Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leo Roberts, Research Fellow, Centre for Mental Health, The University of Melbourne

With dual men’s and women’s Ashes series under way, the performance of elite Test cricketers is in the spotlight. For psychologically minded researchers like us, one aspect of play is attracting particular interest: the performance of batters progressing through the famed “nervous nineties”.

Popularised by commentators, this terminology captures the idea that batters with 90 or more runs become anxious about reaching (or not reaching) a century (100 runs).

Commentators and journalists (and Wikipedia) often portray the nervous nineties as a problematic moment for batters. This anxiety, the story goes, leads to lost ability, slow run-scoring and timid play.

These ideas are intuitive – but are they correct?

In fact our new research, published today in PLOS ONE, shows batters approaching 100 runs typically increased their scoring rate (more runs per ball) and became more likely to score a boundary (a four or a six), without being any more likely to get out than at any other point between 70 and 130 runs.

100 is not an arbitrary number

While cricket is a team sport, the individual accumulation of 100 runs is universally hailed as a major batting achievement.

Notably, 99 runs is an impressive individual total; yet in cricket culture, 99 is a world away from 100.

Watching a batter reach 100 runs reveals its significance. Jubilation and relief flood out, teammates stand and applaud, and crowds respond. Even nearby opponents offer congratulations.

Scoring centuries builds a batter’s reputation, while enhancing their legacy, their chance of team selection and, let’s not forget, their team’s chances of winning.

In stark contrast, getting out just short of a century is a bitter experience.

Beyond the disappointment, being dismissed in the 90s can attract stigma of mental weakness (especially if repeated) and is widely considered “a failure to convert”.

Who wouldn’t be nervous?

Read more:
What cricket can teach us about the mind’s experience of time – and how to deal with anxiety

Challenges of realising success

Many people can think of a time when a desired achievement slipped through their fingers just when success seemed assured.

Humans have imperfect thought control and can experience unhelpful thoughts at inconvenient times, like pondering the consequences of failing when success is in sight.

The possibility of gaining or losing reputation is also a common source of performance anxiety.

For athletes, performance anxiety places extra demands on the ability to execute precise actions.

Generally speaking, the anxious brain is thought to be less efficient at perceiving relevant information in the environment, and at planning and executing movement.

To counteract this, performers need to apply coping strategies to maintain performance, such as the acceptance of negative thoughts or directing their thoughts to a single focus, like the ball in cricket.

According to the mythology of the nervous nineties, these strategies could include more cautious behaviour to try to avoid getting out.

What does the data say?

In our new research, we examined data about every ball bowled in 712 men’s and women’s Test matches played between 2004 and 2022 (over 1.4 million deliveries).

In stark contrast to the colloquial phenomenon of the nervous nineties, we found batters in their 90s generally scored faster without increasing their chances of dismissal.

Importantly, accelerated scoring – that is, a progressive increase in the average runs per ball and the probability of a boundary – was uniquely large throughout the 90s when compared to the 70s, 80s and immediately after 100.

Some key examples from this year’s Ashes series bear out this finding. When Usman Khawaja brought up his century in the first men’s Ashes Test of 2023, it was with a boundary.

When Ellyse Perry was caught out on 99 runs in the women’s Test match, she was dismissed playing an aggressive shot destined for the fence – not exactly the timid play expected of the “nervous nineties” phenomenon.

In fact, Perry’s forceful batting is precisely the kind of playing our analysis predicts for those nearing a century.

And throughout the 90s, we estimated the probability of a batter getting out on any given score to be about 1.3% – much the same as throughout the 70s, 80s and just after 100.

Managing the nerves

We have come up with several explanations for the productive batting observed in the 90s.

Possibly, batters rush to escape their nervous discomfort by batting aggressively or with more urgency (such as running faster between the wickets).

The bowling team could also play a role. Bowling sides often try to limit run-scoring as batters near 100 by bringing fielders closer to the pitch, hoping to build pressure and encourage a mistake.

Ironically, a field packed tightly around the batter may offer a faster path to a century by leaving the boundary unprotected from any shot that passes through or over the infield.

While we can’t judge a batter’s emotional state from historical cricket data, we suspect many players are actually nervous when progressing from 90 to 100 runs. But we find no evidence the “nervous nineties” leads to widespread poor functioning or timid play.

International cricketers appear to typically manage any nerves and capitalise on the situation. It’s a fine example of coping among an elite population in a career-defining situation.

Read more:
What Olympic athletes can teach us about regulating our emotions and staying dedicated

Daniel R. Little receives funding from ARC Discovery Project DP160102360.

Leo Roberts, Matthew J. Spittal, and Mervyn Jackson do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Cricket commentators love to talk about the ‘nervous nineties’ – but our new research suggests there’s no such thing – https://theconversation.com/cricket-commentators-love-to-talk-about-the-nervous-nineties-but-our-new-research-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-208027

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Wiltshire, Professor of Theoretical Physics, University of Canterbury

Our ideas about the Universe are based on a century-old simplification known as the cosmological principle. It suggests that when averaged on large scales, the Cosmos is homogeneous and matter is distributed evenly throughout.

This allows a mathematical description of space-time that simplifies the application of Einstein’s general theory of relativity to the Universe as a whole.

Our cosmological models are based on this assumption. But as new telescopes, both on Earth and in space, deliver ever more precise images, and astronomers discover massive objects such as the giant arc of quasars, this foundation is increasingly challenged.

In our recent review, we discuss how these new discoveries force us to radically re-examine our assumptions and change our understanding of the Universe.

Einstein’s legacy

Albert Einstein faced huge dilemmas 106 years ago when he first applied his equations for gravity to the Universe as a whole. No physicist had ever attempted something so bold, but it was a natural consequence of his key idea. As a 50-year-old textbook reminds us:

Matter tells space how to curve, and space tells matter how to move.

Data were almost completely lacking in 1917 and the idea that galaxies were objects at vast distances was a minority view among astronomers.

The conventional viewpoint, accepted by Einstein, was that the whole Universe looked like the inside of our galaxy. This suggested stars should be treated as pressure-less fluids, distributed randomly but with a well defined average density – the same, or homogeneous, anywhere in space.

Based on the idea that the Universe is the same everywhere, Einstein introduced his cosmological constant Λ, now known as “dark energy”.

On small scales, Einstein’s equations tell us that space never stands still. But forcing this on the Universe on a large scale was unnatural. Einstein was therefore relieved by the discovery of the expanding universe in the late 1920s. He even described Λ as his biggest blunder.

Read more:
Dark matter: our review suggests it’s time to ditch it in favour of a new theory of gravity

Ideas about matter have evolved, but not geometry

We now have amazingly detailed models of the physics of stars and galaxies embedded in the evolving Universe. We can trace the astrophysics of “stuff” from tiny seed ripples in the primordial fireball all the way to complex structures today.

Our telescopes are wonderful time machines. They look back all the way to when the first atoms formed, and the Universe first became transparent.

Beyond is the primordial plasma, opaque like the interior and surface of the Sun. The light that left the Universe’s “surface of last scattering” was very hot back then, about 2,700℃.

We receive that same light today, but cooled to minus 270℃ and diluted by the expansion of the Universe. This is the cosmic microwave background and it is remarkably uniform in all directions.

This is strong evidence the Universe was very close to spatially uniform when it was a fireball. But there is no direct evidence for such uniformity today.

A ‘lumpy’ Universe

Far back in time, our telescopes reveal small merging galaxies, growing into ever larger structures until the present day.

The expansion of the Universe has been halted entirely within the largest matter concentrations known as galaxy clusters. Where space is expanding, the clusters are stretched in filaments and sheets that thread and surround vast empty voids, all growing with time but at different rates. Rather than being smooth, matter forms a “cosmic web”.

But the idea that the Universe is spatially homogeneous endures.

There would be a gross inconsistency between the observed cosmic web and an average curved geometry of space if all we see is all there is. Evidence for missing matter has been around since the first observations of galaxy clusters in 1933.

Our first observations of the cosmic microwave background radiation and its ripples in the decade from 1965 changed that idea.

Our models of nuclear physics are wonderfully predictive. But they are only consistent with observations if the missing mass in galaxy clusters is something like neutrinos that cannot emit light. Thus we invented cold dark matter, which makes gravity stronger within galaxy clusters.

Billions have been spent trying to directly detect dark matter, but decades of such efforts have yielded no definitive detection of what makes up 80% of all matter and 20% of all the energy in the Universe today.

An anomalous sky

The cosmic microwave background radiation is not perfectly uniform. Superimposed on it are fluctuations, one of which is abnormally large and has the shape of a dipole: a yin-yang diagram covering the whole sky.

We can interpret this as an effect due to relative motion, provided we define the cosmic microwave background radiation as the rest frame of the Universe. If we didn’t do this, we would need a physical explanation for the large dipole.

Much of the puzzle boils down to a power asymmetry – a lopsided Universe. The temperatures of the hemispheres above and below the plane of the Milky Way are slightly different to expectation.

These anomalies have long been explained as a result of unaccounted physical processes in modelling microwave emissions from the Milky Way.

Read more:
The largest structures in the Universe are still glowing with the shock of their creation

Matter within the sky

The cosmic microwave background radiation is not the only all-sky observation to show a dipole. Last year, researchers used observations of 1.36 million distant quasars and 1.7 million radio sources to test the cosmological principle. They found that matter, too, is unevenly distributed.

Another even more widely discussed mystery is the “Hubble tension”. Conventionally, we assume that an all-sky average of the Universe’s present expansion rate gives one well defined value: the Hubble constant. But the measured value differs from expectation, given a standard expansion history based on the cosmic microwave background radiation. If we allowed for inhomogeneous cosmologies, this problem may simply disappear.

Using cosmic microwave background data from individual opposing hemispheres, a standard expansion history implies different Hubble “constants” on each side of the sky today.

These puzzles are compounded by an ever-growing list of unexpected discoveries: a vast giant arc of quasars and a complex, bright and element-filled early Universe unveiled by the James Webb Space Telescope.

If matter is much more varied and interesting than expected, then maybe the geometry is too.

Models which abandon the cosmological principle do exist and make predictions. They are simply less studied than standard cosmology. The European Space Agency’s Euclid satellite will be launched this year. Will Euclid reveal that on average space is not Euclidean? If so, then a fundamental revolution in physics might be around the corner.

Read more:
The Euclid spacecraft will transform how we view the ‘dark universe’

David Wiltshire received funding from the Royal Society of New Zealand, most recently a Catalyst Seeding Grant. With previous Marsden funding, he developed the first detailed observational tests of the non-standard timescape cosmology. These will include tests by the Euclid satellite mission.

Eoin Ó Colgáin most recently received funding from the National Research Foundation of Korea (2020-2022) to conduct research into cosmological tensions.

Jenny Wagner received funding from the German Science Foundation to investigate the biasing model-dependencies and degeneracies of strong gravitational lensing as a cosmological probe, for instance to constrain the Hubble constant.

Shahin Sheikh-Jabbari receives funding from IPM, Tehran and ICTP, Trieste, Italy, which has been used to investigate cosmological tensions and non-standard alternatives such as the dipole cosmology.

– ref. Cosmological models are built on a simple, century-old idea — but new observations demand a radical rethink – https://theconversation.com/cosmological-models-are-built-on-a-simple-century-old-idea-but-new-observations-demand-a-radical-rethink-204190

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Madi Day, Lecturer, Department of Indigenous Studies, Macquarie University

With NAIDOC week coming up, there is already a surge in expectations for extra labour from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in workplaces.

Events like NAIDOC Week see employers across the country leaning on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff. They are expected to plan and organise cultural events and experiences, which is rarely reflected in their job description or pay packet.

The Make us Count report, which we co-authored, found this is not just limited to NAIDOC Week. This report reflects on the experiences of Aboriginal women in workplaces within the Victorian public sector, and reveals this additional labour is a burden on Aboriginal women. Regardless of their employment level or role in their respective workplace, this unpaid labour is often expected of them.

One participant stated,

The value [of Aboriginal cultural knowledge] is only when I organise NAIDOC or Reconciliation Week celebrations. The worst part is that it is up to me to drive recognition of these important events and for the rest of the year, culture and I are forgotten.

Many organisations publicly state they are committed to acknowledging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, which is often outlined in their Reconciliation Action Plans or other organisational strategy documents. They rarely, however, provide resources to meet this commitment.

Read more:
Attention managers: if you expect First Nations’ staff to do all your ‘Indigenous stuff’, this isn’t support – it’s racism

Aboriginal unpaid labour is nothing new

Australia has a long history of capitalising on Aboriginal women’s unpaid work. Bidjara and Birri Gubba Juru author and academic Dr Jackie Huggins, has written about unpaid domestic service provided by Aboriginal women and girls.

This occurred in white settler homes and on missions and reserves into the 1970s. Many who were supposed to be paid had payments withheld, misappropriated or were underpaid and are still seeking compensation.

Huggins, in her foreword for Make Us Count, writes, “workplaces are a microcosm of Australia”, meaning what happens in workplaces is a small representation of what happens everywhere. Huggins goes on to say the report reveals little has changed and Aboriginal women are still expected to perform unpaid labour.

It’s not ‘cultural load’

The Healing Foundation, an organisation dedicated to healing trauma in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, describes “cultural load” as an accumulative trauma and stress experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are navigating systemic adversity in their lives while they are also trying to succeed in their careers.

Ngadjuri and Bundjalung academic Kelly Menzel has argued workplaces often misuse the term “cultural load”. This term is often used to describe the additional unpaid work expected of people because they are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander – like organising NAIDOC week events or educating non-Indigenous staff.

Overburdening Aboriginal women with unreasonable workloads not part of their job description is not reflective of cultural responsibilities or cultural load. It is gendered and racial exploitation.

Last week, a piece by Bundjalung Mununjali NITV digital journalist and producer Bronte Charles detailed the emotional and psychological toll of additional expectations and responsibilities imposed on Indigenous staff by non-Indigenous supervisors and colleagues.

Many of the participants in the Make it Count research participants also spoke about feeling tokenised and not seen as professionals with genuine skills and expertise.

What the ‘Make us Count’ research found

We interviewed 25 Aboriginal women working in the Victorian public sector and a further ten responded to an online survey. They reported multiple forms of racism and gendered violence in their workplaces. Many expressed they were undervalued compared to non-Indigenous colleagues and Aboriginal men.

One participant stated, in terms of recruitment and promotion opportunities, that “Aboriginal women are the bottom of the pecking order”.

The Make Us Count research found managers in the Victorian public sector failed to act on reports of bullying, harassment and racism.

One participant shared,

I spoke to my manager about what was going on and he agreed that we would come together with these two particular people. Then said to me that this must be a cultural thing as opposed to it being the bullying and harassment that it was. So, they failed to act.

Some Aboriginal women who reported receiving unwanted attention or harassment from Aboriginal men were told the issue was cultural. And for some, when the offender was a non-Indigenous colleague who bullied, harassed or were racist toward them, they were only referred to “cultural safety” training.

Some participants referred to harassment from Aboriginal men as lateral violence (meaning violence from within the same group). However, in most cases these men were in higher ranking positions, making this an abuse of power.

Overworking and undervaluing Aboriginal women in the workplace is discrimination and a systematic barrier to career progression. One participant stated, “It’s taken me 17 years to get from entry level to where I am now”.

Another commented “Unless you’re always performing at 150% or more, people don’t see you”.

Aboriginal transgender women and gender diverse people, as well as Aboriginal queer women, were invited to participate in this research. However, none of the participants chose to share this information about themselves, which may be telling in its own right.

In the Victorian public sector, just 0.7% of employees identify as transgender, non-binary and gender diverse. Research on the experiences of Indigenous LGBTQIA+ people in the workforce in general reveals high levels of discrimination, racism, social exclusion, queerphobia and transphobia.

As demonstrated by the Make Us Count report and other research, there is an urgent need for workplaces to take action to address racism and misogyny.

This includes unpaid labour, precarious working conditions like recurring short-term contracts and workplace harassment and violence. Aboriginal women want to be able to enjoy their work and have productive careers without being subjected to racism, discrimination, and exploitation.

As the following woman from our survey makes clear,

I just want to be able to be in a job where I can actually do the job and then still have the capacity to give back to the community.

Madi Day received funding from the Commission for Gender Equity in the Public Sector’s Research Grants Round 2022- Victoria State Government.

Bronwyn Carlson received funding from the Commission for Gender Equity in the Public Sector’s Research Grants Round 2022- Victoria State Government.

Debbie Bargallie received funding from the Commission for Gender Equity in the Public Sector’s Research Grants Rounds 2022 – Victoria State Government.

– ref. During NAIDOC Week, many Indigenous women are assigned unpaid work. New research shows how prevalent this is in the workplace – https://theconversation.com/during-naidoc-week-many-indigenous-women-are-assigned-unpaid-work-new-research-shows-how-prevalent-this-is-in-the-workplace-208454

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roy Judge, Associate Professor (Prosthodontics) Melbourne Dental School, The University of Melbourne

It seems our perception of dental health and beauty has changed over the last 20 years or so. Social media posts, TV shows and films depict a perfect smile as being dominated by a broad pearly white teeth.

The idea of this kind of “perfect” smile was born in early Hollywood and popularised by actors including Julia Roberts. Advertisements for toothpaste or other oral health products commonly use models with wide, bright smiles, creating an aesthetic ideal.

Now some dental practitioners are beginning to self-identify as “cosmetic dentists”. And new technologies and materials allow dentists to make significant changes to the shape and colour of teeth.

But are these changes purely for looks? And what do they do to people’s natural teeth.

What are veneers?

One way of changing your smile is using dental veneers.

Veneers are coverings (usually made of porcelain) constructed in a laboratory and then bonded with adhesive to teeth.

Dental veneers can be used to change the colour and shape of teeth. They are commonly used at the front of the mouth and most often on the top teeth as this is the area of the mouth of maximum visual impact.

Veneers can be applied to lower anterior (front) teeth however, but this is technically more difficult due to these teeth’s smaller size and reduced surface area for effective bonding. Veneers can be applied to single teeth or multiple teeth.

The shape of veneers is matched to the shape of adjacent teeth. They should be in proportion to the facial profile and in harmony with the lips. Veneers are technically demanding for the dentist and technician to construct, blend and fit. The cost of each veneer can vary with the level of complexity of each case, patients should ask for a written quote before starting care.

Read more:
Curious Kids: what is inside teeth?

What lies beneath

What patients should know about dental veneers is that the dentist will most often have to shave down the front portion of the tooth to make room for the veneer.

And veneers do not last forever. They may need to be replaced if they chip, discolour or come unstuck. Each time a veneer is replaced the amount of the tooth left can reduce in size, making each round of care more difficult.

Eventually veneers may not be a viable choice. Then the patient may need need to move on to more extensive treatment choices such as crowns, which are thicker and more permanent.

To help patients make informed decisions dentists have the ability to provide trial digital or handcrafted mock-ups for patients to evaluate before committing to a treatment approach. This “try before you buy” step can be invaluable to ensure the patient’s expectations are likely to be achieved after the application of veneers. If this step is missed then the veneers may not meet the patient’s aesthetic needs requiring removal and replacement.

High levels of oral hygiene by the patient are a must to maximise the quality of fit of the bonded veneers as well as longevity within the mouth.

Read more:
Doctors may soon get official ‘endorsements’ to practise cosmetic surgery – but will that protect patients?

Professional guidelines

Recently the Medical Board of Australia has issued guidelines for medical practitioners who perform cosmetic surgery, with stronger regulation due to come into effect at the start of July this year.

They include patient screening for body dysmorphia – a mental health condition characterised by excessive concern about one’s appearance or specific physical features. This is intended to ensure each patient’s assessment of their own needs can be met in a biologically safe and predictable manner by their treating clinician.

Veneers can be the right choice for some people. But before embarking on this form of irreversible care there should be an informed risk-versus-benefit discussion between the patient and clinician. If the individual patient still wants aesthetic improvement but decides they don’t want veneers, there are other treatment choices available.

Alternatives

Bleaching and orthodontics can also change the colour and position of teeth.

Bleaching (or whitening) has been a standard clinical activity since the late 1980s and is normally undertaken using customised trays and prescription of a range of bleach treatments. Ideally this is done in consultation with a dental practitioner to understand the cause of tooth discolouration. This will determine whether bleaching is the appropriate choice and if it is likely to work.

Orthodontics is the controlled movement of teeth using bonded attachments and activated orthodontic wires (braces). In recent times, dentists have been able to provide individualised clear aligners to move teeth in a controlled manner. The principle of tooth movement using incrementally modified aligners is available through many providers, but should always be carefully and regularly managed by the treating dentist or orthodontist.

A patient should understand the risks and benefits of each of these choices as they relate to their individual needs rather than a generic approach to planning.

Read more:
50 shades whiter: what you should know about teeth whitening

Teeth for life

Dentists are trained to provide lifelong care and should be keen to explain and tailor treatment choices for informed and considered patients.

Patient-centred care should drive treatment choices and advocate for the best interests of patients. As such, we must maintain a balanced approach towards the delivery of idealised look, keeping in mind the importance of teeth function for a healthy diet and wellbeing.

