneath the K index, you will see the current “solar wind parameters”: velocity is the speed of the wind towards Earth, and Bz is the magnetic field strength. If Bz is negative it means it is pointed from north to south, opposite to Earth’s magnetic field.
From the velocity of the solar wind (in kilometres per second) we can calculate when we expect it to reach Earth. From the strength of the solar wind’s magnetic field (in Tesla, T) and direction (positive or negative), we can estimate how it will interact with Earth’s magnetic field.
An example of solar wind parameters listed on the aurora watch website. Bureau of Meteorology
To put it all together: for a strong geomagnetic storm, the solar wind would have a speed of about 700 km/s and a negative magnetic field with a value something like -20 nT.
So, in this case it would take about 35 minutes to reach Earth and generate a strong geomagnetic storm and aurora activity.
Now, let’s look at the 30 minute forecast
All this data is used to produce the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 30 minute forecast.
The NOAA 30 minute forecast provides a simple visual guide on what level of aurora we can expect for each hemisphere. NOAA
This animation of a green glow surrounding Earth’s poles gives a clear visual idea of where the aurora is likely to be strongest (usually on Earth’s night-time side).
If it’s red, the aurora is forecast to be very strong! The aurora doesn’t have to lie directly over Australia to be visible – you just need to be able to see it on the horizon looking south. This is why Tasmania and southern New Zealand generally have the best chance.
NOAA aurora forecast on May 11 2024 showing a very high probability of aurora extending away from the South Pole. NOAA
There’s an aurora alert and the 30 minute forecast looks promising. What do I do now?
There are a few other things to consider before you rush outside to see an aurora.
Firstly, it needs to be dark, so a winter’s night in a dark location is ideal. Secondly, as those of us in Sydney and Newcastle are painfully aware, the sky must be clear of clouds.
Lastly, a direct view to the horizon in the south is generally needed for us in the southern hemisphere (it is very rare to see the aurora overhead so close to the equator).
Aurora usually last for between 15 to 30 glorious minutes, but if you’re super lucky this could extend to a few hours. So, plan to be looking south for some time.
I still didn’t see anything! Why?
Space weather forecasts are notoriously difficult. Solar physicists monitor the Sun to predict eruptions that might cause geomagnetic storms and phenomena like aurora, and the Sun’s magnetic field is constantly changing.
We have very few observations between the Sun and Earth, so we rely heavily on models of the solar wind to predict if and when an eruption at the Sun will arrive.
Only when the particles from the Sun reach 1.5 million kilometres from Earth can we actually measure the solar wind speed and magnetic field. This gives only about 30 minutes notice.
Even then, the measurements are made at a single point, known as L1. That measurement may not be representative of all of nearby space.
Researchers in solar physics, space physics and ionospheric physics are working towards piecing together each critical component in the space weather chain to make more precise forecasts. But for the time being, we are essentially limited to “nowcasting”. So keep an eye on social media for live aurora updates, too.
Hannah Schunker receives funding from the Australian Research Council Future Fellowship Award.
On January 1 this year, the commercial logging of native forests ended in Victoria and Western Australia. It was one of the most significant changes in the history of forest management in Australia.
These practices are worth discussing. But conflating them with the destructive commercial logging practices of the past is unwarranted.
We have a rare opportunity to consider a fundamental question – how much should we intervene and manage our forests? With commercial logging gone, should we aim to create “wilderness” – nature without people – or should we manage Country, as Australia’s Traditional Custodians have done for millennia?
Forest Country has changed profoundly
Before European colonisation, Traditional Custodians managed Country through the careful application or exclusion of fire and watched which plants grew and which animals thrived. Over tens of thousands of years, this experience accumulated.
Unfortunately, in the past 250 years of colonisation, Australia’s forested landscapes, once tended for thousands of generations, have changed profoundly.
These changes began with the displacement of Traditional Custodians and the sudden change to cultural fire regimes. In Tasmania, for instance, Palawa people used fire to create open woodlands. After colonisation, their fire regime was abandoned and the woodlands reverted to rainforest.
More recently, large areas of Australia’s forests have been damaged by a century or more of logging, land clearance, bushfires and flooding. As a result, today’s forests would be unrecognisable to earlier generations of Traditional Custodians.
In response, some Traditional Custodian groups in Victoria have restarted cultural management, partnering with Western scientists to begin to heal Country.
If these efforts are successful, we expect to see more biodiversity, healthier, more resilient forests, as well as new support for Traditional Custodians’ management of cultural landscapes.
What does it mean to care for a forest?
To be clear, no two forests are alike. There’s no blueprint to manage all forests.
Some forests are fire-tolerant, while others are fire-sensitive. Each forest has its own history of disturbances and its own ability to respond to future disturbances.
Forest structure matters too. Forests comprised of large trees are more likely to stay healthy and recover quicker from bushfires than forests of densely packed small trees.
Caring for Forest Country means reading the needs of each forest to ensure it can endure whatever the future holds.
Removing trees to save the forest?
You might look at a forest with lots of small trees and think it’s a good thing – the forest is growing back.
But you can have too much of a good thing. Very dense forests typically emerge in response to an intense disturbance, whether logging, floods, or fire. Tens of thousands of seedlings can regenerate per hectare. As they grow, the seedlings compete intensely for water, light and soil nutrients.
At such high densities, growth quickly slows and the overall health of the forest declines. This delays the development of large trees, which are disproportionately important to bird, mammal and insect species.
Worse, because these young trees are growing slowly, they are vulnerable to bushfire for decades longer. This is crucially important, as climate change is triggering more frequent landscape-scale bushfires.
Thinning forests is done by removing some trees so those remaining can grow larger, faster. It’s similar to how gardeners thin out a vegetable patch, removing weaker seedlings so others can thrive.