Roy Judge receives funding from various granting bodies supporting dental research, these include the University of Melbourne, Australian Dental Research Foundation, Australian Prosthodontic Society, Australian Osseointegration Society, Australian Society of Periodontology and the Biomedical Translation Bridge Program. Roy is an academic at the University of Melbourne, he also works in private practice as a specialist prosthodontist providing care for referred patients, including dental veneers.

– ref. Smile! What are veneers and what do they do to your natural teeth? – https://theconversation.com/smile-what-are-veneers-and-what-do-they-do-to-your-natural-teeth-207112

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sally Cripps, Director of Technology UTS Human Technology Institute, Professor of Mathematcis and Statistics, University of Technology Sydney

Rapid progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has spurred some leading voices in the field to call for a research pause, raise the possibility of AI-driven human extinction, and even ask for government regulation. At the heart of their concern is the idea AI might become so powerful we lose control of it.

But have we missed a more fundamental problem?

Ultimately, AI systems should help humans make better, more accurate decisions. Yet even the most impressive and flexible of today’s AI tools – such as the large language models behind the likes of ChatGPT – can have the opposite effect.

Why? They have two crucial weaknesses. They do not help decision-makers understand causation or uncertainty. And they create incentives to collect huge amounts of data and may encourage a lax attitude to privacy, legal and ethical questions and risks.

Cause, effect and confidence

ChatGPT and other “foundation models” use an approach called deep learning to trawl through enormous datasets and identify associations between factors contained in that data, such as the patterns of language or links between images and descriptions. Consequently, they are great at interpolating – that is, predicting or filling in the gaps between known values.

Interpolation is not the same as creation. It does not generate knowledge, nor the insights necessary for decision-makers operating in complex environments.

However, these approaches require huge amounts of data. As a result, they encourage organisations to assemble enormous repositories of data – or trawl through existing datasets collected for other purposes. Dealing with “big data” brings considerable risks around security, privacy, legality and ethics.

Read more:
Robots are creating images and telling jokes. 5 things to know about foundation models and the next generation of AI

In low-stakes situations, predictions based on “what the data suggest will happen” can be incredibly useful. But when the stakes are higher, there are two more questions we need to answer.

The first is about how the world works: “what is driving this outcome?” The second is about our knowledge of the world: “how confident are we about this?”

From big data to useful information

Perhaps surprisingly, AI systems designed to infer causal relationships don’t need “big data”. Instead, they need useful information. The usefulness of the information depends on the question at hand, the decisions we face, and the value we attach to the consequences of those decisions.

To paraphrase the US statistician and writer Nate Silver, the amount of truth is approximately constant irrespective of the volume of data we collect.

So, what is the solution? The process starts with developing AI techniques that tell us what we genuinely don’t know, rather than producing variations of existing knowledge.

Why? Because this helps us identify and acquire the minimum amount of valuable information, in a sequence that will enable us to disentangle causes and effects.

A robot on the Moon

Such knowledge-building AI systems exist already.

As a simple example, consider a robot sent to the Moon to answer the question, “What does the Moon’s surface look like?”

The robot’s designers may give it a prior “belief” about what it will find, along with an indication of how much “confidence” it should have in that belief. The degree of confidence is as important as the belief, because it is a measure of what the robot doesn’t know.

The robot lands and faces a decision: which way should it go?

Read more:
Bayes’ Theorem: the maths tool we probably use every day, but what is it?

Since the robot’s goal is to learn as quickly as possible about the Moon’s surface, it should go in the direction that maximises its learning. This can be measured by which new knowledge will reduce the robot’s uncertainty about the landscape – or how much it will increase the robot’s confidence in its knowledge.

The robot goes to its new location, records observations using its sensors, and updates its belief and associated confidence. In doing so it learns about the Moon’s surface in the most efficient manner possible.

Robotic systems like this – known as “active SLAM” (Active Simultaneous Localisation and Mapping) – were first proposed more than 20 years ago, and they are still an active area of research. This approach of steadily gathering knowledge and updating understanding is based on a statistical technique called Bayesian optimisation.

Mapping unknown landscapes

A decision-maker in government or industry faces more complexity than the robot on the Moon, but the thinking is the same. Their jobs involve exploring and mapping unknown social or economic landscapes.

Suppose we wish to develop policies to encourage all children to thrive at school and finish high school. We need a conceptual map of which actions, at what time, and under what conditions, will help to achieve these goals.

Using the robot’s principles, we formulate an initial question: “Which intervention(s) will most help children?”

Next, we construct a draft conceptual map using existing knowledge. We also need a measure of our confidence in that knowledge.

Then we develop a model that incorporates different sources of information. These won’t be from robotic sensors, but from communities, lived experience, and any useful information from recorded data.

After this, based on the analysis informing the community and stakeholder preferences, we make a decision: “Which actions should be implemented and under which conditions?”

Finally, we discuss, learn, update beliefs and repeat the process.

Learning as we go

This is a “learning as we go” approach. As new information comes to hand, new actions are chosen to maximise some pre-specified criteria.

Where AI can be useful is in identifying what information is most valuable, via algorithms that quantify what we don’t know. Automated systems can also gather and store that information at a rate and in places where it may be difficult for humans.

AI systems like this apply what is called a Bayesian decision-theoretic framework. Their models are explainable and transparent, built on explicit assumptions. They are mathematically rigorous and can offer guarantees.

They are designed to estimate causal pathways, to help make the best intervention at the best time. And they incorporate human values by being co-designed and co-implemented by the communities that are impacted.

We do need to reform our laws and create new rules to guide the use of potentially dangerous AI systems. But it’s just as important to choose the right tool for the job in the first place.

Sally Cripps receives funding from Paul Ramsay Foundation, The Medical Research Futures Fund, the Australian Research Council and The National Health and Medical Research Council.

Edward Santow, through HTI, receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation.

Nicholas Davis, through HTI, receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation.

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

– ref. How should a robot explore the Moon? A simple question shows the limits of current AI systems – https://theconversation.com/how-should-a-robot-explore-the-moon-a-simple-question-shows-the-limits-of-current-ai-systems-199180

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Neil G Sipe, Honorary Professor of Planning, The University of Queensland

In all the debate about Australia’s housing crisis, the impact of transport has been largely overlooked.

When we talk about transport, it’s usually about time spent commuting and not the out-of-pocket costs. While housing is typically the biggest household cost, spending on transport is the second- or third-largest cost – and these costs are inextricably linked.

There is research to suggest the cost difference between the inner and outer suburbs largely vanishes when both housing and transport costs are taken into account.

In Australian cities, housing costs typically decrease with distance from the CBD. Thus, people looking for affordable housing tend to look in the outer suburbs.

The desire to own a home, and reap the benefits of increasing housing values, trumps all other considerations. Would-be buyers typically consider the house price and not the commuting costs. That’s because the home price is a single known figure, while transport costs add up over time.

But when housing and transport costs are combined, the “cheaper housing” in the outer suburbs becomes more expensive as their residents typically travel longer distances. These extra transport costs leave households facing mortgage stress in these outer suburbs in an even worse situation.

Read more:
Affordable housing is not just about the purchase price

The high cost of car-dependent suburbs

How much does it cost to run a car? Using Australian Tax Office and Australian Bureau of Statistics data, the annual cost for households with one vehicle is around $9,500 per year, or nearly $800 a month.

However, many households, particularly in the outer suburbs, have more than one car. Their costs could be twice as much, or more if they drive longer-than-average distances.

When combined with the national average monthly mortgage repayment of $3,425 to $3,535 as of April (before the last two interest rate rises), this means driving costs could increase the average cost of owning a suburban home by nearly a quarter (for one-car households) to a half (for two-car households).

Concerns about the transport impacts of housing decisions are not new. In 2006, urban policy researcher Jago Dodson and I developed the VAMPIRE (Vulnerability Assessment for Mortgage and Petroleum Inflation Risks and Expenditure) Index to examine household vulnerability to higher mortgage interest rates and fuel costs. It showed the outer suburbs of Australia’s capital cities were the most vulnerable because they depended on motor vehicles (not public transport) to get around.

One goal of our research was to help improve public transport in outer suburban areas. Residents would then be less reliant on car ownership and ultimately less vulnerable to interest rate and fuel price increases.

Policymakers showed considerable interest at the time. However, such concerns seem to have dissipated over the years – although urban transport researcher Abraham Leung updated the VAMPIRE Index for southeast Queensland last year.

Related Australian research includes a 2020 analysis of the impacts of commuting costs on housing affordability for low-income renters.

Read more:
Designing suburbs to cut car use closes gaps in health and wealth

Why not consider housing and transport costs together?

The idea of combining housing and transport costs is not widespread. Yet notable efforts have been made, particularly in North America, to provide a more accurate picture of the true costs of buying a house in particular areas.

The most impressive effort has been the work done by the Chicago-based Center for Neighborhood Technology. It created an H+T (housing plus transportation) Index in 2006. This index examines costs for all parts of the US and is regularly updated. It provides a better understanding of the affordability of each area by dividing housing and transport costs by income.

Another national-level example is the US Department of Transportation’s Housing and Transportation Affordability Indicator. It measures what the average US household spends on housing and transport combined as a percentage of income.

One of the most advanced efforts at a local and regional government level is the work of the metro Vancouver region in Canada.

This study found that when housing and transport costs are both taken into account, there is little cost difference between the inner and outer suburbs. Thus, prospective home owners would be better off looking for housing closer to the CBD. Vancouver includes housing and transport costs in its Metro 2040 Plan.

Another regional government example comes from Portland, Oregon. The city has created an equity atlas that shows the combined cost burden of housing and transport.

Read more:
Living ‘liveable’: this is what residents have to say about life on the urban fringe

What does this mean for planning policy in Australia?

Housing strategies must consider transport when deciding land-use plans and where to develop new housing estates. This more holistic approach would produce better outcomes by reducing cost pressures on households.

Such an approach would likely result in higher housing densities closer to the CBD and other employment centres. It should also get decision-makers to focus more on providing better public transport for outer suburbs and other areas that lack good transport services.

One obstacle to an integrated approach by Australian policymakers is that they lack a way to easily assess the combined housing and transport costs. While the VAMPIRE index was a step in the right direction, Australia needs a regularly updated and more focused tool like the above-mentioned H+T Index and Housing and Transportation Affordability Indicator.

Neil G Sipe has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Outer suburbs’ housing cost advantage vanishes when you add in transport – it needs to be part of the affordability debate – https://theconversation.com/outer-suburbs-housing-cost-advantage-vanishes-when-you-add-in-transport-it-needs-to-be-part-of-the-affordability-debate-204807

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By My Nguyen, Senior Lecturer in Finance, RMIT University

In a move that has taken the business world by surprise, PwC Australia this week offloaded its government consultancy business to Allegro Funds for just $1.

It’s what’s known as a peppercorn transaction.

Peppercorn transactions, which involve a minimal payment to fulfil the requirements of a legal contract, are not as unusual as they may seem.

They are used when companies seek to rid themselves of liabilities as well as opportunities.

PwC’s decision comes in the aftermath of a scandal triggered by a former PwC tax partner who, while advising the federal government on laws to prevent corporate tax avoidance, shared confidential information with colleagues.

Read more:
Self-interest versus public good: the untold damage the PwC scandal has done to the professions

You might wonder why the asking price was set at $1 and not $2, or $100. It’s because the $1 is a nominal price, which is all that is needed to make the sale legally binding.

Under contract law, sales are valid if they are in return for a “consideration”.

The actual value of the transaction is far greater than the price paid, including things such as the ability of the purchaser to operate the business successfully, meet operational commitments (including those to staff), and pay down outstanding debt.

The purchaser, Allegro Funds, will be shouldering not just the business (and whatever opportunities it brings) but also liabilities and ongoing contracts.

In the past, several football and Formula 1 teams have also been sold for a nominal price of $1, a price that takes into account the transfer of liabilities and obligations along with opportunities.

Caterham Sports, a UK company that designed and built cars for the Caterham Formula 1 team, was sold for just £1 (A$1.90) in 2014.

Football clubs Chelsea, Portsmouth and Swansea City were sold for £1 in 1982, 1997 and 2001 respectively, with the buyers taking on the debts and obligations as well as the opportunities.

While these transactions often occur when a company is struggling or wants to offload certain liabilities, they can also take place when things are better but not as good as they could be under a new owner, and for nominal prices that exceed $1.

Some of the most transformative offloadings have been sold for billions.

The most notable was Facebook’s US$1 billion purchase of Instagram in 2012, in which Facebook not only gained the platform and its user base, but also took on any obligations or liabilities.

Amazon’s 2017 A$13.7 billion acquisition of Whole Foods in 2017 was similar.

Read more:
Who needs PwC when consultancy work could be done more efficiently in-house?

All that’s different between these billion-dollar price tags and a price tag of $1 is the best guess of the old owner about the asset’s prospects under the new owner (and in PwC’s case, the imperative to find a new owner quickly).

When a business is dragged down with liabilities, and it becomes clear it has better (although uncertain) prospects under a new owner, the price needn’t seem to make sense.

PwC’s government consultancy business might well be worth much, much less than $1 to its existing owners if it stayed in their hands. They faced the prospect of having to continue to fund the business with few or no government contracts.

The UK football teams that were bleeding money until sold for £1 would also have been worth a lot less than £1 to their existing owners.

Instagram was also probably worth less than the US$1 billion it sold for, until it was bought by a new owner with the ability to integrate it with something bigger and make it far more valuable. A recent guess is US$100 billion.

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

– ref. You can’t buy much for $1, except maybe a global company. Why PwC could be sold for less than the price of a stamp – https://theconversation.com/you-cant-buy-much-for-1-except-maybe-a-global-company-why-pwc-could-be-sold-for-less-than-the-price-of-a-stamp-208577

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicola Gaston, Co-Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, University of Auckland

Yesterday’s announcement of NZ$128 million in new funding for universities has naturally been welcomed as a badly-needed reprieve. But we have to ask, is this a bailout for struggling institutions, or is it just a Band-Aid on a tertiary sector with deeper structural wounds?

It’s clear the pandemic massively exacerbated the challenges caused by years of funding below inflation rates. All universities have seen previous redundancy rounds, some of which may have been inevitable.

But whatever academic fat there was to lose is gone. Recent cuts have bitten into flesh, and now the bone saws are out. The choices being made about which teaching programmes should go – teacher training, modern languages or geophysics – are no choice at all, other than which limb to amputate.

So the government’s simultaneous proposal to review the tertiary funding model offers a chance to take the system back to basics – to remind us why these institutions are publicly funded in the first place, and to give them a warrant of fitness for the 21st century.

The ‘per student’ funding problem

The proposal to spread the $128 million (over two years) across all tertiary institutes – universities, wānanga and Te Pukenga – looks fair and consistent. As such, it looks far less like a bailout of particular institutions than an admission that the current policy settings are not fit for purpose.

But that fairness also reveals the problem with our funding settings. Tertiary education subsidies are allocated “per student”, and this structurally advantages larger institutions.

There is a baseline cost of operating a teaching programme or department, on top of which additional students cost relatively little. We fund research in universities in this way, through baseline funding topped up by contestable grants, but not teaching.

Read more:
Starved of funds and vision, struggling universities put NZ’s entire research strategy at risk

The University of Auckland, for example, is currently in an enviable financial position, by local standards at least. Yet it will pick up more new funding than any other university by virtue of having the most students.

Furthermore, the new funding won’t avert all the proposed redundancies. The downside of “fairness” is that the funding holes at Victoria and Otago universities will not be covered. It will likely be the same story at AUT, Massey and Waikato.

So yes, the $128 million is perhaps just a Band-Aid. But it does buy time to rethink and re-strategise while the system is reviewed – which was the most important part of yesterday’s announcement.

University leadership accountability is now under the microscope – under many microscopes, even. Any redundancies with strategic implications for what a university can teach or research should now be delayed as much as possible.

Value and equity

First and foremost, the New Zealand public owns and operates tertiary education institutions because they deliver economic and social value: value for the student who learns and acquires a qualification; and value for those who don’t attend but will rely on those who do (such as doctors and nurses).

There is a question of equity, too. Some New Zealanders might be able to pay for their children to study overseas, but equal access to education at home should be a fundamental principle.

All this becomes important when we ask what our university system should look like. For example, do we need eight universities competing for both students and funding?

Read more:
With campus numbers plummeting due to online learning, do we need two categories of university degree?

I don’t think there is an easy answer to that. The University of Auckland has long had a strategy of leveraging its size to claim the position (and reputational advantages) of being New Zealand’s “highest-ranked” university internationally.

The smaller universities, by contrast, have been strategic about facing their local communities more directly, and building reputations in specific fields. We should therefore not be cavalier about downsizing the sector in general. The benefits of a university to a community should be widely distributed.

Minister of Finance Grant Robertson touched on this at the funding announcement when he said universities had perhaps spent too much on marketing. And that may be true of their efforts to maximise international rankings to maximise international student revenue.

But the fact that each university has its own identity, developed over many years in collaboration with its local community, is also something to celebrate.

3 important questions

Overall, then, yesterday’s announcement offers hope because it recognises the need for coordination between universities on teaching – with a report to Cabinet in a month on the risks to specific programmes – and because it acknowledges the immediate threat to New Zealand’s national research capacity.

The two-year time frame for the review of funding structures is probably realistic, given the complexity of current funding models. The interdependence of research and teaching income streams needs to be examined carefully.

Read more:
‘Battered and broken. I must get out’: what staff told us about teaching and working in universities today

The different sizes of institutions, and different levels of research and teaching focus, mean seemingly simple models can have unanticipated biases, whether towards certain (larger or more research-intensive) institutions, or towards particular types of scholarship (such as science over the humanities).

The anticipated outcomes of any proposed new model will need to be measured against the Education Act’s definition of a university and its reasons to exist:

• does it maintain a balance (and interdependence) of teaching and research?

• does it maintain a diversity of scholarship, the sciences and the arts, the quantitative and the qualitative?

• and does it deliver for its community, and thus justify its independent existence?

Academic freedom is enshrined in the law as meaning universities operate as the “critic and conscience” of society. But their responsibility to community is a useful way of thinking about what that means, in my opinion. Either way, these seem like the necessary questions to ask if we want to get back to basics.

Nicola Gaston receives funding from the Tertiary Education Commission as Co-Director of the MacDiarmid Institute, and from the Royal Society Te Aparangi as an Investigator on Marsden research grants.

– ref. Bailout, Band-Aid or back to basics? 3 questions NZ’s university funding review must ask – https://theconversation.com/bailout-band-aid-or-back-to-basics-3-questions-nzs-university-funding-review-must-ask-208564

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Hammoud, PhD candidate, Western Sydney University

Millions of men, women and children have converged on Mecca this week for the Hajj pilgrimage. The Saudi government says it will be the largest crowd ever for the pilgrimage.

The Hajj pilgrimage is, at its core, a pilgrimage towards God. This presents a paradox of sorts. If God is beyond time and space, then what is the purpose of travelling to a particular place? Is God not present now, everywhere?

The celebrated author Gai Eaton offers an elegant response:

Our sense of the divine Presence is blunted. We need to find it focused on a particular place and, for the Muslim, that place is the Ka’ba at Mecca, which he has faced every time he prayed and to which he now journeys in pilgrimage.

A transformative experience

Within the Islamic worldview then, the Ka’ba functions as the locus of hearts. I use the plural “hearts” here, for the pilgrimage is not only an individual religious obligation. It is a communal act that strengthens ties of kinship between Muslims in a way that resembles nothing else.

When the pilgrims prepare to don the Hajj attire, they discard more than their clothes. Nationality, race and socio-economic status are tossed to the wayside — prince and pauper unite as pilgrims. All distinctions are left behind.

The experience can be transformative, particularly for those embarking on the pilgrimage for the first time.

The renowned activist and minister Malcolm X was compelled to re-evaluate his views on race in the wake of his Hajj experience. In his Letter From Mecca, he wrote:

There were tens of thousands of pilgrims, from all over the world. They were of all colours, from blue-eyed blondes to black-skinned Africans. But we were all participating in the same ritual, displaying a spirit of unity and brotherhood that my experiences in America had led me to believe never could exist between the white and non-white.

Coupled with his societal reflections was an internal revolution, one that stirred his heart. In his autobiography, he writes:

In my thirty-nine years on this earth, the Holy City of Mecca had been the first time I had ever stood before the Creator of All and felt like a complete human being.

Read more:
Millions of Muslims prepare to perform the hajj amid calls for a boycott

Road to Mecca fraught with challenges

For Muslims then, the return of Hajj pilgrims to pre-pandemic numbers this year (or even surpassing them) represents another opportunity for this reorientation towards God.

Granted, globalisation has drawn the world closer, denting the impact of encountering people from completely different walks of life. Despite this, the Hajj pilgrimage remains unparalleled in its capacity to turn hearts, both individually and collectively.

All this is not to say that the experience is one of ease and comfort.

If the history of the Hajj pilgrimage has demonstrated anything, it is the road to Mecca is often fraught with challenges. The most recent challenges confronting potential pilgrims have been unforeseen, drastically altering the Hajj experience.

The COVID pandemic saw pilgrimage to the holy sites halted for two years, with only a limited number of Saudi residents permitted to perform the pilgrimage.

As the pandemic slowly subsided, many Muslims in other countries who had waited with eager anticipation booked their travel plans. But they were met with a new complication.

The struggle for getting a spot

In 2022, the Saudi government announced that all those intending to perform the pilgrimage from several Western countries, including the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand and the European Union, must register through the Motawif website. Those who had already made bookings were advised to immediately cancel them and register through Motawif.

This would place the registrant into a lottery-type system, replacing the Hajj travel tours that had operated locally in these countries for many years.

The Saudi administration claimed it was trying to remove the middle man and make the Hajj travel package process smoother and more affordable. Many testimonies, however, appear to confirm the contrary.

Read more:
Technology remains at the heart of the hajj

Registrants criticised the persistent technical failures of Motawif, and those who were lucky enough to make it to Mecca bemoaned the disorganised mess that greeted them upon their arrival.

The Saudi claim of increased affordability was also contested. Prices for a Hajj package vary, depending on the level of luxury that the pilgrim desires during their stay in the holy cities. When factoring in all costs, however, the total price for the package hovered in the range of US$7,000 to $13,500 (A$10,000 to $20,000) per person.

For many Muslims in the West, a more affordable Hajj package was viewed as desirable. In reality, though, prices remained high — the only difference being the Saudi government collected the profits.

This year, the Saudi authorities have ditched the short-lived Motawif system. Rather than operating on a lottery basis, it has now been replaced with a new first-come, first-serve system. Only time will tell whether this new system is feasible, or whether it will go the way of Motawif.

Despite these challenges, Muslims from around the world continue to flock to the Hajj. Through this ritual, they direct their hearts individually and collectively towards the Ka’ba. In doing so, they step out beyond time, linking the past and present in an unbroken covenant with God.

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

– ref. An unbroken covenant with God: what the Hajj means for Muslims – https://theconversation.com/an-unbroken-covenant-with-god-what-the-hajj-means-for-muslims-208571

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kelly Menzel, Associate Dean Education, Gnibi College, Southern Cross University

During this year’s Reconciliation Week I asked the group of non-Indigenous students I was teaching “who is responsible for doing Reconciliation work?”.

They all quickly put their hands up and said “us”.

I then asked them “what does this work look like? What can you actually do?”

They all looked a bit blank and admitted they didn’t know what it really meant to “do the work” or what “the work” looks like.

Non-Indigenous people often don’t know how they should address racism and social inequity brought about by colonisation and white privilege. This may be why many Australians are expressing hope the Voice to Parliament is going to solve such problems.

For example, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Linda Burney has said if the Voice to Parliament had been in place, the so-called crime crisis in Alice Springs would have been better addressed.

There have also been claims the Voice will “fix what is broken”.

Indigenous leaders, scholars, activists and community members have spent decades suggesting solutions to inequities in this country, which still haven’t been implemented.

Read more:
Attention managers: if you expect First Nations’ staff to do all your ‘Indigenous stuff’, this isn’t support – it’s racism

Indigenous people have already offered solutions

Indigenous People, our culture and our communities are not to blame for the inequities we live with. And expecting an Indigenous “Voice” to be a fix-all for inequities brought about by the colonial project is unrealistic and problematic.

Closing the Gap is a good example of the government putting all of its eggs in one basket, and expecting outcomes that have not been delivered.

As Indigenous academics have pointed out, often issues placed under Closing the Gap targets are lost in the list.

Data from the productivity commission shows only four of the 17 targets under the agreement are on track to be met. A recent report in Queensland found these targets will not be met by the 2031 deadline.

Indigenous leaders, communities and organisations have led research focusing on racism, Indigenous deaths in custody, the Stolen Generations, and the harm caused by the Northern Territory intervention.

The clear recommendations in this work from Indigenous People continue to be largely ignored by mainstream Australia and rarely acted upon by those in power.

Read more:
People in the Kimberley have spent decades asking for basics like water and homes. Will the Voice make their calls more compelling?

What will be different this time?

For more than 100 years our communities have called for appropriate representation in government. The Voice to Parliament could potentially represent the views of Indigenous communities and hopefully assist in informing policy and legal decisions that impact our lives.

But the Voice to Parliament cannot solve the deeply entrenched racism and bigotry in Australian society, media, and institutions.

And expecting it to do so is assigning the role and responsibility of addressing racism to the people experiencing it. This should be the ongoing work of everyone, all of the time, regardless of the upcoming referendum.

The effects of the societal imbalance caused by colonisation impacts everyone. The reason it continues is because people in power and the wider (whiter) community continue to benefit from it.

Read more:
Here’s some context missing from the Mparntwe Alice Springs ‘crime wave’ reporting

Even if we get the Voice, non-Indigenous people still need to ‘do the work’

After I asked my students who is responsible for reconciliation work we discussed the kind of work that needs to be done by all non-Indigenous peoples to address the ongoing damage of colonisation.

This (ongoing) work requires everyone to:

• recognise your position in the world. Learn who you are and where you come from. This means recognising your privilege and being mindful of how this informs your attitude, beliefs, behaviour and how you communicate with others. And learn to remain silent while those with less privilege than you speak about their experiences, even if your instinct is to respond defensively

• acknowledge oppressive histories and systems that enable you to occupy the land you now live on. Learn the sociopolitical history of Australia, and the Peoples whose land you are occupying

• find out how you benefit from colonial structures and ways to utilise your privilege to dismantle the oppression of others. An example of this is to cede the space for Indigenous voices, Peoples and communities to determine what happens in our communities. Do not sit in an Indigenous identified position, or speak on issues that effect us or think you can swoop in and fix us. All people have the right to autonomy and to determine what is right for our own communities

• remind your peers that addressing racism and the negative effects of colonisation is the work of everyone, all of the time.

It is not the work or responsibility of the Voice to Parliament, or Indigenous People, to do this work.

We cannot rely on one strategy to “solve” the racial divide in Australia. This is something that requires much work to be done from those with privilege and power.

The issues Indigenous People face need to be addressed now instead of passively waiting to see if we get the Voice to Parliament. This should be occurring with or without an established Voice.

If Australia is waiting for the Voice to be established to have complex and nuanced truth-telling, what will happen if the referendum vote is No?

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

– ref. The Voice alone won’t solve the issues facing Indigenous people. Everyone has to do that work – https://theconversation.com/the-voice-alone-wont-solve-the-issues-facing-indigenous-people-everyone-has-to-do-that-work-206676

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jianni Tien, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of Sydney

Earlier this year, federal health minister Mark Butler announced a new national Lung Cancer Screening Program. The first of its kind for lung cancer, the screening program will open initially to current and former smokers aged 50 to 70 years by July 2025. It aims to save lives by detecting lung cancer earlier.

Since the 1980s, highly successful public health campaigns have raised awareness about the dangers of smoking and, in economically wealthy countries like Australia, the rate of smoking has dropped considerably.

Unfortunately, the success of anti-smoking campaigns has been accompanied by growing stigma around lung cancer. In fact, 28% of Australians admit they have less sympathy for lung cancer sufferers than those with other forms of cancer. And when it comes to an array of health issues, stigma negatively affects diagnosis, treatment and outcomes.

Patient support groups, professional associations and peak bodies are all in agreement that we need to rethink and modernise our understanding and approach to lung cancer, smoking and stigma.

Read more:
Can vaping help people quit smoking? It’s unlikely

More never-smokers are getting diagnosed

As well as the National Lung Cancer Screening Program, May saw the announcement of a nationwide ban on the sale of nicotine vapes in response to alarming increases in both vaping and smoking among young people. The vaping ban sparked a national conversation about the use of nicotine products, but little media attention has been paid to the lung cancer screening program.

Lung cancer is the fourth most diagnosed cancer in Australia and the leading cause of cancer-related death in Australia, followed by breast cancer.

While there is no disputing the link between lung cancer and smoking, nor the value of public health measures like the recent vaping ban, the proportion of people diagnosed with lung cancer who have never smoked – especially young women – is increasing. There is also growing recognition of other lung cancer risks such as environmental exposures and air pollution.

Despite this, lung cancer receives less funding (around 30% of what breast cancer receives) and is beset by poor screening, delayed diagnoses and low survival rates. The symptoms of lung cancer – including new cough, hoarse voice, coughing up blood, breathlessness, weightloss – can be missed and lead to diagnosis when the disease is already advanced.

Unfortunately, cancer as a disease is prone to various forms of moralising and many Australians think that ex-smokers “deserve” lung cancer as a consequence of their health behaviours.

But smoking and other so-called “lifestyle choices” are highly dependent on social status, family environment, wealth, and educational exposure over a lifetime.

Lung cancer disproportionately impacts people of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage, those in regional and rural areas and those with lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

Smoking is not simply an individual choice, but rather is heavily influenced by one’s social context. Likewise, developing lung cancer, much like heart disease or diabetes, is not a personal or moral failing, despite having clear lifestyle links.

Read more:
New funds will tackle Indigenous smoking. But here’s what else we know works for quit campaigns

‘It’s the dirty disease’

In our recent study, we interviewed 14 women and 3 men aged 30–72 and recruited from social media. They spoke about undergoing treatment for lung cancer. In addition to dealing with their illness and treatment, they faced significant stigma:

[…] it’s the first time I’ve really been aware of the sort of shame attached to an illness.

Some participants spoke about the lack of funding for lung cancer:

[…] people don’t donate to lung cancer because we’re not pretty. We’re stinky and tobacco-y.

And of how public health campaigns had contributed to stigma and needed to be updated:

They know young people are getting it out there and it’s just not hitting the press because it’s the ‘dirty disease’. There is so many young people. Who deserves to die, whether they’re smokers or not? I mean, it needs to be acknowledged.

There needs to be another campaign around: Why are so many people getting lung cancer when they’ve never smoked?

Read more:
Passive vaping – time we see it like secondhand smoke and stand up for the right to clean air

Changing the conversation

The national lung cancer screening program is a step in the right direction to improve survival rates of lung cancer in Australia. But it’s important we confront the idea of lung cancer as a “dirty” disease, “brought on one’s self”.

The nationwide conversation around vaping provides as a good opportunity to do away with simplistic – and stigmatising – narratives about nicotine use that characterise it as weak or shameful. It’s time to disrupt assumptions about lung cancer being solely attributable to a person’s decisions to smoke. And we need to recognise the importance of supporting and caring for people experiencing ill-health regardless of lifestyle “choices”.

Alex Broom receives funding from the Australian Research Council

Katherine Kenny receives funding from The University of Sydney and The Australian Research Council

Malinda Itchins has received honoraria payments from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Bayer, consultancy fees from Roche, Merck, has received funds to sit on an advisory board for Pfizer, Takeda, Bayer, MSD, Amgen, Merck, Roche, Beigene and research grant funding from Pfizer.
Malinda is a Board Member and Lung Cancer Chair on Council for the not-for-profit organisation, Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA).

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

– ref. ‘The dirty disease’ – both smokers and non-smokers get lung cancer. They face stigma on top of illness – https://theconversation.com/the-dirty-disease-both-smokers-and-non-smokers-get-lung-cancer-they-face-stigma-on-top-of-illness-206595

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Hepburn, Professor, Deakin Law School, Deakin University

Fossil fuel companies in Australia could ship their carbon dioxide (CO₂) waste overseas for disposal, under changes to the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 introduced to parliament late last week.

During her second reading speech, Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek said:

Companies would be able to better plan for transboundary projects for carbon capture and storage into sub-seabed geological formations within a clear regulatory framework. Until then, this export activity is not permitted under the sea dumping act.

The Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Bill 2023 will allow export of CO₂ for the purpose of “sequestration”, or storage under the sea. Companies, or research organisations, would need to first apply for an export permit.

The main difficulty with this plan is that offshore
carbon capture and storage has not worked effectively in Australian waters.

If a permit is given for CO₂ waste to be exported to poorer countries, it’s unclear how these countries will acquire the capacity and knowledge to achieve successful carbon storage when wealthy fossil fuel companies operating in Australia could not.

Read more:
Relying on carbon capture to solve the climate crisis risks pushing our problems into the next generation’s path

No lack of storage capacity here

The stated objective of the amendment is to:

support countries without storage capacity to reduce their atmospheric emissions by allowing the export of carbon dioxide streams to countries with available sub-seabed geological storage formations.

But Australia appears to have a great deal of storage capacity, with conservative estimates putting the total at 740 billion tonnes.

In 2021, five areas for Offshore Greenhouse Gas Storage in Commonwealth waters were identified off the coast of Western Australia and the Northern Territory.

The real issue is not lack of storage capacity but rather, the fact offshore CO₂ injection is not working.

World’s biggest carbon capture and storage flop

In Australia the only operational offshore carbon capture and storage project is Chevron’s Gorgon Project on Barrow Island in Western Australia.

By 2024, the Moomba project in the Barossa gas field – located in Australian waters off the Northern Territory – will become operational. Like the Gorgon project, the Moomba project has made bold claims, stating it has capacity to store up to 1.7 million tonnes of CO₂ annually.

Chevron built the “world’s largest” system to extract CO₂ in gas from its offshore reservoirs and inject it deep under the island. The A$81 billion gas export plant was approved on the condition it could store CO₂ in offshore reservoirs and, at a minimum, inject 80% of the CO₂ from the gas produced.

But in the 12 months to June 2022 Chevron only injected 1.6 million tonnes of CO₂ into the underground reservoir and vented 3.4 million tonnes to the atmosphere.

In the six years since export of LNG commenced from the Gorgon Project, 20.4 million tonnes of CO₂ has been extracted but only 6.5 million tonnes has been stored under the island. This significant shortfall adds to global warming and impedes Australia’s ability to reach our legislated 2030 emissions cuts.

Read more:
What is carbon capture and storage? EPA’s new power plant standards proposal gives it a boost, but CCS is not a quick solution

Transferring CO₂ to poorer countries is also bonus for fossil fuel companies like Chevron because from July 1, the reformed safeguard mechanism will make carbon capture and storage failures very expensive.

That’s because the new safeguard mechanism does not allow emission baselines to be as readily adjusted as used to be the case.

Fossil fuel companies will have to begin paying a lot more for emissions that are above their allocated baselines. For example, a report estimates Woodside and its partners will be subject to an additional cumulative liability of up to A$63 billion up to 2050 at the Burrup Hub LNG export project under the new safeguard mechanism reforms. Exporting CO₂ from failed carbon capture and storage sites will allow fossil fuel companies to avoid these costs.

London calling

The existing anti-dumping legislation and the proposed change stem from international agreement.

The Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 (London Convention) was the first international agreement designed to protect the marine environment from sea dumping.

Sea dumping refers to the deliberate disposal of wastes or other matter from vessels, aircraft, platforms or man-made structures into the sea. It does not include material released directly into the sea from a land source or operational discharges from ships.

The London Convention sets up a framework which prohibited sea dumping and which required parties to apply for a special permit for approved materials to be dumped.

The subsequent London Protocol of 2006 took a more restrictive approach. The Protocol prohibited all sea dumping except for identified wastes such as dredged material, sewage sludge, and fish waste. These listed wastes could be dumped if a permit was approved but approval could not be given if it was reasonably likely to cause harm.

Amendments adopted to the London Protocol in 2009 and 2013, yet to be ratified, allowed for the export of CO₂ streams to countries with suitable offshore storage sites, provided an agreement or arrangement has been entered into between the countries concerned.

Australia intends to ratify the 2009 and 2013 amendments, and the amendments to the Sea Dumping Act represent the first stage in this process. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEW) has indicated Australia will apply a “precautionary approach” in the assessment of these permits.

Shifting the problem elsewhere

It’s argued that exporting CO₂ to storage sites overseas will provide significant environmental benefits within a decarbonising economy. The Australian research and industry collaboration CO2CRC considers such transboundary exportation “safe, reliable, necessary and urgent”.

But this is all premised on the assumption carbon capture and storage is effective and operational. The Australian experience to-date shows it is not. So the only apparent benefit of exporting CO₂ overseas lies in the fact it shifts the problem of escalating emissions out of the country.

Read more:
Opening 10 new oil and gas sites is a win for fossil fuel companies – but a staggering loss for the rest of Australia

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

– ref. Australia has introduced a new bill that will allow us to ship carbon emissions overseas. Here’s why that’s not a great idea – https://theconversation.com/australia-has-introduced-a-new-bill-that-will-allow-us-to-ship-carbon-emissions-overseas-heres-why-thats-not-a-great-idea-208456

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shani Sniedze, Research Fellow, Australian Council for Educational Research

As the school year hits the half-way mark, many Year 6 students and their families will be starting to think more about the move to high school next year.

Moving to secondary school is a big change for young people. In addition to hearing stories – good and bad – on the school grapevine, students today also see stories via platforms like YouTube and TikTok. These may or may not be helpful or reflect what their experience will be like.

To discover the actual challenges Australian students face, in 2021, the Australian Council for Educational Research conducted a series of student forums with 444 year 6 to 8 students at 15 schools around Australia in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia.

Students do feel excited

In the forums, students talked about their experiences of moving to high school, their main challenges, as well as potential solutions. We also had conversations on what they felt they needed to know about the move to secondary school.

When asked about their feelings about high school, the responses were mixed. More than 30% said “happy”, “excited” or “confident”. But 25% replied “fear” and 13% said “uncertainty”.

But they are also worried

When asked to explain their fears and uncertainties, 44% of students said academic work. This included concerns around both the difficulty level and amount of academic work in secondary school, as well as increased expectations on students’ performance. As one student told us:

Everyone says that there is lots more homework in high school.

About 30% of respondents also said the new school environment was a concern. This included familiarising themselves with a new campus, finding their way around and the culture of a new school. For example, learning “how things are done at this school” as well as the rules for each classroom. As another student said:

It makes me nervous, knowing that I might get lost.

And 21% said social aspects worried them. This included making new friends, keeping in touch with old friends, as well as the complexities of managing the usual ebb and flow of friendships and interactions at school. One respondent explained:

I feel nervous because there will be new people.

Students also discussed self-management. This included getting up on time, managing public transport, changing to and from sports uniforms, making sure they were prepared for class (having done the homework and brought the correct materials), as well as general time management to fit everything in. Another student told us:

In primary school I had heaps of time. I used to play hockey every weekend. Now I don’t.

What students want

The key message from students was that they wanted independence in their school transition. Students said they wanted some help with the move, because, of course, it was new territory. But they strongly felt that once they had guidance, they were old enough to take care of the challenges themselves.

As some students told us, “take deep breaths in and out when scared”, “the Year 8s have helped me a lot”, “make one friend at a time”, and “just be yourself”.

Read more:
Talking with your teen about high school helps them open up about big (and little) things in their lives

How parents and carers can help

So, how can adults help, while allowing for plenty of independence? The starting point is simply to engage with your young person: ask questions about their move to high school, share your experiences and identify the details of what your young person wants and needs to know.

Here are some practical things parents and carers can do:

• share helpful family stories about change (moving schools, new job, new lifestyle), particularly where there are examples of feeling nervous, making mistakes, and asking for help.

• practice travelling to the new school together during the holidays, so students feel confident doing it on their own when the school year begins.

• look at the high school’s website and social media pages together to see what sort of information you can find. Follow up with the school if you or your child have questions.

• check in with your new school about what orientation activities might be planned. And talk to your existing school: do they have any transition activities?

• importantly, talk with your young person about how they and their classmates are feeling about the move to secondary school. What are their challenges? What could help?

There are more examples of how to help in non-profit organisation Life Ed’s Guide to Thrive. Their examples and resources build directly from the research above.

The big picture

The bigger picture is change and uncertainty is a fact of life. Transitioning from primary to high school is an opportunity for young people to learn skills for managing change they can use again in their future.

Read more:
Year 1 and Year 8 can be surprisingly tough transitions (if your child is struggling, they are not alone)

The student forums research referred to in this article was funded via Life Ed, a not-for-profit organisation, from the Australian government’s ‘Being Healthy Being Active’ grant. This grant also funded the extension of the research into practical advice and resources for the classroom and home, from which the article draws examples.

– ref. ‘It makes me nervous’: how to help your child prepare for high school – https://theconversation.com/it-makes-me-nervous-how-to-help-your-child-prepare-for-high-school-207616

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ari Mattes, Lecturer in Communications and Media, University of Notre Dame Australia

Dating back to the 1930s – earlier, even – horror cinema has been socially and politically conscious, interrogating taboos around gender, sex, class and race along with the borders between states like pro- and anti-social.

But it’s only been in the last 10 years or so that horror films – a booming genre following the success of Midsommar (2019) and Get Out (2017) – have started privileging telling rather than showing, didactically explaining themselves to the viewer as though we haven’t always already gotten it.

Horror films once managed to seamlessly integrate cultural commentary into their visceral effect. We could watch films like Wes Craven’s The Last House on the Left (1972) and be horrified yet intrigued by its critical commentary on American counterculture.

The most distinctive thing about the films of the current horror cycle is their lack of subtlety. It’s not enough that a film implies a kind of critical social position. A character now has to explicitly state this.

This kind of new sincerity has been sapping the genre of its fun.

Run Rabbit Run, following a mother and daughter as the past comes back to haunt them, is the latest Australian film to jump on the bandwagon of the new wave of horror.