Around the world, thinning has been done by foresters for centuries to speed up production of larger, more valuable logs. But thinning can benefit forests in other ways.
Thinning is not a silver bullet – it may produce ecological benefits in some forests, but not in others.
For instance, researchers explored whether past commercial thinning operations affected the amount of a tree’s crown consumed by subsequent bushfire. In mountain ash forest, thinning didn’t change the rate of crown consumption in either young or old forests. In drier forests, thinning reduced fire severity in young forests – but not in old forests.
This raises important questions: If the thinning had been done for ecological, not commercial, reasons, would the results have been different? If they had been done in other forest types, would the results have been different?
We don’t have good answers to these questions because so little research on ecological thinning has been done in Australia’s forests. But we do know that it has had positive results in many other forests around the world.
A way forward
Australia’s Traditional Custodians are rightly acknowledged as the continent’s first scientists. By living on and working with Country, they learned how it responded.
As we turn an historic page in forest management in parts of Australia, Western scientists could do well to learn from and partner with Traditional Owners to explore new ways to manage Country. Try new approaches. Learn from practice. And work together to figure out how best to heal Forest Country.
Jack Pascoe has received funding from the Australian Research Council. He is affiliated with the Biodiversity Council, Saltwater People, Conservation Ecology Centre and Back to Country.
Patrick Baker has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, and the Victorian government. He has also received funding to teach intensive short courses on forest dynamics to field staff of Local Land Services NSW and Forestry Corporation NSW. He has consulted for the NSW Office of the Chief Scientist and Engineer and the NSW Natural Resources Commission on issues related to native forest management.
Tom Fairman has received funding from the Victorian Government and the Australian Research Council. He is currently involved in research evaluating approaches to restoration undertaken by First Nations groups. He is a member of the Corner Inlet Landcare Group, Forestry Australia, the Gippsland Forest Dialogue, and the Gippsland Agroforestry Network.
A diagnosis of life-limiting cancer can be overwhelming and cause feelings of panic and anxiety. But for some people, it provides a license to live life differently, including quitting toxic jobs and becoming more adventurous.
In our recently published research, we sought to understand the impact of a cancer diagnosis and subsequent experiences for cancer survivors.
We talked with 81 New Zealanders (23 Māori and 58 non-Māori) who had lived longer than expected with a life-limiting or terminal diagnosis of cancer (four to 32 years since first diagnosis), and 25 people who were identified as their supporters.
We found there are vastly different ways in which people experience and respond to a cancer diagnosis, but for some it’s a prompt to make significant changes. Of the 81 participants, 26 expressed the view, unsolicited, that cancer had some positive impact on their lives – without downplaying the negative impacts it could have as well.
A licence to change
Being told you only have limited time left to live can undoubtedly be a shock. But it can lead to profound change.
It’s not uncommon for people who receive a serious diagnosis to draw up a “bucket list”. Some people in our study took the opportunity to travel or move to a new home.
For others, the diagnosis provided a chance to rethink their lives and make more significant changes to the way they lived. They decided to be culturally more adventurous and to take up new skills.
Many of these people quit their jobs or changed to jobs that suited them better. Many changed their relationships with the people around them. One talked about showing more affection for his children, another was kinder and stopped fretting over small things.
Some people make significant changes to their lives following a cancer diagnosis. Getty Images
Some decided to be more selective and no longer be around people who were negative. Others took up new hobbies or crafts which they felt were healing. For one person, the cancer diagnosis provided the impetus to look at things and people differently, which they thought would not have happened otherwise.
Individuals could also undergo a transformation to become what they felt they were meant to be in life. One person, given two months to live, embraced rongoā (Māori traditional healing), including its spiritual side. They now love their “journey” and feel this was what they were “supposed to do”.
For many, a diagnosis of cancer gave them license to be different people and to resist conforming to social norms, including having a job, being thrifty or not taking risks.
Disrupting diagnoses
One person, given only months to live, moved out of her flat, gave away her possessions, quit her job that she described was toxic, and returned home to say goodbye to her family.
Most importantly for her, she worked on experiencing “joy” – after receiving the diagnosis, she realised she had lost it. But she continues to live many years later. After a while, she had to find a new flat, get a new job and the recovery of her joy was challenged:
I had to start working again. And, of course, with working again, joy goes down, time goes down, rest goes down, spirituality goes down.
But not everyone has the opportunity to change. Some peoples’ lives were limited because of the physical effects of the cancer, its treatment, or because of their personal, social or financial resources.
Some go to great lengths to ensure their lives change as little as possible after diagnosis to maintain a sense of normality.
Why we need to know
Given the fear a cancer diagnosis can elicit, it is important to see there are different ways of responding.
It is also worth knowing there are people who live longer than expected. Many people in our study were given just months to live, but one woman was still alive 12 years after being told she had a year left.
Beyond that, this research documents how the disruption produced by a cancer diagnosis can prompt people to breach social norms. Where people have the capacity and resources to change, those around them and their health professionals can support them in taking opportunities to live life differently.
We heard people say they think of their cancer as a friend or an amazing opportunity. Some even felt thankful.
The possibility of cancer providing opportunities for some in no way diminishes the grief or a sense of loss, fear and anxiety that can accompany such diagnoses.
Our research supports a reframing of cancer narratives, to consider ways of tempering the negative impacts of a diagnosis – while remaining cognisant of the struggle that can follow such news, and the variability in people’s capacity to engage with that struggle.
Kevin Dew receives funding from The Marsden Fund..
Alex Broom receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Kerry Chamberlain receives funding from the Marsden Fund.
Chris Cunningham, Elizabeth Dennett, and Richard Egan 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.