The psychological terrain of the guilty mother is typical narrative fare, but, unlike Jennifer Kent’s brilliant The Babadook (2014), Run Rabbit Run doesn’t take any of this in surprising or invigorating directions.

The film fits into the kind of “self-help” horror mode, using the same cliches about trauma and psychology as self-help, presented in a neat package for the consumer.

Read more:
The rise of pop-psychology: can it make your life better, or is it all snake-oil?

No escape

Fertility doctor Sarah (Sarah Snook) and her young daughter Mia (Lily LaTorre) live alone.

When Mia begins showing an interest in her family’s secret history, the ghosts of the past – involving Sarah’s mysterious sister Alice (D’Arcy Carty) and mother, Joan (Greta Scacchi), now confined to some kind of institution (nursing home? asylum?) – begin to materialise in the present in classic gothic fashion.

The more the daughter reaches out to her mum in the hope of understanding her family, the more dysfunctional their relationship becomes. The scares become more frequent, and the whole thing culminates with a revelation so obvious (I had picked it at the 30-minute mark) one wonders if it was meant to be a revelation at all.

In trite fashion, the film’s closing moments show for Sarah, no matter how fast she runs, there’s no escaping her past.

Predictable cues and gothic cliches

This is TV director Daina Reid’s first feature film, so it makes sense it would be released by Netflix, whose films always feel more suited to the television than cinema screen.

Run Rabbit Run looks like a made-for-Netflix movie, with the usual lack of depth in the image and excessive sharpness that tend to define the films the company produces or distributes.

It follows some of the predictable visual cues of horror in the Instagram-era: muted, washed-out colours; a score favouring drone sounds; a plethora of slow-moving tracking shots and spooky silhouettes.

The narrative is replete with gothic cliches. Dream and reality start to mirror each other; there’s a weird kid; the ordinary and familiar become increasingly strange.

Run Rabbit Run very much functions as a kind of bourgeois horror film. We watch affluent people unable to cope with the realities of middle-class life, with the usual hangups.

It is most effective in its capacity to tap into some of the weirdness of being a parent, capturing the anarchic impulse of kids. This is the guiding theme of the film: the estrangement of the parent from the young child.

Your child, you inevitably discover, is not only not you, but also forever watching, critical, and in tension with you.

Read more:
Films made for Netflix look more like TV shows — here’s the technical reason why

A visceral medium

There’s nothing excessively bad about Run Rabbit Run. It’s a watchable psychological horror film with some genuinely arresting moments, but it suffers from the current earnestness running through so much contemporary popular culture.

It seems to approach its – let’s face it, totally ludicrous – ghost story with the seriousness of a Bergman film. The result is something that feels both lightweight and unpleasurable.

It uses silly cliches and caricatures from the tired annals of pop psychology, but the absolute seriousness of its tone saps these cliches of their potential to generate pleasure for the viewer (which, after all, is why we see genre films).

Film is a visceral medium; horror film more than most. The heavy-handed tone of Run Rabbit Run exhausts it of visceral impact. We are left with an object that simply does not move us very much.

Trauma from the past re-emerging in the present has always been an operative force underlying the Gothic, but in the best works it’s not literalised in the form of a petty individual trauma. It is integrated into the very substance of character and community, rather than reduced to the psychology of a single character.

The “trauma” in Run Rabbit Run – while significant for the characters – doesn’t connect to any more meaningful cultural or historical moment. With nothing left unsaid, any ambiguous complexity of character is absent.

The tendency of the new wave of horror is to have everything on the surface. In the social media age everything has become tell, tell, tell. I guess it’s no surprise horror films follow this path. Yawn.

Run Rabbit Run is on Netflix from today.

Read more:
Why true horror movies are about more than things going bump in the night

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

– ref. Run Rabbit Run isn’t excessively bad – just earnest, heavy-handed and predictable – https://theconversation.com/run-rabbit-run-isnt-excessively-bad-just-earnest-heavy-handed-and-predictable-207626

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

Chris Hipkins anticipated a “diplomatic” meeting with Xi Jinping. The Chinese leader said he placed “great importance” on the relationship with New Zealand. Both businesslike, Hipkins made sure to stress his country was open for business too.

And there is certainly a good story to tell when it comes to China. Hipkins is building on decades of cooperation, understanding and ground-breaking economic agreements. Bilateral trade was worth NZ$40 billion in 2022 and could reach $50 billion by 2030.

There might even be scope for cooperation over China’s position on a political settlement of the war in Ukraine. Despite New Zealand and most Western nations being sceptical about the initiative, it’s fair to say Chinese authorities would value New Zealand’s input.

But it’s also fair to say Hipkins was wise to visit now, given what he has coming up in his calendar: the NATO summit in July, and a decision on whether New Zealand should join “pillar two” of the AUKUS security pact between the US, UK and Australia.

Both things will concern China. And despite Beijing’s appreciation of New Zealand’s diplomatic approach – including Hipkins’ reluctance to characterise Xi Jinping as a “dictator” – the timing of this red-carpet visit has been ideal.

Claim and counter-claim

So New Zealand walks a fine line with China, and beneath the diplomatic niceties there is a growing fault line. When Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta visited China earlier this year and expressed New Zealand’s “deep concerns” over human rights, Hong Kong and Taiwan, some media suggested she’d been “harangued” by her Chinese counterpart.

Mahuta has said the conversation was merely “robust”, but there’s no denying China’s combativeness over criticism or threat.

When British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said China posed “the greatest challenge of our age to global security and prosperity” at May’s G7 summit in Japan (which came on top of an official communiqué tacitly focused on China), Beijing hit back at what it called “smears” and “slander”.

While not part of the G7, New Zealand later added its name to a “Joint Declaration Against Trade-Related Economic Coercion and Non-Market Policies and Practices” that built on the G7 meeting. Although it didn’t explicitly mention China, the declaration clearly articulated concerns over Beijing’s perceived willingness to use trade sanctions against countries that displease it.

This includes South Korea after it installed a US missile defence system, and Australia after it called for an independent investigation of the origins of COVID-19. More recently, China blocked Lithuanian exports after the tiny nation allowed Taiwan to establish a de-facto embassy there.

Read more:
Sorry prime minister, Joe Biden was right – Xi Jinping really is a ‘dictator’

When New Zealand joined the US in speaking out over the security agreement between China and the Solomon Islands, Chinese state media accused Wellington of smearing and demonising their country and yielding to the influence of Washington.

A few months later, New Zealand reiterated its position to uphold the rule of international law around China’s island-building in the South China Sea. While officially this amounted to not taking sides over competing claims to sovereignty, it effectively rejected China’s historic claims to the area.

And quite recently it was revealed a New Zealand frigate was confronted – professionally but visibly – by Chinese naval vessels while in international waters near the disputed Spratly Islands.

Security and circumspection

Closer to home, there have been intermittent skirmishes over cyber-security. In 2018, New Zealand’s Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) stated it had “established links” between the Chinese Ministry of State Security and a global campaign of commercial intellectual property theft.

New Zealand’s Security Intelligence Service (SIS) has also recently noted agents from a “small number of foreign states” were becoming “increasingly aggressive”, but chose not to identify the culprits.

Read more:
AUKUS is already trialling autonomous weapons systems – where is NZ’s policy on next-generation warfare?

But when it was reported an analyst within the Public Service Commission had been suspended after being named an “insider threat risk” by the SIS, the Chinese embassy called the claims “ill-founded, and with an ulterior motive to smear and attack China, which we firmly oppose”.

The G7 countries have directly called on China not to interfere in their domestic affairs. New Zealand generally prefers to be circumspect. The SIS has identified foreign states monitoring alleged dissidents in New Zealand, but it doesn’t name those states.

Read more:
Approach with caution: why NZ should be wary of buying into the AUKUS security pact

NATO and AUKUS

How long the diplomatic tightrope can be walked is an open question, given the prime minister’s forthcoming attendance at the NATO summit in Lithuania in July, and the pending decision on AUKUS.

With its support for Ukraine against Russia, New Zealand has become much closer to NATO, which in 2021 also identified China as a security challenge, saying Beijing’s ambitions and its “coercive policies” challenge the Western bloc’s “interests, security and values”. China called it a “completely futile” warning.

Read more:
New Zealand has just joined an overtly anti-China alliance – are the economic risks worth it?

At the same time, of course, New Zealand may be moving closer to involvement in the AUKUS alliance, which would mean access to cutting-edge, non-nuclear military technologies. And while it’s never explicit, AUKUS is a response to the perceived threat of China’s increasing assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific region.

Despite its own rapid militarisation, the Chinese government has condemned AUKUS as reflecting a “Cold War mentality” that involves a “path of error and danger”. However diplomatically it was hedged, the same message will almost certainly have been delivered to Chris Hipkins yesterday in Beijing.

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

– ref. Hipkins meets Xi Jinping: behind the handshakes, NZ walks an increasingly fine line with China – https://theconversation.com/hipkins-meets-xi-jinping-behind-the-handshakes-nz-walks-an-increasingly-fine-line-with-china-208558

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

The surplus for the financial year that ends Friday will be larger than the $4.2 billion forecast in the budget, Treasurer Jim Chalmers will say on Wednesday.

In a speech to be delivered in Darwin, Chalmers says the government had been “deliberately cautious” in its estimate in the budget, “given the history”. This was a reference to former Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s “back in black” prediction in 2019.

Now, “We’re in a significantly better position than we forecast,” Chalmers says. “We’re expecting the surplus will be bigger than forecast in May.”

The surplus upgrade has enabled the government to recently announce $2 billion for housing, distributed to the states and territories before the end of the financial year.

The good news on the surplus comes as Australian Bureau of Statistics figures on Wednesday will reveal how the fight against inflation is progressing. Next week the Reserve Bank will consider whether to raise interest rates yet again.

The cash rate is currently 4.1%, after the Reserve Bank has hiked rates a dozen times, most recently early this month.

Rating agency S&P Global said this week: “We expect the Reserve Bank of Australia to raise its policy rate further this year.”

Meanwhile, the government and opposition are gearing up for another byelection test, this time in the Liberal Gold Coast seat of Fadden, vacated by Stuart Robert, one of the ministers who oversaw Robodebt.

Opening Labor’s campaign on Tuesday night, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese homed in on Robert.

“Stuart Robert is resigning from parliament having presided over one of the most shocking and cruel failures in the history of Australian politics – Robodebt,” Albanese said.

“Ripping the humanity out of human services. Stripping the social justice from social security. Targeting vulnerable people – and bragging about it.

“That’s the sort of person Peter Dutton thought was good enough for his shadow ministry. And that’s the sort of candidate the LNP thought was good enough for your community. Those are the policies and values they put forward to represent you, time and time again.”

Fadden is on a margin of 10.6%. Although both sides expect the Coalition to hold it on July 15, a swing against the Liberal National Party would be another blow for Dutton, after the disastrous loss of the Liberal seat of Aston in Victoria.

The LNP is putting considerable resources into its Fadden campaign. There were mixed views in Labor about whether to contest the seat, but the local party was anxious to do so, because it overlaps areas important in the state election in 2024.

A swing against Labor would be interpreted, in part, as having implications for the Voice referendum.

Dutton said on Tuesday the byelection was “an opportunity to send the government a message in relation to cost of living, that you’re not happy with the policies that they’ve presided over – and also on the Voice.

“I think there will be a lot of people in Fadden who want to send the Prime Minister a very clear message that they’re not happy with his Canberra Voice proposal, and they’re not happy that he’s continuing to keep details from Australians in relation to how the Voice will operate.”

Labor’s candidate in Fadden, Letitia Del Fabbro, who ran at the 2022 election, is a nurse educator. The LNP candidate is Cameron Caldwell, a Gold Coast councillor.

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

– ref. This year’s surplus will be bigger than the $4.2 billion projected at budget time: Chalmers – https://theconversation.com/this-years-surplus-will-be-bigger-than-the-4-2-billion-projected-at-budget-time-chalmers-208585

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Barron, Professor, Macquarie University

A honey bee’s life depends on it successfully harvesting nectar from flowers to make honey. Deciding which flower is most likely to offer nectar is incredibly difficult.

Getting it right demands correctly weighing up subtle cues on flower type, age and history – the best indicators a flower might contain a tiny drop of nectar. Getting it wrong is at best a waste of time, and at worst means exposure to a lethal predator hiding in the flowers.

In new research published today in eLife our team reports how bees make these complex decisions.

Read more:
Bees can do so much more than you think – from dancing to being little art critics

A field of artificial flowers

We challenged bees with a field of artificial flowers made from coloured disks of card, each of which offered a tiny drop of sugar syrup. Different-coloured “flowers” varied in their likelihood of offering sugar, and also differed in how well bees could judge whether or not the fake flower offered a reward.

We put tiny, harmless paint marks on the back of each bee, and filmed every visit a bee made to the flower array. We then used computer vision and machine learning to automatically extract the position and flight path of the bee. From this information, we could assess and precisely time every single decision the bees made.

We found bees very quickly learned to identify the most rewarding flowers. They quickly assessed whether to accept or reject a flower, but perplexingly their correct choices were on average faster (0.6 seconds) than their incorrect choices (1.2 seconds).

This is the opposite of what we expected.

Usually in animals – and even in artificial systems – an accurate decision takes longer than an inaccurate decision. This is called the speed-accuracy tradeoff.

This tradeoff happens because determining whether a decision is right or wrong usually depends on how much evidence we have to make that decision. More evidence means we can make a more accurate decision – but gathering evidence takes time. So accurate decisions are usually slow and inaccurate decisions are faster.

The speed-accuracy tradeoff occurs so often in engineering, psychology and biology, you could almost call it a “law of psychophysics”. And yet bees seemed to be breaking this law.

The only other animals known to beat the speed-accuracy tradeoff are humans and primates.

How then can a bee, with its tiny yet remarkable brain, be performing on a par with primates?

Bees avoid risk

To take apart this question we turned to a computational model, asking what properties a system would need to have to beat the speed-accuracy tradeoff.

We built artificial neural networks capable of processing sensory input, learning and making decisions. We compared the performance of these artificial decision systems to the real bees. From this we could identify what a system had to have if it were to beat the tradeoff.

The answer lay in giving “accept” and “reject” responses different time-bound evidence thresholds. Here’s what that means – bees only accepted a flower if, at a glance, they were sure it was rewarding. If they had any uncertainty, they rejected it.

This was a risk-averse strategy and meant bees might have missed some rewarding flowers, but it successfully focused their efforts only on the flowers with the best chance and best evidence of providing them with sugar.

Our computer model of how bees were making fast, accurate decisions mapped well to both their behaviour and the known pathways of the bee brain.

Our model is plausible for how bees are such effective and fast decision makers. What’s more, it gives us a template for how we might build systems – such as autonomous robots for exploration or mining – with these features.

Read more:
It’s bee season. To avoid getting stung, just stay calm and don’t swat

Andrew Barron receives funding from the Australian Research Council grants FT140100452 and DP210100740 and Templeton World Charity foundation Grant TWCF-2020-20539.
Coauthors on the article James Marshall and HaDi MaBouDi currently work for UK robotics company Opteran Technologies.

– ref. Bees are astonishingly good at making decisions – and our computer model explains how that’s possible – https://theconversation.com/bees-are-astonishingly-good-at-making-decisions-and-our-computer-model-explains-how-thats-possible-208189

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paola A. Magni, Senior Lecturer in Forensic Science, Murdoch University

The United States Coast Guard is now leading the investigation into the Titan submersible, looking for answers about why it imploded, and what actions should be taken next.

A multinational search for the Titan came to a halt on Thursday, when a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) found five pieces of debris sprawled across the seabed, some 500 metres from the Titanic shipwreck. The vessel experienced a catastrophic implosion at some point during its journey, with all five passengers presumed dead.

Read more:
What was the ‘catastrophic implosion’ of the Titan submersible? An expert explains

For now, details elude us – and it could be days, or even weeks, before we receive meaningful updates on the investigation’s progress. Similar past events, such as the 2019 fire in the Russian submarine Losharik, have shown how sensitively the details of such investigations should be treated.

The Titan disaster happened in international waters, in a commercially operated vessel, and with victims of different nationalities. Officials will likely want to be certain about any details released – and some may not be disclosed at all.

What happens next?

The Titan, a research and exploration sub owned by US company OceanGate, lost contact with its surface vessel on Sunday morning, about one hour and 45 minutes after its departure.

Chief investigator Jason Neubauer said the US Coast Guard will receive help from Canada, France and the United Kingdom. He said authorities had already mapped the accident site, and the inquiry will aim to address several questions, including:

• what may have happened to cause the implosion?
• how can safety be improved for future submersible voyages?
• what civil or criminal charges should be laid in relation to the events, if any?

Recovery operations in remote parts of the ocean are painstakingly complex, with myriad variables to consider. We can expect the Titan investigation will cost millions of dollars.

Harsh conditions

The investigation is being carried out at depths of about 1,800m, some 600km from the nearest coastline. The same vessel that identified the initial debris – a deep-sea ROV called Odysseus 6K – is reportedly also being used to look for the vessel’s remaining parts.

Manufacturer Pelagic Research Services told CNN the ROV’s lifting capabilities had “been utilised and continue to be utilised”, and that missions would continue for about a week. However, we don’t know whether any debris has been recovered yet.

ROVs can collect vast amounts of data for deep-sea operations, including video footage and sensor readings. Ideally, an ROV will be able to reliably and quickly transmit data back to a support vessel or onshore facility, since real-time data transfer is often needed to make important decisions on the fly.

That said, even if Odysseus 6K delivers on this, some parts of the Titan may never be found. They may have disintegrated during the implosion, drifted too far away from the search area, or be obscured by other debris.

Underwater hazards, harsh weather and strong currents all add to the challenge – especially by limiting visibility. In the deep ocean, turbidity (haziness) and the absence of natural light means visibility is close to zero. Here, only sonar technology (which uses sound waves) may be used for navigation, mapping and locating objects of interest.

Any debris recovered will undoubtedly be valuable. Debris is physical evidence of the implosion, so analysing it will provide information (such as damage patterns and fractures) that can be used to infer the source of the implosion and the forces involved.

Experts can also conduct chemical analyses of the residue on the wreckage. However, this is affected by seawater, so a prompt recovery will be important.

Read more:
An expert explains what safety features a submersible should have

The Titan’s remote location means investigators won’t have the luxury of having the quick support offered by coastal rescue stations that can rapidly deploy search and rescue assets and diving teams.

They’ll have to rely on specialised resources, such as large vessels and aircraft with extended range capabilities. Aircraft can provide an elevated platform for visual observation and aerial mapping, as well as remote sensing technologies including radar systems and thermal imaging sensors.

Finding the remains

Chief investigator Neubauer has said searching for victims’ remains is on the agenda. But the chances of actually finding them will depend on various factors, including the cause of the implosion, the depth at which it happened, and the surrounding conditions.

A severe implosion may have resulted in extensive fragmentation and scattering of both the submersible’s structure and human remains. Remains can be swept away in currents, or tampered with by marine life.

They also behave differently depending on whether they’re recovered from non-sequestered environments (exposed in the water) or sequestered environments (enclosed in a vessel). In the former scenario, bodies are often consumed by animals and decomposition causes disarticulation, wherein the bones gradually separate at the joints. However, garments can sometimes help to keep things together.

The effort to locate remains may involve observation from long-range aircraft and patrol vessels, or may even rely on radar, sonar or satellite imagery. If remains are located deep underwater, recovering them may involve using a specialised hoisting system designed to handle the challenges of a deep-sea environment.

Sharing responsibility

The Titan investigation will involve coordination between multiple entities, including maritime authorities, coast guard services and search and rescue organisations.

It will be subject to international agreements such as the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, as well as international law such as
the duty to render assistance, which is enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This requires that all vessels, regardless of their flag, have a legal obligation to render assistance to any person in distress at sea.

For now, we can only speculate on what the Titan investigation might produce. All we can do is wait, and hope that whatever answers do emerge will be put to good use to make sure something like this never happens again.

Read more:
Why is extreme ‘frontier travel’ booming despite the risks?

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

– ref. The Titan sub disaster investigation has begun. Here’s what might happen next – https://theconversation.com/the-titan-sub-disaster-investigation-has-begun-heres-what-might-happen-next-208464

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shih-Wen Sue Chen, Associate professor, Deakin University

There’s trouble brewing in Heaven. This has implications for an average teenage boy Jin Wang (Ben Wang), the protagonist of the Disney+ series American Born Chinese (2023).

The series is an adaptation of Gene Luen Yang’s graphic novel of the same name. It features many actors from the Oscar-winning film Everything Everywhere All at Once, such as Michelle Yeoh and Ke Huy Quan.

American Born Chinese has attracted the attention and praise of major news outlets such as The Washington Post, The New York Times and The Atlantic. It also appears on several lists of the best Disney+ shows.

Viewers may have encountered variations of the Monkey King character from the 16th-century Chinese classic Journey to the West in TV shows, such as Monkey (1978).

American Born Chinese focuses on Wei-Chen (Jimmy Liu), son of the Monkey King. He comes to earth in the form of a new student at Jin’s high school. Wei-Chen is determined to find the Fourth Scroll which will stop the Bull Demon from taking control of Heaven. Jin is reluctant to reciprocate the friendship extended by Wei-Chen. He just wants to fit into his predominantly white high school.

American Born Chinese is a recent addition to stories of young people who grapple with what it means to be successful.

Success, youth, and the model minority stereotype

For Jin, being popular and joining the soccer team is more important than excelling academically. He doesn’t fit into the model minority stereotype which essentialises Asian Americans as hardworking, docile and family-oriented high achievers.

The model minority can be found in films such as The Joy Luck Club (1993) and young adult novels like Girl in Translation (2010).

In his attempts to gain popularity, Jin reveals he is a flawed character. He steals, lies, betrays his friends and remains silent when he is bullied by racist classmates.

Read more:
More than ‘model minorities’: in Netflix’s Beef, Asian migrants are allowed to have real emotions

As immigrants, Jin’s parents embarked on their own “journey to the West,” hoping to achieve the American Dream. However, they are unlike stereotypical Asian American “tiger” parents because they do not pressure him to do well at school. Neither do they insist on Jin learning Mandarin.

However, Jin’s mother Christine (Yeo Yann Yann) constantly nags her husband Simon (Chin Han) to ask for a promotion at work even though the family is financially comfortable. Hardworking Simon is silent, nonthreatening and quietly does his work without challenging his boss’s decisions. He finds it difficult to speak up for himself both at work and at home.

This character fits stereotypes of Asian American men as effeminate, emasculated and failing the standards of ideal white masculinity.

In Christine’s eyes, Simon has not achieved the American Dream. Unlike Simon, Christine has an entrepreneurial spirit. She takes out the family’s savings to invest in an herbal powder business without consulting her husband. This leads to a crisis in the family when Simon wants to quit his job. It is only when he stands up for his wife at the principal’s office that their relationship improves.

A hero without superpowers

Wei-Chen disrupts Jin’s life by challenging his narrow definition of success as popularity. Self-assured Wei-Chen does not care what others think of him. Likewise, their Japanese American classmate Suzy Nakamura is a confident leader of the Culture Club who rallies students to protest against racist behaviour. Her outspokenness challenges model minority stereotypes.

While Jin tries to distance himself from both Suzy and Wei-Chen, the latter believes in his friend and trusts that Jin will help him. Wei-Chen’s determination and faith in Jin is the catalyst for Jin’s self-transformation. Through this unlikely friendship, Jin comes to believe Wei-chen’s claim that the heavenly rebellion is real.

The Goddess of Mercy Guanyin (Michelle Yeoh) entrusts Jin with the mission to stop the Bull Demon. Jin refuses and Freddy Wong (Ke Huy Quan), a sitcom character, appears to him in a dream. Freddy tells him,

a hero doesn’t always have to have superpowers. A hero is someone who goes on a journey, shows courage, helps others.

Redefining Success

Our research on conceptualisations of children and success in Asia has shown that media representations about young people have moved beyond narrow definitions of achievements as academically oriented. It encompasses the cultivation of positive personal qualities and good morals for the benefit of the community.

Jin exemplifies this shift beyond the Asian context. He transforms from an individual hyper-focused on personal desires into a brave friend who is willing to sacrifice himself to save his community.

In the season one finale, Jin embraces a new definition of success. Instead of taking part in his first soccer match in front of the school, he steps out of his comfort zone to help his unpopular friends.

For Jin, being popular is no longer his first priority. His refusal to be docile challenges the model minority stereotype. He has truly become a hero.

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

– ref. An unlikely hero: American Born Chinese challenges the model minority myth – https://theconversation.com/an-unlikely-hero-american-born-chinese-challenges-the-model-minority-myth-207929

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Dwyer, Associate Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, University of Tasmania

This week, Australia announced its latest package of military and humanitarian support for Ukraine, totalling approximately A$110 million.

The package comprises 70 military vehicles, which include 28 M113 armoured personnel carriers and other support vehicles (trucks, trailers and “special operations vehicles”).

The package also includes a supply of 105mm artillery shells, which are desperately needed by Ukrainian forces. The Ukrainian government says it will need one million rounds of ammunition this year.

While this support package was welcomed by the Ukrainian government, it has been criticised by some for being too small, tokenistic and not providing the level of equipment and support needed to counter Russia’s invasion.

Why has this latest package been criticised?

The primary issue with the package is the supply of the M113 armoured personnel carriers. Ukraine has previously requested Australian designed and built Hawkei armoured vehicles, going so far as to describe the Hawkei as “its new crush”.

However, Australia has so far declined to provide these. The M113 armoured personnel carriers that Australia is sending to Ukraine date back to the Vietnam War. Although the vehicles have undergone a variety of upgrades over the years, they are widely considered to be obsolete in modern warfare.

Australia is in the process of retiring them in favour of a new, modern design of armoured personnel carrier. The Defence Department itself has said the M113 carriers are obsolete:

[they] are no longer able to counter the current and emerging threats presented in our operating environment.

In an address to the Indian Ocean Defence and Security Conference in Perth last year, Lieutenant General Simon Stuart, the new Australian Army chief, also said:

The combined arms fighting system that protects our soldiers today has at its core a 60-year-old armoured personnel carrier. […] We can and we must do better — and we have a plan to do so.

Why are we not giving the Ukrainians what they want

The government is currently unable (or perhaps unwilling) to supply the Hawkei vehicles that Ukraine has requested, on the advice of the Australian Defence Force. As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said this week:

On Hawkei, I know that has been raised, the advice is that would not be the best way to provide assistance to Ukraine.

Defence has reportedly rejected providing Hawkei vehicles to Ukraine due to an unresolved braking issue and a limited supply of spare parts, which it asserts would make the Hawkei currently unsupportable in combat.

However, Ukraine would be well aware of these issues. And its request (and enthusiasm) for this particular vehicle means the government likely sees a need for the Hawkei on the battlefield – one that is unlikely to be met by the M113s.

It is difficult to conclusively determine why Australia has chosen such a military hardware composition for its latest support package and why it is denying Ukraine the assistance it is requesting.

There is still a chance Albanese will offer more support over the coming months, for example, at the upcoming NATO conference he will attend in July.

Read more:
Why can’t the West agree on how much military support to send to Ukraine?

We have other hardware we could offer

Much has been made recently about the potential for Ukraine’s allies to supply F-16 fighter jets to Kiev. The F-16 would provide Ukraine with a formidable air combat and strike capability that is crucial for pushing back Russian forces.

Ukraine’s air force currently utilises old Soviet-era fighters, predominantly MiG-29s and Sukhoi Su-27s, which have been jerry-rigged to deploy Western munitions.

After dragging its feet for months, the US recently announced it will approve allied exports of F-16 jets to Ukraine. The move was welcomed by countries like Denmark, which maintains a fleet of 40 F-16s, of which about 30 are operational and could be supplied to Ukraine.

However, another option exists for Australia: its retired fleet of F/A-18 classic Hornets. Australia has 41 of these fighter jets in storage, which Ukraine has reportedly been looking into, although has not yet formally requested. Negotiations are reportedly underway on a deal.

The F/A-18 has some advantages over the F-16 for Ukraine’s purposes. First, it is a “navalised” fighter, meaning it has a strengthened undercarriage that would allow it to land and take off from rougher airfields (and potentially roads), unlike the F-16 which requires highly maintained airfields.

This would give the Ukrainian air force more flexibility and increase the chances the aircraft would survive longer in combat. In more remote locales, these jets would also be more difficult to detect when not flying.

Australia’s version of the F/A-18, the F/A-18A, has also been heavily upgraded, making its fleet roughly equivalent to the slightly more modern F/A-18C standard.

Further, given Australia’s jets have not been deployed in a naval context (on, say, aircraft carriers) and thus subjected to saltwater environments, they are in good condition.

There are, of course, some issues with Ukraine receiving F/A-18 jets.

First, it would require export approval from the US, which is required for all US military hardware to be resold or re-exported. This, however, would not likely be difficult to obtain.

Perhaps more significantly, it would also require Ukraine’s pilots to be trained on the F/A-18 platform. However, this will be an issue for the F-16, or any other Western fighter jet sent to Ukraine’s air force.

Why Australia should do more

Australia’s distance from the conflict means it isn’t as likely to provide as much support as other states in closer geographic proximity to Russia.

The European Union, for instance, just announced it will increase its military aid fund to Ukraine by a further €3.5 billion (A$5.7 billion).

But as Matthew Sussex, one of Australia’s leading Russia experts, has pointed out, Russia is a strategic competitor to Australia that will increasingly pivot its attention to the Indo-Pacific region.

As such, our geographic distance is no excuse for weak support to a state attempting to counter an illegal and devastating invasion by Russia. We can, and should, be doing considerably more.

Read more:
Ukraine war: how US-built F-16 ‘Fighting Falcon’ could help Kyiv move on to the offensive

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

– ref. Australia is not giving Ukraine the military support it needs – sending our retired jets would be a start – https://theconversation.com/australia-is-not-giving-ukraine-the-military-support-it-needs-sending-our-retired-jets-would-be-a-start-208570

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

If you’ve just decided to start using tampons and you’re finding it tricky, you’re not alone! Lots of young teens and first-time tampon users have told me they experience “tampon trauma” – meaning it hurts, won’t go in or gets stuck coming out. But with a little bit of practice, it’s super easy.

Tampons are safe and convenient, especially if you’re going to the beach, swimming or doing something physically active. You can’t feel a tampon once it’s inserted properly, which is why some people prefer tampons to pads or period undies. Tampons are used by millions of people around the world. They’re made from natural cotton, rayon fibre or both, and absorb fluid, including menstrual blood.

In Australia, tampons are classified as “medical devices” which means they have to meet certain safety standards. So even though there’s a confusing array of brands available in Australia it’s good to know they all pass the safety test.

Just like pads and period undies, tampons come with different absorbencies, such as “mini” or “light”, “regular” and “super”. As you get to know your own periods and cycle, you’ll also get to know which tampons suit you best over the course of your period. It’s common for the first couple of days of a period to be heavier, meaning you might need a tampon with higher absorbency.

Read more:
Menstrual cups vs tampons – here’s how they compare

How to insert

A tampon is designed to sit inside the vagina, right up high against the cervix. The vagina is a stretchy muscular tube and has plenty of room to accommodate a tampon.

The vagina slopes upward and backward, towards the spine. A common difficulty first-time tampon users encounter is pushing the tampon straight up rather than slightly backwards, so it hits the front wall of the vagina and feels like it can’t go up any further. The same can happen in reverse when pulling a tampon out – it needs to be pulled slightly forward, not straight down, or it could hit the back wall of the vagina and feel stuck.

If you want to, you can practise using a tampon between your periods, or when your flow is light. Wash your hands first, then get a mini-sized tampon and make it slippery by putting some water-based lubricant on it. Some people might dab a tiny bit of Vaseline on the tip of the tampon instead. Vaseline shouldn’t be put on tampons during a period, as it reduces absorbency.

Pull the string so it reaches its full length before you insert it. Stand in front of a mirror and have a look at where the opening of your vagina is by pulling the vaginal lips apart. Then either squat, or put one leg up on a stool, shelf, or side of the bath, which gets you in a comfortable position to practise.

Gently put the tip of the tampon into the opening and then push it up and back with your finger. You can put your fingers inside your vagina first, to get a feel of the way your vagina slopes. (If you have long nails, take care not to scratch yourself!)

Some tampons come with an “applicator”. This is made of two cardboard or plastic tubes, one inside the other. The larger tube has the tampon inside it, and the smaller one sits just below the tampon. When inserting, you hold the smaller part and push the applicator inside your vagina rather than putting your fingers inside. When the applicator has gone all the way in, you push the tampon out by “plunging” the smaller tube up, pushing the tampon out.

It’s virtually impossible to put a tampon into the wrong hole! There are three holes in that part of the body – the vagina, the urethra (where wee comes out) and the anus, or bum hole, where poo comes out. Most people are familiar with where the bum hole is, because (hopefully) they wipe their bums a lot!

The urethra is very small, and you wouldn’t be able to fit a tampon into it. It sits high up towards the top of the vulva – where your inner vaginal lips meet in the middle, and just below the tip of the clitoris.

Tampons can be left in for up to six hours. If your period is heavier than anticipated and the tampon has become “soaked”, you might have to change it earlier. You’ll know when that happens because some menstrual fluid will leak onto your undies.

Don’t panic though – it’s something you’ll be able to feel and deal with before anyone else notices! If you know you have heavy flow days and want to take extra precautions, you can wear a light pad on your undies (or period undies) as well as using a tampon.

Read more:
Heavy periods are common. What can you do, and when should you seek help?

Toxic shock syndrome

You might have heard about something called Toxic Shock Syndrome. This is caused by a bacterial infection that releases toxins into the blood and is a serious condition.

It can happen anywhere in the body but is known to be associated with the use of ultra super absorbency tampons. There are now guidelines and regulations worldwide for tampon manufacturing to reduce the risk of infections.

These days toxic shock syndrome is extremely rare (about 0.001% of people), and still only occurs if tampons are left in for several hours, allowing the bacteria to multiply.

Symptoms are high fever, vomiting, diarrhoea, muscle aches, headaches and a rash.

Read more:
From sharp butt pains to period poos: 5 lesser-known menstrual cycle symptoms

Environmentally friendly options

It’s important to NEVER flush a tampon down the toilet. If you’re in a public toilet, there should be bins inside toilet cubicles for all disposable period products. At home, you could wrap it in tissue and put it in a rubbish bin. You might also be aware people are now looking at environmentally friendly alternatives to disposable pads and tampons.

Reusable pads and period undies were designed to help reduce waste from disposable pads. There’s now also an alternative to tampons, which is the modern “menstrual cup”. These are made of medical grade silicone that you fold over, push up inside your vagina using two fingers, and then pop! It springs open inside the vagina and catches any menstrual fluid.

Unlike a tampon, they sit a little lower down in the vagina, and just like tampons, they can take practice getting used to. These can be used for up to 12 hours which makes them super convenient. You can try a menstrual cup anytime – and some people might switch between tampons and a cup or pads or period undies, depending on what feels right on the day.

Managing periods is something almost half the population deals with. It can feel scary, but it might help to know that just about everyone who has periods goes through the same process of figuring it out! The more you arm yourself with information and know how much choice is out there, the more confident you’ll feel. And don’t forget there are always adults out there who are willing and able to give you advice and help.

Read more:
Why queues for women’s toilets are longer than men’s

Melissa Kang has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Councill, Australian Research Council and Medical Research Futures Fund. She is affiliated with the Australian Association for Adolescent Health and the International Association for Adolescent Health. She has co-authored Welcome to Your Period, Welcome to Consent, Welcome to Your Boobs and Welcome to Sex.

– ref. How do I insert a tampon? – https://theconversation.com/how-do-i-insert-a-tampon-201871

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kyla Raby, PhD candidate researching the role of consumers in eradicating modern slavery in supply chains, University of South Australia

Australia is not immune to the rapidly growing global problem of modern slavery. In fact, new research has found the number of people living in modern slavery has more than doubled in the past four years, rising to an estimated 41,000.

Sadly, very few people are formally identified as victims and able to access vital support. For example, in the 2021-22 financial year, the Australian Federal Police received just 294 reports of modern slavery and human trafficking.

The Australian government’s recent funding boost of $23.4 million for survivors of human trafficking will enable more survivors to access support without having to report to police.

However, our research on modern slavery and housing found that much more is needed to enable access to essential support, particularly when it comes to safe and sustainable housing.

Why survivors struggle to find housing

In the UK, survivors of modern slavery are provided government-funded accommodation through trafficking-specific safe houses. But in Australia, survivors’ access to accommodation through the Support for Trafficked People Program is reliant on what services exist in the state and territory they are based.

This means survivors are often left to scramble for a limited number of housing options alongside others in need during the current housing crisis, but they face additional barriers to accessing these services.

Read more:
Homelessness today sees workers and families with nowhere stable to live. No wonder their health is suffering

To understand the implications for modern slavery survivors, our research surveyed 107 housing providers and 19 caseworkers who support survivors across Australia. We also interviewed a portion of these participants.

We found that survivors of modern slavery experience multiple barriers to accessing both temporary accommodation and long-term housing. The most significant challenges were linked to their lack of reliable income, insecure migration status and the ongoing effects of trauma.

For example, a quarter of all housing providers we surveyed restrict temporary migrants from accessing their services. Social housing in many Australian jurisdictions is also generally only available to Australian citizens or permanent residents. Migrant slavery survivors on temporary visas, therefore, can’t access these housing options at all.

Survivors’ visas may also restrict them from working in Australia or accessing income support. This also means they can’t access accommodation because many providers require residents to have an ongoing income.

As explained by one housing provider, their residents

need to have work rights […] so they can transition to their own property.

Another housing provider told us,

it’s not people’s visa status that matters, it’s just the fact that temporary visa holders are often not on a stable income.

Suitability of services for survivors

Even if modern slavery survivors can access accommodation, the options available to them may not be appropriate given the complex trauma they have experienced.

Many mainstream services are unsuitable for survivors because of their rules and requirements. For example, curfews are often put in place by providers to ensure the safety or comfort of all residents. Such rules restrict an individual’s freedom of movement, which can be re-traumatising for survivors whose experience of exploitation involved similar restrictions.

For male survivors or those wanting to live with family, finding suitable accommodation is even more challenging. Almost half of accommodation providers do not accept partners, children or other family members of their largely female residents. Nearly a third only do so in particular circumstances.

Our research also found that the types of accommodation most suitable for modern slavery survivors are ones which have been designed especially for them.

However, we only identified two examples of such services in Australia – the Salvation Army’s trafficking and slavery safe house in Sydney and the Lighthouse Foundation’s Young Women’s Freedom Program in Melbourne.

Insecure housing can have serious implications for survivors. It places them at risk of homelessness and further exploitation. As one provider explained to us, a lack of suitable accommodation can place a survivor

at high risk of remaining or returning to a situation where they are subjected to abuse by a person who uses violence.

It can also be disruptive to survivors’ recovery and have negative implications for their overall wellbeing.

First steps to improvement

In Australia’s federated system of governance, antislavery policy is a Commonwealth responsibility, while housing policy is a state and territory responsibility. Removing these barriers requires effective collaboration across both policy spheres and tiers of governments.

Allowing community organisations to refer survivors to the federal government’s anti-trafficking program is a first step to improving their access to accommodation and other vital supports.

Read more:
Australia’s modern slavery law is woefully inadequate – this is how we can hold companies accountable

We also need to change the human trafficking visa framework to ensure all migrant slavery survivors are able to access visas with rights to work and access to income support.

State and territory housing policy needs to allow survivors on temporary visas to access social housing, as well. Funding for survivor-specific accommodation services in every capital city is also urgently required.

Without such changes, survivors of modern slavery remain vulnerable to further exploitation and slavery will continue to grow in Australia.

Kyla Raby works for the Australian Red Cross, who received funding from the Department of Social Services to undertake the research discussed in this article.

Nerida Chazal conducted consultancy work for Australian Red Cross in the production of this research.

– ref. Australia’s hidden housing crisis: survivors of modern slavery have few safe places to turn – https://theconversation.com/australias-hidden-housing-crisis-survivors-of-modern-slavery-have-few-safe-places-to-turn-206292

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Taylor, Adjunct academic, Flinders University

You may be interested (or possibly horrified) to discover you ingest and inhale thousands of tiny life forms on a daily basis.

The air and surfaces around you are home to multitudes of bacteria, fungi, viruses, mites, algae and protozoa. Your skin isn’t much better, with a complex ecosystem of organisms called commensals which aren’t necessarily good or bad, but will shift in their composition depending on where you live, the products you use and the pets you have.

Most of these creatures are generally undetectable due to their microscopic size and low concentrations. But when they find a niche they can exploit, you might notice them by their smell, or the appearance of unwanted staining and colour changes. A lot of this fungal growth is what we call mould.

We’ve all been disappointed in ourselves at one time or another, lifting a neglected orange out of the fruit bowl to discover the bottom half is covered in a velvety blue-green growth.

But what do the myriad colours that appear on our stuff tell us about the world we try not to think about?

Black

Often black staining is quite a disturbing occurrence. The concept of toxic black mould is one many people have become aware of due to flood impacts.

A quick online search will likely terrify you, but not all black discolouration is due to the same organisms, and almost none of it will outright cause you harm.

Stachybotrys is the one known as toxic black mould. It often turns up on building materials that have been wet for a long time.

Read more:
Health Check: how does household mould affect your health?

When the grout in your shower turns black though, that’s a different fungus called Aureobasidium. It’s slimy, sticky and somewhere between a filamentous mould, which grows threadlike roots through whatever it’s eating, and a yeast, which prefer a free-floating, single-celled style of life.

Bleaching will often kill Aureobasidium, but the dark pigmentation will likely hang around – harmlessly, but stubbornly.

Blue

That blue orange I mentioned before, you can thank Penicillium for that. The organism that gives us blue cheese and the antibiotic penicillin is also responsible for producing a dense growth of mould that almost looks like smoke when disturbed, spreading millions of spores onto the rest of your fruit bowl.

Penicillium is a big group with hundreds of species, ranging from recognised pathogens to species yet to be named. However, the ones that turn up in our homes are generally the same “weed” species that simply cause food spoilage or grow in soil.

Yellow and orange

We often think of fungi as organisms that thrive in the dark, but that’s not always true. In fact, some need exposure to light – and ultraviolet (UV) light in particular – to complete their life cycle.

Many plant pathogens use UV light exposure as a trigger to produce their spores, and then protect their DNA by hiding it behind melanin-containing shells.

Stemphylium and Epicoccum turn up in our homes from time to time, often hitching a ride on natural fibres such as jute, hemp and hessian. They produce a spectrum of staining that can often turn damp items yellow, brown or orange.

Green

We’re all fairly familiar with the green spots that turn up on mouldy bread, cake and other food items. Often we try to convince ourselves if we just cut off the bad bit, we can still salvage lunch.

Sadly that’s not the case, as the roots of the fungi – collectively called mycelium – spread through the food, digesting and collecting sufficient nutrients to pop out a series of tiny fruiting bodies which produce the coloured spores you see.

Read more:
Health Check: is it safe to cut mould off food?

The green tuft is often from a group of fungi called Aspergillus. Under the microscope they look rather like the puffy top of a dandelion gone to seed.

Like Penicillium, Aspergillus is another big fungal group with lots of species that turn up virtually in every environment. Some are heat tolerant, some love acid and some will happily produce spores that stay airborne for days to months at a time.

In the green gang is also a fungus called Trichoderma, which is Latin for “hairy skin”. Trichoderma produces masses of forest-green, spherical spores which tend to grow on wet cardboard or dirty carpet.

Pink, purple and red

There are plenty to speak of in this category. And there is also a common bacterium that makes the list.

Neurospora, also known as the red bread mould, is one of the most studied fungi in scientific literature. It’s another common, non-hazardous one that has been used as a model organism to observe fungal genetics, evolution and growth.

Fusarium is less common indoors, being an important crop pathogen, but will sometimes turn spoiled rice purple. It also occasionally turns up on wet cement sheet, causing splotchy violet patches. Fusarium makes large, sticky, moon-shaped spores that have evolved to spread by rain splashes and hang onto plants. However, it is fairly bad at getting airborne and so doesn’t tend to spread very far from where it’s growing.

Finally in this category, that pink scum that turns up around bathroom taps or in the shower? It’s actually a bacterium called Serratia. It will happily chew up the soap scum residue left over in bathrooms, and has been shown to survive in liquid soaps and handwash.

White

When fungi were first being classified and were eventually given their own phylogenetic kingdom, there were lots of wonderful and not strictly categorical ways we tried to split them up. One of these was hyaline and non-hyaline, essentially referring to transparent and coloured, respectively.

One of the interesting non-pigmented moulds you may well catch sight of is a thing called Isaria farinosa (“farinosa” being Latin for “floury”). This fungus is a parasite of some moths and cicadas and is visible as brilliant white, tree-shaped growths on their unfortunate hosts.

So when you notice the world around you changing colour, you can marvel with your newfound knowledge at the microscopic wonders that live complex lives alongside yours. Then maybe clean it up, and give the fruit bowl a wash.

Read more:
Hidden housemates: meet the moulds growing in your home

Michael Taylor consults for WSP Australia in the area of occupational hygiene, indoor environmental quality and hazardous materials. He has previously received grant funding from SafeWork SA to study fungi in indoor environments.

– ref. What do the different colours of mould mean in my house? – https://theconversation.com/what-do-the-different-colours-of-mould-mean-in-my-house-207737

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tina Hinton, Associate Professor of Pharmacology, University of Sydney

In most cases, pain and fever relief is as simple as a trip to your local supermarket for some paracetamol or ibuprofen.

While both are effective at reducing pain, they work in different ways. So deciding which one you should choose is dependent on the type of pain you are experiencing. Sometimes it might be appropriate to take a medication that contains both drugs.

In Australia, paracetamol is branded as Panadol, Herron Paracetamol, Panamax, Chemist Own or Dymadon, plus there are generic chemist brands. Nurofen is the common brand name for ibuprofen, which is also sold under generic brand names.

So how do you know which one to choose and when?

Different blocking actions

While ibuprofen and paracetamol can be taken for similar reasons (pain relief) each works in a slightly different way.

Ibuprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, which means it acts by blocking the enzymes that produce a group of chemicals called prostaglandins. These chemicals are important for normal body functions such as relaxing blood vessels, preventing blood clotting, secreting protective mucus in the gut and helping the uterus contract. They are also involved in inflammation, pain and fever.

It is still not completely understood how paracetamol works. Like ibuprofen, it is thought to act by blocking the enzymes that produce prostaglandins, although through a different mechanism to ibuprofen. There is also good evidence paracetamol interacts with the brain’s endocannabinoid system and the “descending pain pathway”, which inhibits the perception of pain.

Read more:
Why does my back get so sore when I’m sick? The connection between immunity and pain

Is one drug better than the other?

Because they each provide pain relief in different ways, paracetamol can be better at treating some types of pain, while ibuprofen is better at treating other types. But be wary of packaging that claims a medication is useful for targeting pain associated with a specific condition as these claims are not true.

Because it reduces inflammation, the Australian Therapeutic Guidelines state ibuprofen is the better choice for pain associated with osteo- and rheumatoid arthritis, period pain, some types of headache, and for pain that comes from having an operation. Paracetamol does not reduce inflammation but it is a better choice when fever is associated with the pain, like when you have a cold or flu.

The Australian government recommends either paracetamol or ibuprofen if you have pain associated with COVID.

Read more:
I’m at home with COVID. When do I need to see a doctor? And what treatments are available?

What about taking both or ‘piggybacking’ them at intervals?

We can sometimes get better relief when we take both types of medicine at the same time, since each targets a different cause or pathway of the pain. If one pathway does not completely control the pain then it can be useful to target the other one. The effects of each drug can add together for a bigger effect.

Combination products that contain both paracetamol and ibuprofen in a single tablet include Nuromol and Maxigesic.

Using a combination product means you can take fewer tablets. However, the doses in these combined products are sometimes less than the maximum recommended dose, meaning they might not work as well when compared with taking the tablets individually.

Other times, you can get the best effect by alternating doses of ibuprofen and paracetamol. This keeps the levels of the medication in the body more constant and helps to provide more steady pain relief. This may be particularly useful when treating pain and fever in children. To do this, one drug is given, then a dose of the other drug is given a few hours later, with you continuing to alternate between the two throughout the day.

If you are alternating between different pain medicines, make sure you leave time (at least one hour) between the dosing of each product to get more effective and consistent relief. Only give the recommended dose of each medicine as outlined on the pack. And do not administer more than the maximum recommended number of doses for each medicine per day.

Read more:
Take care with paracetamol when pregnant — but don’t let pain or fever go unchecked

How do the side effects compare?

Side effects from either drug are rare and generally mild.

Ibuprofen does have a reputation for causing stomach problems. These can manifest as nausea, indigestion, bleeding in the stomach, and diarrhoea. For this reason, people with a history of bleeding or ulcers in the gut should not take ibuprofen. Ibuprofen is also known to sometimes cause headaches, dizziness, and higher blood pressure.

Because ibuprofen thins the blood, it should also not be taken by people who are taking other medicines to thin the blood; like aspirin, warfarin, and clopidogrel. Ibuprofen should also be avoided by pregnant women and people with asthma. In these cases, paracetamol is the better choice.

However, you need to be careful when using these medicines to make sure you don’t use more than is recommended. This is particularly important for paracetamol.

Paracetamol at the recommended doses is not toxic but too much can lead to liver failure.

Because paracetamol is found in lots of different products, it can be hard to keep track of exactly how much paracetamol you have taken and this increases the risk of taking too much.

Read more:
The TGA is considering paracetamol restrictions due to poisonings – but what does that mean for consumers?

Both work, both need to be used safely

Paracetamol and ibuprofen are effective medications for the relief of both pain and fever; however, care must be taken to use them safely.

Always read the label so you know exactly what products you are using and how much. Only take the recommended dose, and if you need to, write down the time you take each dose. Your pharmacist or doctor can also advise on the best medicine for your pain and fever and how to use the selected medicine safely.

Associate Professor Tina Hinton has previously received funding from the Schizophrenia Research Institute (formerly Neuroscience Institute of Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders). She is currently a Board member of the Australasian Society of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacologists and Toxicologists.

Dr Jessica Pace is a pharmacy practice academic and practising hospital pharmacist. She is a fellow and the chair of the Society of Hospital Pharmacists Australia (SHPA) NSW branch and member of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia (PSA).

Associate Professor Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a Fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association, and a member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd a medical device company, and a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design, and testing.

– ref. Paracetamol versus ibuprofen – which works best and when? – https://theconversation.com/paracetamol-versus-ibuprofen-which-works-best-and-when-207921

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christiaan De Beukelaer, Senior Lecturer in Culture & Climate, The University of Melbourne

I went sailing on a bright yellow outrigger canoe in the Marshall Islands in March. On board were Alson Kelen, founder of Waan Aelõñ in Majel (WAM, Canoes of the Marshall Islands), and a group of youngsters taking part in a climate justice workshop.

Alson’s NGO is a hive of activity. Sailing ships, some finished and some under construction, surround an A-frame building right between the government-owned Marshall Islands Resort and the Ministry of Education on Majuro Atoll. Alson acquired the land decades ago from the country’s first president, Amata Kabua, for a symbolic dollar.

As we sailed, he told us his organisation’s work is about “empowering the young men and women of the Marshall Islands, endowing them with the skillset essential to bring them into the global society”. It’s keeping the traditions of shipbuilding and wayfaring alive, while offering fossil-fuel-free transport between the country’s islands.

As home to the world’s third-largest ship registry, the Marshall Islands is a key player in global shipping, while rising sea levels threaten its low-lying islands. This puts the country in a unique position in negotiations on new shipping emission targets.

Although WAM’s yellow outriggers might not make a dent in greenhouse gas emissions from the world’s cargo ships, these little vessels are a local counterpoint to the Pacific state’s climate diplomacy.

Read more:
To reach net zero, we must decarbonise shipping. But two big problems are getting in the way

What’s at stake?

The need to decarbonise shipping is urgent. Shipping is the most efficient means of cargo transport, but the sheer volume of goods – 11 billion tonnes a year – puts its emissions on a par with countries like Germany or Japan. Shipping emissions add up to around 1 billion tonnes a year.

In 2018, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the United Nations agency that regulates shipping, set its first sector-wide climate target: to halve shipping emissions between 2008 and 2050.

This “initial strategy” doesn’t align with the Paris Agreement goal of keeping global warming below 1.5℃. It does, however, require a review of the strategy every five years.

A revision is due to be adopted next month. This follows years of go-slow tactics by several large developing countries and lofty commitments by most IMO member states to “keep 1.5 alive”.

Shipping looks increasingly likely to have a target of zero emissions by 2050. Whether that’s “net zero” or “absolute zero”, and whether it counts only emissions on board or the full life cycle of emissions attributable to shipping, is still being negotiated.

Zero by 2050 sounds like a big win. It will certainly be better than the current target. But emissions must come down a lot faster for the 1.5℃ limit to remain an option.

Read more:
Shipping emissions must fall by a third by 2030 and reach zero before 2050 – new research

How can the energy transition be made equitable?

For a low-lying atoll state like the Marshall Islands, climate change is a matter of life and death. Exceeding 1.5℃ of warming will likely trigger tipping points that would raise sea levels as ice caps melt. This would inundate the Marshall Islands.

To “keep 1.5 alive”, the Marshall Islands and other Pacific states are calling for hard “interim targets” to reduce shipping emissions by 37% by 2030 and 96% by 2040. The United States, Canada and the United Kingdom have proposed similar targets.

Pacific states are also calling for an equitable energy transition. Just as Alson’s outrigger canoes won’t make much difference to shipping emissions, Pacific islanders – indeed most of the world’s population – didn’t produce the emissions that are causing the climate crisis.

In 2021, the Marshall Islands proposed a global levy on shipping emissions – at least US$100 per tonne of CO₂-equivalent – to speed up the transition. It’s increasingly clear, however, that “levies exceeding US$100 per tonne may be needed to reduce carbon emissions”.

A growing group of countries, including Ghana, Namibia, South Korea, France and Denmark, are calling for a levy on shipping. Last week at the Paris Summit for a New Global Financing Pact, 22 countries – including Norway – supported a levy. The US didn’t, but flagged it is something it will “look at”. Even so, support for the Pacific equity agenda remains limited.

Shipping costs will go up as the energy transition unfolds. Costs are expected to increase more for the poorest countries, which already often pay higher-than-average shipping charges. For small island developing states like the Marshall Islands, not getting help with these costs could prove disastrous.

‘We are not drowning. We are fighting’

A sailing cargo ship to serve the Marshall Islands’ needs is under construction at the Asia Shipbuilding shipyard in South Korea. The publicly owned Marshall Islands Shipping Corporation will operate the 48-metre vessel. While this ship may make only a small contribution to curbing emissions, the country is working hard to translate the ambitious targets of its climate diplomacy into practice at home.

Read more:
Wind-powered cargo ships are the future: debunking 4 myths that stand in the way of cutting emissions

Maritime transport could be the first industry to have a global price on emissions. It will raise enormous revenues, leading to questions of how to administer and spend these funds. The World Bank is positioning itself to administer the US$3.7 trillion that may be levied over the decades to 2050.

Some may argue the call for an equitable transition is too big an ask. The shipping industry, they whisper in the corridors of the International Maritime Organization, can’t be expected to solve all the world’s problems. They’re right – although no one is suggesting shipping must solve all the world’s problems.

But if the transition isn’t equitable, they’re barely trying to solve any problems. The most ambitious “equitable transition” now on the table will barely fix centuries of colonial exploitation and unfair trade.

As IMO member states gear up for two weeks of negotiations in London, the rallying cry of Pacific youth remains as important as ever: “We are not drowning. We are fighting.”

Christiaan De Beukelaer receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the ClimateWorks Foundation.

– ref. Marshall Islands, a nation at the heart of global shipping, fights for climate justice – https://theconversation.com/marshall-islands-a-nation-at-the-heart-of-global-shipping-fights-for-climate-justice-202613

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rikke Louise Bundgaard-Nielsen, Teaching Associate, The University of Melbourne

Parents and other caregivers typically modify their speech when they talk to babies and young children.

They use simple sentences and special words, like “nana” for banana. They also speak slowly, use a higher pitch, and exaggerate the ups and downs of the “tune” of their speech. In many languages, caregivers also exaggerate their vowels in a process called “hyperarticulation”.

Researchers refer to all these things as “child or infant-directed speech”. But it is also commonly known as “motherese” or “baby talk”.

Baby talk is used around the world. A 2022 study involving people from 187 countries showed adults can tell whether speech is intended for children or adults, even when they have no familiarity with the language being used.

Our new research looks at how baby talk works in the Australian Indigenous language Warlpiri.

Why do we use baby talk?

Simplifying speech and using baby talk modifications makes it easier for children to understand. But it also helps children regulate their emotions because it sounds more positive.

On top of this, the enhanced “tune” is thought to attract and maintain children’s attention to speech and the exaggerated vowels help babies learn the sounds of languages.

However, almost all we know about the shape and purpose of baby talk is based on studies of a few European languages, Mandarin and Japanese.

These are languages spoken in predominantly western, educated, industrialised, rich, democratic cultures. This excludes thousands of other languages spoken in the world.

For example, where most of the world’s languages have just five to seven vowel sounds, many European languages, including English, have more than double that number, making those languages rather unusual. This raises the question of what modifications speakers use in other types of languages and cultures.

Do they use the same speech modifications to children? And if so, why?

Read more:
Why ‘baby talk’ is good for your baby

Our research

Our research, published this month, investigates the use and purpose of child-directed speech in Warlpiri. Warlpiri is spoken in Central Australia by more than 3,000 people and has three vowel sounds: “i”, “a”, and “u”, which correspond loosely to the vowels in “bee”, “bah”, and “boo” in English.

To compare vowels in words spoken to children to words spoken to adults, we videoed four Warlpiri-speaking caregivers in conversation with other familiar adults and four young children (aged between two and three) at their homes.

Our approach deliberately considers the real-life social contexts in which conversations are had. Most previous work has recorded interactions with children in lab settings, and then recorded caregiver-adult interactions separately, typically with an unfamiliar researcher.

Read more:
Six decades, 210 Warlpiri speakers and 11,000 words: how a groundbreaking First Nations dictionary was made

Warlpiri baby talk helps children learn new words

Our study showed Warlpiri speakers, with just three vowels, also use pitch and vowel modifications in their speech to young children.

It is the first time a finding like this has been established.

This is similar to what English speakers do. But there are also important differences.

Firstly, Warlpiri speakers raise their pitch and change the quality of their vowels so that they sound more like vowels produced by children. This modification likely enhances the children’s attention to speech. As other research has shown children prefer to listen to the voices of other children over adults.

Secondly, Warlpiri speakers use vowel modifications for a special teaching purpose.

Walpiri caregivers pronounce nouns with very clear and exaggerated vowels. This is different from how they pronounce vowels in other parts of speech, such as verbs. It is also very different from the way adult Walpiri speakers speak to each other. This helps little children learn new words by ensuring the names for things (often “toys” or “food”) stand out in speech.

Adults are probably not aware of how their vowels sound, or how they are changing them. But they are aware of other aspects of how they change their speech in baby talk style. As Alice Nelson Napurrurla also told us:

When we are sitting and talking with the little ones, we must always use their words […] like when we say ‘mangarri’ [food], ‘miyi’ [vegetable food], they say ‘nyanya’ [food]. Or when we say ‘jinta-kari’, ‘jinta-kari’ means ‘another one’, but the little ones they use ‘jija-jayi’ [another one] […] we’ve got to use their language.

Our study is the first to observe that caregivers use vowel and pitch modifications to achieve two different goals at the same time: to hold child attention and to teach the names for things.

We believe they are able to do this because Warlpiri has only three vowels. By contrast, a new study of Danish, which has more than 20 vowels, revealed Danish caregivers make their speech slower and exaggerate the “tune” but do not hyperarticulate their vowels. This shows us while baby talk might be a universal phenomenon, the vowel inventory of each language plays an important role in determining what strategies caregivers can use.

Read more:
Lots of kids are ‘late talkers’. Here’s when to take action

What next?

Our research shows again how baby talk is not an affectation or a silly thing adults do. It helps little children learn language.

Warlpiri caregivers make sophisticated use of baby talk modifications, showing the importance of further research on the shape and function of child-directed speech in diverse languages from across the world.

Rikke Louise Bundgaard-Nielsen receives funding from ARC Grant #FT190100243.

Alice Nelson receives funding from ARC grant #FT190100243 and the ANU Futures Scheme for this research.

Carmel OShannessy receives funding from ARC grant #FT190100243 and the ANU Futures Scheme for this research.

Jessie Bartlett receives funding from ARC grant #FT190100243 and the ANU Futures Scheme for this research.

Vanessa Napaltjari Davis receives funding from ARC grant #FT190100243 and the ANU Futures Scheme for this research.

– ref. A new study of Warlpiri language shows how ‘baby talk’ helps little kids learn to speak – https://theconversation.com/a-new-study-of-warlpiri-language-shows-how-baby-talk-helps-little-kids-learn-to-speak-207835

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tony Jaques, Senior Research Associate, RMIT University

The loss of the OceanGate submersible Titan appears to be an example of warnings ignored.

“We have heard the baseless cries of ‘you are going to kill someone’ way too often,” OceanGate chief executive Stockton Rush wrote in 2018, after being told he was putting lives at risk using his experimental submersible Titan to ferry customers to view the wreck of the Titanic almost 4,000 metres below sea level. “I take this as a serious personal insult.”

Rush, who died along with four others with the Titan’s “catastrophic failure” last week, was warned by marine technology experts as well as atleast one employee (subsequently dismissed) that the carbon-fibre vessel risked potentially “catastrophic” problems without rigorous testing and assessments.

Those boarding the Titan had to sign a waiver stating it was “an experimental submersible vessel that has not been approved or certified by any regulatory body which could result in physical injury, emotional trauma or death”. That should have been warning enough.

But this is not about being wise after the event. Consulting firm Institute for Crisis Management compiles statistics on crises across the globe every year. It rates 46% of these as “smoldering” in nature – that is, likely to have occurred after red flags or warning signs.

“In every crisis I have every studied,” says United States crisis management expert Ian Mitroff who has authored more than 20 books on the subject, “there were always a few key people on the inside of an organisation, or on its edge, who saw the early warning signs and tried to warn their superiors.”

“In every case, the signals were either ignored or blocked from getting to the top or having any effect.”

US academics Erika James and Lynn Wooten agree:

Smouldering crises nearly always leave a trail of red flags and warning signs that something is wrong. These signals often go unheeded by management.

Read more:
Why PR agencies and their spin should be the subject of greater scrutiny

Why red flags get ignored

Why are red flags not always acted on?

Sometimes the warning signs simply aren’t recognised.

This happened with French bank Société Générale, which in 2009 lost about €4.9 billion through unauthorised transactions by a single rogue futures trader, who created fictitious trades to cover losses on a falling market. An independent inquiry found the bank failed to act on 75 red flags over a period of 18 months.

Sometimes the problem gets reported but is blocked from moving up to management.

In one of Australia’s worst disasters, the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria in 2009 that killed 173 people, some of the fires were caused by fallen power lines sparking fires in hot windy weather.

Subsequent inquiries revealed clear warnings about the risk of fires.

Sometimes top decision-makers are aware of the problem but don’t see it as a priority.

This appeared to be the case at the Pike River coal mine in New Zealand, where a gas explosion in 2010 caused a mine collapse, killing 29. The ensuing royal commission found that in the previous seven weeks the financially stressed company had “failed to heed numerous warnings of a potential catastrophe at the mine”.

The commission concluded:

In the drive towards coal production the directors and executive managers paid insufficient attention to health and safety and exposed the company’s workers to unacceptable risks. Mining should have stopped until the risks could be properly managed.

And sometimes warning alarms are literally turned off.

Following the disastrous explosion and fire on the ill-fated Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers, in 2010, a US government investigation was told vital safety warning systems had been deliberately disabled to spare workers being awoken by false alarms.

Experts will try to resolve exactly how and why the Titan joined the Titanic on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean – and whether the disaster could have been avoided if the many prior safety concerns had not been “explained away”.

The best crisis management is to prevent the crisis in the first place. Whether it is companies or governments or communities or individuals, when there are warning signs of impending disaster speak up, and keep speaking up, until someone takes action.

Read more:
3 crisis-leadership lessons from Abraham Lincoln

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

– ref. Time after time, tragedies like the Titan disaster occur because leaders ignore red flags – https://theconversation.com/time-after-time-tragedies-like-the-titan-disaster-occur-because-leaders-ignore-red-flags-208370

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ryan Storr, Research fellow, Swinburne University of Technology

There has been a sharp increase in public resistance and backlash to the advancement of LGBTIQ+ inclusion and equality recently. The UK charity Stonewall reports that LGBTIQ+ recorded hate crimes in the UK have increased in recent years, and in Australia, there has been a large uptick in anti-LGBTIQ+ related events.

Sports have become a flashpoint for these issues, too. Globally, international sports federations have introduced bans to exclude trans and gender diverse athletes from sporting competitions.

FIFA even banned teams and players from wearing the “one love” armband. The armbands were to be worn by players in the men’s World Cup in 2022 to protest against the treatment of LGBTIQ+ people in Qatar, where it is illegal to be gay.

A history of LGBTIQ+ people in sport

Sports have a long history of exclusion and discrimination towards LGBTIQ+ people. In Australia, around 75% of LGBTIQ+ people have experienced or witnessed homophobia in sport.

Professional athletes such as Megan Schutt and Moana Hope have spoken out against discrimination of LGBTIQ+ athletes.

However, efforts have been made to address problems within the sporting world
around homophobia, biphobia and transphobia. Organisations like Proud2Play, of which the author of this piece is a co-founder, and Pride Cup aim to increase the visibility of LGBTIQ+ athletes. Celebrations such as pride rounds and games across sporting codes show targeted diversity work.

LGBTIQ+ representation and diversity across sports is important because research shows that young people, in particular, need role models and to see themselves both represented and celebrated.

There is still a lot of work to do across the Australian sporting world, though, and this work must be prioritised through appropriate funding and targeted action.

With increased activity and visibility of LGBTIQ+ inclusion efforts, however, comes increased resistance from people and organisations who believe that LGBTIQ+ people are a threat to modern society. This resistance and activism against the advancement of LGBTIQ+ equality has been termed “heteroactivism”.

Read more:
Israel Folau’s comments remind us homophobia and transphobia are ever present in Australian sport

What is ‘heteroactivism’?

Heteroactivism was coined by queer scholars Kath Browne and Catherine J. Nash. It is defined as “a term to conceptualise oppositions to LGBTIQ+ equalities, in ways that seek to assert a particular form of heteronormative sexual and gender order”.

It is a framework which positions heterosexuality and gender normativity (being cisgender) as superior, and the foundation of functioning western civilisation. Christianity is central to heteroactivism, with roots in the US Christian right.

In Australian sport, heteroactivism has been bubbling away for many years.

Sports seen as a key arena for heteroactivism

Sports have become a key platform to mobilise and advance resistance to LGBTIQ+ equality. Some Australian sports organisations have banned transgender women from participating in elite competitions.

Bills have also been drafted in parliament to “save women’s sport”, seeking to limit and exclude trans and gender diverse people from participating in both elite and community competitions.

Heteroactivism has a history in Australian sports. Both NRL player Israel Folau and tennis star Margaret Court are high-profile heteroactivists, using their platforms in sports to vilify LGBTIQ+ people.

More recently, players from a variety of sporting codes have refused to participate in pride rounds and wear pride jerseys.

Often, arguments against supporting LGBTIQ+ inclusion efforts centre around LGBTIQ+ identities being at odds or going against a player’s religion. Court even once stated that transgender children were the work of the devil.

The impact of ongoing heteroactivism in sport is profound, and has been very successful in halting progress for LGBTIQ+ people in that world.

Ongoing efforts to resist advances in LGBTIQ+ equality in sports have included:

• trolling on social media and abusive messages when sports organisations support LGBTIQ+ inclusion

• allegations and abuse towards out lesbian athletes

• abuse towards out gay male athletes

• targeted campaigns and complaints towards sports that engage with LGBTIQ+ inclusive practices.

For example, one group, Binary Australia, sent over 2,700 emails to Football Australia, protesting the inclusion of transgender football players in NSW.

The targeted and coordinated activism directed at sports organisations stops administrators from enacting LGBTIQ+ inclusive policies and practices. It silences them in speaking out in support of LGBTIQ+ people. It makes LGBTIQ+ inclusion too difficult to engage with in comparison with other areas. It becomes too political or “not worth the pushback”.

The mental health implications for LGBTIQ+ people are significant, too. Research shows
that ongoing discrimination can lead to poor mental health, increased anxiety and depression and dropping out of sports.

Sports for good or bad?

Administrators in sports have an opportunity to stand up to and address growing resistance to LGBTIQ+ equality. This can happen through policy development, anti-vilification efforts and, more importantly, demonstrating support for LGBTIQ+ achievements and contributions in sport.

By allowing heteroactivism to be mobilised through the medium of sports, administrators continue to alienate LGBTIQ+ players, fans and employees.

There are both opportunities and challenges for the Australian sporting world and how it responds to heteroactivism. Australia can be a world leader in efforts to improve outcomes for LGBTIQ+ people and make meaningful steps forward in the fight against homophobia, biphobia and transphobia, ensuring LGBTIQ+ people are represented and included across all levels of sports.

Ryan Storr works for and consults to The Diversity Storr, and cofounded Proud2Play. He receives funding from VicHealth.

– ref. What is ‘heteroactivism’? How sports became a battleground for opposing LGBTIQ+ progress – https://theconversation.com/what-is-heteroactivism-how-sports-became-a-battleground-for-opposing-lgbtiq-progress-208015

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Moewaka Barnes, Senior researcher, Massey University

There is little evidence to suggest Aotearoa New Zealand’s mainstream news media critically evaluate their own reporting on issues about or affecting Māori and te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi). This is concerning, given the negative framing of so much coverage, past and present.

The one exception to this general ambivalence has been the groundbreaking apology in 2020 by digital and print news organisation Stuff for a long history of monocultural and Eurocentric bias.

Informed by our research on how news about Māori and te Tiriti is often constructed, Stuff looked back at its legacy mastheads and found stories that ranged from “blinkered to racist”. It pledged to change and improve to reflect a commitment to Māori audiences and the principles of te Tiriti.

To date, no other media organisation has attempted to evaluate its reporting in this way – or, in fact, acknowledge this might be necessary. But media funding agency New Zealand on Air now offers a Tiriti Framework For News Media, also based on our research, to guide organisations applying to its public interest journalism fund.

It is hoped the framework will help media organisations develop strategies that promote more accountable and equitable practices in their day-to-day reporting and commentary.

Colonial and settler narratives

The initiative is important because news is not some objective truth waiting to be reported. It is constructed through the lenses of news teams – and particularly senior journalists and editors – who are predominantly Pākehā.

The types of stories that are told, and the way people and subjects are represented, involve deliberate choices. This frequently means few Māori stories are told. And when Māori are represented, they can be framed in limiting and negative ways.

Historically, this is common to news and media representations of Indigenous peoples everywhere. There is undoubtedly bias at work some of the time. But as we have argued previously, these “negative ‘stories’ and representations of Indigenous peoples are strategic; tactical necessities rather than aberrations”.

Read more:
Indigenous knowledge is increasingly valued, but to fully respect it we need to decolonise science – here’s how

In other words, they “play important roles in the ongoing colonial project, enhancing the legitimisation and naturalisation of the institutions, practices, and priorities of the colonising state”.

Early European colonists in the South Pacific founded newspapers and published material to serve their interests, institutionalising their preferred social order and norms. For example, an early handbook from the New Zealand Company in 1839 – “Information Relative to New Zealand, Compiled for the use of Colonists” – included some of the first representations of Māori as savage and lawless.

Settler newspapers recycled these themes from 1840 onwards. Variations of the same message persist to the present day. Recent research shows that in countries colonised by Britain, news consistently represents Indigenous peoples as violent, primitive and untrustworthy.

Read more:
How to decolonize journalism — Podcast

Fundamental questions

Contemporary coverage of Māori activism still routinely misinforms and fails to capture nuance. Reporting of the 2020 Ihumātao occupation, for example, frequently reduced internal tensions to a clash between young and old.

Similarly in Australia, the debate over the proposed First Nations Voice to Parliament has seen the spread of disinformation attempting to equate the policy with apartheid.

On the other hand, there is evidence that both journalists and their audiences want to see change. This is where the new media framework can make a difference. It provides detailed examples of more equitable news practices, and prompts news organisations to ask themselves several fundamental questions:

• Commitment to te Tiriti: how do you enact responsibilities under He Whakaputanga and te Tiriti?

• Societal accountabilities: how do you transform use of harmful, racist themes and narratives around Māori?

• News media practices: who benefits from the kinds of stories you choose to tell?

• Māori-controlled media: how do you represent diversity in Māori stories and in your own staffing?

Read more:
Included, but still marginalised: Indigenous voices still missing in media stories on Indigenous affairs

Challenge and opportunity

We’ve seen some positive responses to the framework, as well as accusations that the Tiriti requirements of New Zealand on Air’s public interest journalism fund amount to “propaganda” that muzzles mainstream media.

Either way, media organisations are now operating in an environment where profit models require innovation, with increasing competition from social media and changes in audience behaviours.

While this is challenging, it also offers an opportunity to transform journalism and improve newsroom practices. The Stuff and New Zealand on Air initiatives show how it’s possible to tackle harmful representations of Māori in mainstream news media.

Our framework could also be adapted to other sectors and settings where systemic bias and disadvantage are felt. For now, though, it is up to media organisations, funders and policymakers to decide how they will respond.

The authors acknowledge Dr Jenny Rankine and Dr Ray Nairn who were authors on Te Tiriti Framework For News Media and contributed to this article.

Angela Moewaka Barnes was contracted by New Zealand On Air to develop the Tiriti Framework For News Media. She also receives funding from the Marsden Fund, administered by the Royal Society Te Aparangi.

Belinda Borell was contracted by New Zealand On Air to develop the Tiriti Framework For News Media.

Tim McCreanor was contracted by New Zealand On Air to develop the Tiriti Framework For News Media. He is a member of Stop Institutional Racism (STIR).

– ref. Decolonising the news: 4 fundamental questions media can ask themselves when covering stories about Māori – https://theconversation.com/decolonising-the-news-4-fundamental-questions-media-can-ask-themselves-when-covering-stories-about-maori-205916

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University

On reflection, Simon Crean was probably the first domino to fall in a certain madness that seized Labor during the Howard era and presaged a decade of turmoil that only settled down under Bill Shorten’s leadership (2013-19).

Crean, who died suddenly over the weekend while travelling in Europe, was known for his hard work, moral clarity and even temperament.

He had been one of very few people to go straight into the cabinet upon his election in 1990 and he was regarded as a skilled practitioner.

So withering were his critiques of the Coalition that he was sometimes described as a Labor “attack dog”, particularly once he was elected deputy Labor leader from 1998. In 2001, he was elected unopposed as Labor’s parliamentary leader.

Turmoil within Labor

But in 2003, the former unionist’s work-a-day presentation was seen by critics in the caucus and the parliamentary press gallery as too negative in tone and unlikely to force the unfashionable prime minister, John Howard, from the Lodge in 2004.

Panicking Labor MPs connived to restore the twice-rejected Kim Beazley to the Labor leadership. Yet, it was the young and vituperative Mark Latham – these days representing One Nation in the NSW upper house – who emerged victorious.

Latham’s mercurial stewardship of Labor proved to be a disaster, delivering the Howard-led Coalition a thumping win in 2004, replete with control of both houses.

Further humiliated, Labor then switched back to Beazley, who had already lost to Howard in 1998 and 2001, and would face a leadership challenge himself in December 2006. Labor then won the next election in 2007 with Kevin Rudd at the helm and Julia Gillard as deputy leader.

Beazley may have been denied a third crack at the prize, but Crean had become the first federal Labor leader not allowed to contest an election at all.

It established a destructive pattern. Rudd would become the first Labor prime minister to be cut down before a shot at re-election, and Gillard, who had replaced him as PM, would suffer the same indignity.

Gripped by factional conflict and frustrated by Howard’s electoral success, Labor had forgotten its formula for stability under Bob Hawke and Paul Keating. It succumbed instead to intrigue and self-referentialism.

Crean’s ousting as party leader in 2003 was a sign of the madness to come.

Read more:
Labor’s legacy: six years of … what exactly?

A moral stand on Iraq

Yet during his truncated opposition stint from 2001-03, Crean took what was arguably the riskiest and most courageous stance since Gough Whitlam committed Labor to recognise “Red” China in 1971 and Herbert “Doc” Evatt opposed not only the Menzies government’s Communist Party Dissolution Bill, but personally led the High Court challenge to its constitutionality.

Crean’s decision to oppose Australia’s participation in the US-led “coalition of the willing” invasion of Iraq is now seen as correct. The war was based on falsified and misinterpreted intelligence and probably led to a worsening of Australia’s national security conditions.

Crean made a point of visiting Australian troops leaving for the war, telling them they had the Opposition’s complete support, even though the war itself was wrong.

Just as Evatt and Whitlam had risked being tagged as “soft” on communism, Crean risked being viewed as weak on terrorism by his detractors in the Howard government, the media and even some within his own party.

An engaged post-parliamentary life

A true believer in the Australian Labor Party and in the labour movement, Crean, like Beazley, was Labor royalty. Both men had been around parliament as children. Their fathers, Frank Crean and Kim Beazley Sr., had been frontbenchers and eventually ministers in the Whitlam Labor governments of 1972-75.

That pedigree may explain his commitment to remain in parliament as the member for the Melbourne seat of Hotham, becoming the only minister to serve in the cabinets of the Hawke, Keating, Rudd and Gillard governments.

His post-parliamentary life involved ongoing representation of Australia’s interests abroad, primarily as chair of the European Australian Business Council.
Crean remained deeply engaged in the issues facing the world, and fiercely committed to the protection of working people and the vulnerable.

In my own dealings with him as a minister and on occasions since, he was unfailingly polite, generous with his time and good-humoured.

Where other ex-leaders carried the scars of their removals, Crean exuded a kind of upbeat forward focus. His tendency was always to the analytical.

I remember meeting him for a drink in Brussels in 2018, where the main subject was the ongoing debacle of Brexit, at that stage nowhere near its final form.

Crean was across every detail, simultaneously mystified by the political basis of such an egregious act of national self-harm on the part of the UK, yet also fascinated by its underlying socio-economic wellsprings.

‘History will treat Simon well’

His sudden death at just 74 has shocked his party and his country, of which he was an energetic and relentless advocate.

It is a mark of that service and the civility he exhibited so effortlessly that Opposition leader Peter Dutton genuinely mourned his loss.

“Simon was a gentleman to deal with and a giant of the labour movement. I always admired Simon for his decency and intellect and only just saw him recently in Melbourne,” the current Liberal leader remarked.

Perhaps the last word, though, should go to Keating, who served with Crean in the Hawke cabinet and was his prime minister, too.

Keating told me today that Crean had been an

honourable participant in the game of politics, eschewing internecine cabals and trickiness. He was straight up and down, always looking beyond factional games for positive policy advances.

History will treat Simon well. Particularly, under pressure, as leader of the parliamentary Labor Party in refusing to join John Howard in his commitment of Australian military forces to the criminal Western attack upon Iraq.

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

– ref. Vale Simon Crean: a true believer in the Labor Party – https://theconversation.com/vale-simon-crean-a-true-believer-in-the-labor-party-208451

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Tibby, Associate Professor in Environmental Change, University of Adelaide

During droughts, Australia’s inland rivers dry up, leaving waterholes as the only wet places in a parched landscape. Fish, turtles, crayfish and other aquatic animals retreat to these vital refuges.

But our research, published today, reveals these waterholes are in danger of filling up with eroded soil from farms. This is putting a big squeeze on life in the river.

When drought breaks, the water flooding into the river carries soil along with it. In theory, soil deposited in waterholes could be flushed out again by large floods.

Studies in the 1990s suggested as long as floods continued to occur, waterholes would maintain a natural balance of sediment. But these studies focused on the Cooper Creek, in the Kati Thanda (Lake Eyre) Basin, where waterholes have a sandy base underlying clay-dominated soil that can be easily washed out again. Many Australian rivers are different. So what happens elsewhere?

Our new research investigated waterhole infilling in the Moonie River, in the northern part of the Murray Darling-Basin. The Moonie catchment has experienced extensive clearing of native vegetation for sheep and cattle grazing. Unlike some neighbouring catchments, the upper and middle portions of the river have minimal water extraction and so their flow patterns are relatively “natural”. It’s a true “dryland river”, flowing only after infrequent rain events. During long periods with no flow, waterholes become the only remaining wet habitats for aquatic animals to survive.

Read more:
Australia’s inland rivers are the pulse of the outback. By 2070, they’ll be unrecognisable

Poking at sediment to understand waterholes

Waterholes in the Moonie River can be more than 5 kilometres long, up to 5 metres deep, and teeming with life. Kingfishers, whistling kites and parrots create a symphony of sound while fish occasionally break the surface of the murky water.

We studied three of the deepest waterholes in the Moonie River, as they are the ones that last longest in droughts. Our initial method was simple. Using metal rods, we probed the soil’s depth at evenly spaced points along the waterholes. Our first survey revealed all three waterholes had accumulated at least a metre of soil, with one site showing more than 2.5 metres of infilling, significantly reducing its depth.

To determine the rate of sediment accumulation, we used radiocarbon dating. This technique is commonly used for dating objects thousands of years old such as the Lake Mungo skeletons. However, nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s introduced new radioactive material including radiocarbon into the atmosphere worldwide. By analysing radiocarbon in the Moonie River sediments, we could estimate their age.

Our sediment dating revealed that, in places, more than two metres of soil had filled the deepest waterholes since the 1950s. Before European occupation, it would have taken thousands of years to deposit this much soil. Our research suggests sediment infilling also sped up over the past few decades.

The accumulated soil reduces the waterholes’ depth, preventing them from holding water for as long as they used to during droughts. Our modelling indicated this reduction has shortened the duration waterholes can hold water by almost a year at some sites, bringing them dangerously close to complete drying during the longest droughts.

Do floods remove soil from waterholes?

However, two significant questions remained: does sediment get removed after a large flood? And if it does, does material from upstream simply get dumped downstream? To answer these questions, we needed some luck and a knowledge of cocktails.

In 2010 and 2011, the Moonie River experienced two very large floods. This gave us the perfect opportunity to find answers. We repeated our waterhole surveys and found even after big floods, there was still a minimum of 1 metre of sediment across most of the bottom of these waterholes, with much deeper sediment in places.

The missing piece of our puzzle was to determine whether the sediments were mixed together, like a margarita, and deposited by a single flood, or if they were layered, resembling a B52 cocktail (another connection to nuclear bomb testing).

To unravel this, we examined how the sediment had changed since before the floods. We observed distinct layers, like those in a B52 cocktail, indicating the sediments had been deposited over a series of flows and floods since the 1950s, rather than solely after individual floods.

Read more:
We helped fill a major climate change knowledge gap, thanks to 130,000-year-old sediment in Sydney lakes

How can we solve this problem?

We need to address the imbalance between eroded soil supply and the river’s capacity to transport sediment downstream.

In the Moonie River, water extraction for human use is minimal, so the problem is unlikely to lie with the river’s flow regime. The main culprit is an increased supply of sediment.

That means the solution lies in better catchment soil management. We need to stop so much soil washing into the Moonie River. This requires further research to find the main sources of soil that fills waterholes. Then determine the most effective ways to prevent erosion and reduce the amount of soil entering the river. This approach also helps preserve precious soils on agricultural land. In some exceptional cases, more extensive engineering solutions may be necessary to restore waterholes.

Given climate change projections for more frequent and longer droughts in the region, taking action to restore and preserve the function of waterholes in dryland rivers like the Moonie becomes increasingly crucial. These actions are essential for safeguarding the diverse aquatic animal life and the people that depend on waterholes for survival during droughts.

Read more:
It’s official: the Murray-Darling Basin Plan hasn’t met its promise to our precious rivers. So where to now?

John Tibby receives funding from the Australian Research Council, The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, the Queensland and South Australian Governments. This research was partially funded by the Queensland Government.

Jonathan Marshall works for the Queensland Department of Environment and Science who partially funded this research.

– ref. Soil erosion is filling vital inland river waterholes, putting the squeeze on fish, turtles and crayfish – https://theconversation.com/soil-erosion-is-filling-vital-inland-river-waterholes-putting-the-squeeze-on-fish-turtles-and-crayfish-207155

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jenny Graves, Distinguished Professor of Genetics and Vice Chancellor’s Fellow, La Trobe University

At the close of the 18th century, the Austrian composer Joseph Haydn wrote one of his masterpieces: an oratorio – a large concert piece for orchestra, choir and solo singers – entitled The Creation, with a libretto based on the biblical story of the creation of the world.

More than 200 years later, our understanding of how the world began has changed spectacularly. As both a scientist and a chorister, I have waited for decades for someone to write a new oratorio that tells the creation story based on science.

But nobody ever did. So – with the help of a poet colleague, a composer and the choir I sing in – I set out to tell the story of the origins of the universe, of life, of species, and of humanity with music and beautiful words and images from cosmology, molecular biology, evolutionary genetics, ecology and anthropology.

Science is beautiful

Rereading my old books by the masters of these fields brought back to me the awe and wonder inspired by the discoveries of the past century.

What could be more awesome than the creation of a universe from nothing? Or the creation of the molecules of life in a warm pond or hydrothermal vent?

What could be more beautiful than the origin of species of increasing complexity, including our own? What could be more important than conserving our planet and understanding ourselves and our place in the Universe?

Read more:
Did life evolve more than once? Researchers are closing in on an answer

So why isn’t the general public in love with science? When I lived in a commune 50 years ago, the very smart sociologists, psychologists and teachers I lived with would deride my passion. Science is hard and boring. Science is downright dangerous. Science is only good for inventing gadgets.

In 1959, the English novelist and chemist C.P. Snow wrung his hands at the existence of “two cultures” that don’t talk to each other. Despite the explosion of scientific advances, I’m not sure we have advanced much in the integration of science into our culture.

My early experiences began a lifelong search for ways to express the beauty and simplicity of science. What could touch us more profoundly than music?

We are what we sing

Humans of all ages and cultures have sung their deepest desires, hopes and fears. There’s even a theory that song evolved before language.

Religion uses music to foster community and bring comfort and certainty to our uncertain lives. For centuries, beliefs have been fostered and reinforced by constant repetition of a credo in one form or another.

As a chorister, I have sung dozens of masses, requiems and oratorios, by Bach, Brahms, Mozart, Berlioz, Faure, Britten and more. I think these classics are the most gorgeous music in the world, and I love singing them.

But the ideas in the librettos were developed centuries ago.

When I first thought of writing an update, the idea seemed preposterous. How could an evolutionary geneticist with little formal musical training ever conceive, let alone write, the libretto for a major new work?

Up until then I had written 462 scientific articles, but only one poem – and that was 65 years earlier.

Nothing is not nothing

I teamed up with my fellow chorister, poet Leigh Hay, with support from Peter Bandy, the conductor of our choir (the Heidelberg Choral Society). Peter persuaded the Australian-born composer Nicholas Buc to write the music.

I had the first line in my head for years: “Nothing is not nothing.” I also had an idea for the finale “Man is the astronomer”, in which soloists ask despairing questions about humanity’s future, answered by the chorus’ reassurance that we humans, uniquely, can understand the universe and our place in it.

To my surprise, the story unfolded in my head, in (rather unkempt) verse, and fell naturally into four sections: the universe, life, species, and humanity.

First the Big Bang and the cacophony of early Earth, and our planet forming into the “pale blue dot no bigger than Neil Armstrong’s thumb”.

Then the coalescence of molecules into self-replicating machines. Dramatising the discovery of the structure of DNA was fun to write: we interrupted excited half-sentences from Watson and Crick with a plaintive aria from Rosalind Franklin.

The steely beauty of DNA, the elegance of coding. The stuttering of mutation was obviously a fugue. For early life, I looked to famous Australian fossils.

Enter Darwin, singing calmly about his “one great law” against a chorus of hysterical hecklers. I had Bach’s St Matthew Passion in mind.

Read more:
Decoding the music masterpieces: Handel’s Messiah oratorio, composed in just 24 days

Then the desperation and frivolity of evolution; black and white moths, dancing lyrebirds, mechanically altruistic ants, speciating rock wallabies. Here I used my knowledge of famous Australian examples, including, alas, extinctions. A funeral march with tolling bell introduces the sixth extinction that is all our own.

When I got to the rise of the third chimpanzee, the “dominant mammal” making a mess of our planet, I started feeling gloomy and had to rescue myself by writing a strong message of hope into the finale.

Approaching the performance

With the words done, Nick Buc’s music written, and a visual backdrop created by animator Drew Berry, we are now well into rehearsals with the 100 voices of the Heidelberg Choral Society, a 60-piece orchestra and four soloists, conducted by Peter Bandy.

The premier of Origins is set for July 18 at the Melbourne Recital Centre. Some 225 years after Haydn’s Creation first dazzled audiences with its religious vision, an oratorio on our origins based in science will have arrived.

Jenny Graves receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is affiliated with the Heidelberg Choral Society.

– ref. Nothing is not nothing: how a scientist set out to sing the story of our origins – https://theconversation.com/nothing-is-not-nothing-how-a-scientist-set-out-to-sing-the-story-of-our-origins-207607

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

Australia will provide $110 million in further assistance to Ukraine, bringing its total support to $790 million during the conflict.

The new package includes 70 military vehicles, artillery ammunition and $10 million to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which manages the Ukrainian Humanitarian Fund, to assist with shelter, health services, clean water and sanitation.

Australia will also extend duty-free access for goods imported from Ukraine for another year.

Of the total $790 million Australia has provided, $610 million has been in military assistance.

But Australia still has not returned its ambassador back to Ukraine, despite many other countries having done so.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the extra support “will make a real difference, helping the Ukrainian people who continue to show great courage in the face of Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and immoral war”.

Defence Minister Richard Marles said Australia was “one of the largest non-NATO contributors in support of Ukraine, and will continue to support Ukraine to end the war on its own terms”.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong said “Russia cannot be allowed to infringe upon another country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity”.

Ukraine’s ambassador to Australia, Vasyl Myroshnychenko, welcomed the latest assistance, pointing to the importance of transportation capability in the war, and expressing his thanks to the prime minister.

Russia loses court bid over embassy lease

Meanwhile, the High Court on Monday dismissed Russia’s attempt to challenge the government’s cancellation of its lease of a site for a proposed new embassy near Parliament House. The lease was quashed on security grounds.

Albanese told the media: “The court has made clear that there is no legal basis for a Russian presence to continue on the site at this time, and we expect the Russian Federation to act in accordance with the court’s ruling”.

Soon after the decision, a Russian diplomat who had been squatting on the site departed.

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

– ref. Australia announces $110 million in new military and humanitarian assistance for Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/australia-announces-110-million-in-new-military-and-humanitarian-assistance-for-ukraine-208465

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ameeta Jain, Senior Lecturer in Finance, Deakin University

Average housing rents across Australia have increased by about 10% per year to February 2023 for new rentals, and just a bit lower than that for existing rentals.

Combined with rapidly increasing interest rates and wage rises not keeping pace with inflation, this is placing huge strain on the average household purse, prompting calls for improved rental market conditions.

Read more:
To deliver enough affordable housing and end homelessness, what must a national strategy do?

The Greens are refusing to pass the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund bill to provide more community housing unless the federal government supports the introduction of rent controls. But is a rent freeze a simple panacea?

Australia used rent controls effectively during the two world wars. However, they have been used in other countries without much success. Using basic economic principles, there is evidence freezes worsen inequality and actually reduce availability.

Making the market worse, not better

Rentals, in economic terms, are a product. To make a quality product for the market, the producer – the landlord – invests substantial sums of money in construction and maintenance to meet legislated minimum standards for rental properties. They also have to cover land and income tax, insurance and mortgage costs.

The rent from a property is expected to cover these expenses with an average return on investment between 3% and 7%. As soon as there is a rent freeze and the return on investment starts falling – in some cases into the negative – landlords will cut back on what they consider discretionary spending.

Read more:
Building in the same old ways won’t end the housing crisis. We need innovation to boost productivity

This can affect spending on maintenance because all other outlays are fixed.
Houses are then allowed to fall into disrepair, leading to landlords selling up or withdrawing properties from the long-term rental market.

Experience in the United States shows how landlords allow some houses to become uninhabitable so they can fraudulently obtain insurance payouts for damage to the property.

Unscrupulous landlords will also try to bypass the minimum rental property standards by offering their properties at above-market rents, capitalising on the high demand and low stock.

Cashing in on the black market

Promoting rent-bidding above the fixed price will only worsen if there are government-imposed rent freezes. While rent bidding has been banned in some states including New South Wales and Victoria, anecdotally it remains widespread.

Then there is a grey area where real estate agents and landlords appear to adhere to the law by not asking for bids, but willingly accept offers above the advertised price from renters desperate to secure a property.

Given the difficulty in evicting renters, and rent freezes not covering costs, landlords might think a premium payment is justified. On paper, it would appear the rent being paid is reasonable and in accord with a government-imposed freeze.

But it also provides the landlord with untaxed cash. This flows on to the building sector where tradies will happily provide their services for cash, thereby expanding the black market.

Read more:
The National Housing Strategy won’t end homelessness without supportive housing

The reasons for the property supply shortage are longstanding, and many of the causes were worsened by the COVID pandemic. These included material supply delays, increased costs and changes in preferred housing types. Government policies relating to the release of land and drawn-out approval processes for new builds have added to the supply problem.

Other unintended consequences

Battling families are further disadvantaged in the rental market because landlords would prefer to have their properties occupied by professionals with no children. Often, it is easier for owners to charge under-the-table premiums to this cashed-up group prepared to pay to get a particular property.

This increase in social segregation has been reported in Britain, where landlords choose renters from their preferred social and economic cohort. This increases the waiting times for “rent frozen” properties, forcing desperate individuals – usually those already most disadvantaged – to rent illegally through the black market.

This worsens the divide between the wealthy market-insiders and unemployed, migrant, young and other disadvantaged renters. The resulting lack of available rentals worsens worker shortages in some areas and can create pockets of increased violence and crime spawned by uncontrolled hidden black markets.

Read more:
Government’s housing fund legislation delayed by Greens-Coalition alliance

While freezing rents would appear to be a simple method to increase rental housing affordability, the unintended consequences of any such move will have a long-term negative impact on the total availability of rental housing stock, reducing the quality of housing and increasing a black market in rental housing.

Global experience suggests that improving supply, by easing building restrictions and scrapping red tape for new developments, is likely to be a more effective policy tool in Australia. Local councils and state governments need to simplify and expedite the process for approving new developments at the same time as reducing taxes on rental properties, both during construction and later.

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

– ref. Rent freezes and rent caps will only worsen, not solve Australia’s rental crisis – https://theconversation.com/rent-freezes-and-rent-caps-will-only-worsen-not-solve-australias-rental-crisis-208099

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Dempsey, Senior lecturer, University of Canterbury

We know putting carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the atmosphere is bad for the climate. But should we be reversing some of the damage by removing greenhouse gases that were emitted decades ago?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seems to think so. Its latest report highlights CO₂ removal as an essential activity if society wants to avoid warming the climate by 2℃ or more.

This is not carbon capture and sequestration, which tries to neutralise the burning of fossil fuels. Nor is it limited to the removals you get by planting – and never harvesting – new forests. Carbon dioxide removal includes all kinds of land- and engineering-based practices that extract the gas from the atmosphere and lock it away permanently.

But it is not an excuse to avoid emissions cuts. Decarbonisation – society’s shift away from fossil fuels – remains essential, and we’re not doing it fast enough.

Atmospheric CO₂ removal – basically, negative emissions – can buy us time to decarbonise by walking back some of the centuries of build-up. And we think New Zealand could be a leader in this effort.

Considering our geothermal and forestry resources, we estimate New Zealand could remove up to three million tonnes of CO₂ from the atmosphere each year – the equivalent of taking 600,000 cars off the road.

Read more:
On top of drastic emissions cuts, IPCC finds large-scale CO₂ removal from air will be “essential” to meeting targets

Putting CO₂ into geothermal systems

When CO₂ is pumped from our cars and smokestacks, it immediately disperses at an extremely low concentration across the vast atmosphere. For every 2,400 molecules making up our air, just one is CO₂ (~420 ppm), which makes it hard to filter them back out again.

Trees extract the few CO₂ molecules from air for photosynthesis. The oceans are also good at removing CO₂ but this makes them more acidic, which is not great for coral reefs.

Scientists have been developing their own technologies for atmospheric CO₂ removal. Most are currently expensive to do in practice. But we think New Zealand could be doing CO₂ removal cheaper than anywhere else in the world, taking advantage of our well developed geothermal and forestry industries.

Read more:
How NZ could become a world leader in decarbonisation using forestry and geothermal technology

Over the past 60 years, we’ve perfected how to extract hot water from several kilometres underground, use it to generate electricity and then put the cooled water back down again. What’s more, the geothermal industry has already done the hard (and expensive) part to figure out how to capture CO₂ that comes up with the geothermal water and inject it back underground.

Unfortunately, geothermal systems cool down over time. Unless new wells are drilled, they deliver less electricity with each decade they’re in use. We can make up the decline by burning logs or forestry waste to further heat the geothermal water and generate more power.

This biomass is a good fuel because it is carbon neutral: any CO₂ it emits came from the atmosphere, not underground. And the forestry industry is already there – a supply of logs, transport logistics and know-how – which all helps keep the costs down.

But instead of letting CO₂ from the burned wood go back into the atmosphere, we could dissolve it in the geothermal water before sending it underground. Unlike in fossil-fuel carbon-capture projects, which inject pure CO₂ that might later rise and leak out, the carbonated water is slightly heavier.

It’s an involved process, but at the end you can turn a geothermal system into a carbon sink that also generates renewable electricity.

Decarbonisation on a budget

When tackling an enormous problem like climate change, governments have to weigh up how much they think voters will let them spend to cut emissions. For this, it is helpful to measure decarbonisation costs.

Mostly, emissions reduction is a choice to switch to a newer, cleaner technology.
One study on abatement costs estimates that the switch from a petrol to an electric car equates to paying US$700 for each tonne of CO₂ kept out of the atmosphere.

We have recently calculated the decarbonisation costs for different geothermal technologies. We found switching from natural gas to geothermal electricity costs about US$250 for each tonne of CO₂ not emitted. When you boost geothermal with extra bioenergy and add CO₂ removal, this drops to US$150 a tonne. And if you’ve already paid for the geothermal plant and wells – an advantage we have here in Aotearoa – then it could drop as low as US$55 a tonne.

In terms of buying ourselves out of an emissions liability, geothermal carbon removal is one of the cheapest options out there.

The government may need to pay billions of dollars between now and 2030 to meet targets under the Paris agreement. A homegrown carbon-removal industry could end up as a strategic strength, particularly as social licence for clear-felling forestry continues to be eroded.

Challenges for CO₂ removal

The main barrier right now is cost. Citing its economic uncertainty, a key UN climate panel has come out against engineering-based carbon removals.

But there is cause for optimism here: the recent history of wind energy and solar power shows costs can fall dramatically as technology uptake grows. With our low-cost advantages, New Zealand has an opportunity to accelerate the rest of the world along the CO₂ removal learning curve.

Another concern is that a narrow focus on offsetting emissions could let heavy climate polluters off the hook. This is the tension between gross and net emission reductions. The government is addressing this issue by reviewing the Emission Trading Scheme, but the world will still need billions of tonnes of CO₂ removal to undo historic damage.

Read more:
Does carbon capture and storage hype delay emissions cuts? Here’s what research shows

Others argue land availability and competition with food crops will limit how much biomass can be made available for carbon removal. While true in a narrow sense, New Zealand currently harvests tens of millions of tonnes of timber each year while producing enough food for 40 million people.

The critics are right to point out this is not a miracle technology. If we’re to undo the climate legacy of centuries of carbon-hungry activity, it’s going to take all kinds of carbon removal.

Other research projects are underway, including the use of a rock known as Dunite, which can be spread on farmland to lock up carbon as it weathers, direct capture of CO₂ from the air with the common mineral Olivine, and enhancement of the carbon-storage capacity of marine sediments, especially in Fiordland.

Read more:
Blue carbon: could a solution to the climate challenge be buried in the depths of fiords?

A key unknown right now is whether the public wants this. It’s easy to kick the can down the road, and it’s true that international carbon trade is a curly issue that needs rigorous study. But CO₂ removal is not science fiction decades away from maturity. It’s here now.

David Dempsey receives funding from MBIE for geothermal research.

Rebecca Peer receives funding from MBIE for research on New Zealand’s energy future.

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

– ref. NZ’s geothermal wells offer a cheap way of storing carbon permanently — equivalent to taking 600,000 cars off the road – https://theconversation.com/nzs-geothermal-wells-offer-a-cheap-way-of-storing-carbon-permanently-equivalent-to-taking-600-000-cars-off-the-road-207901

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Horvath, Senior lecturer, La Trobe University

Never during the 23 years of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s rule has he faced the kind of challenge posed by Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin’s insurrection over the weekend.

The gravity of the crisis was underlined by Putin’s televised address on Saturday. He likened the insurgent’s “criminal adventure” to the catastrophe of 1917, when “intrigues, squabbles and politicking” on the home front triggered a military collapse, revolution and civil war.

In an obvious reference to Prigozhin, Putin claimed that “excessive ambition and personal interests led to treason, to the betrayal of the motherland and the people and the cause” for which Wagner soldiers had fought and died.

From catering food to running a trolling factory

What Putin has ignored is his own role in the transformation of Prigozhin from a convicted criminal and catering entrepreneur into a formidable political force in his own right.

Prigozhin was not merely “Putin’s cook” and a pro-Kremlin oligarch. He was a product of the peculiar kind of authoritarian regime that Putin created during his two decades in power.

In at least three ways, Putin ushered Prigozhin to the centre of Russia’s political stage.

First, Prigozhin was a beneficiary of the Kremlin’s strategy of using loyalist proxies to attack the regime’s domestic opponents and fabricate the illusion of popular support.

The prototype was Nashi (“Ours”), a youth organisation that was created to insulate Russia from the contagion of Ukraine’s Orange Revolution of 2004. Funded by obedient oligarchs, “Nashi” organised massive anti-Western demonstrations and violent attacks on anti-Kremlin militants, but proved powerless to deter mass protests against election fraud in 2011–12.

As the Putin regime struggled to contain this unfolding revolution, it turned to Prigozhin. Then best known as a St Petersburg catering magnate, Prigozhin quickly proved his usefulness by infiltrating the protest movement and funding a notorious television documentary that smeared pro-democracy demonstrators as paid hirelings of the West.

This was merely a prelude to Prigozhin’s main contribution to the consolidation of Putin’s power.

Although the regime had regained control of the streets, the opposition continued to dominate online political discussion. To neutralise this threat, Prigozhin created the Internet Research Agency. This trolling factory employed hundreds of staff, working around the clock to create the illusion of a groundswell of support for the regime.

It also became a tool of Russian influence on the international stage. Its intervention in the 2016 US presidential election helped Donald Trump to win and earned Prigozhin a place on the US sanctions list.

The advantage of proxies like Prigozhin was that they offered a shield of plausible deniability to the Kremlin. The drawback: they were harder to control.

One notorious example was the neo-Nazi outfit “Russkii Obraz” (Russian Image). Its leader was simultaneously collaborating with the Kremlin and organising a terrorist campaign against its own opponents, including police and federal judges.

The Wagner Group is born

Putin’s second contribution to Prigozhin’s ascent was the 2014 invasion of Ukraine when Russia annexed Crimea. Like the Kremlin’s domestic control strategies, the “hybrid warfare” that Russia unleashed on Ukraine involved proxies, or non-state actors, working in close collaboration with the Russian armed forces.

Numerous Kremlin-aligned formations participated in this effort to create the illusion of an authentic popular uprising in southeast Ukraine.

The most durable was the Wagner Group, which was created after a meeting in the Defence Ministry in the summer of 2014. Prigozhin requested the use of military facilities to train volunteers to fight in Ukraine and emphasised that “Papa” (Putin) had endorsed the project.

Read more:
Wagner’s rebellion may have been thwarted, but Putin has never looked weaker and more vulnerable

Wagner mercenaries played an important role in the defeat of Ukrainian forces in the battle of Debaltseve in early 2015. They also became an instrument of Russia’s intervention in Syria, where Prigozhin acquired concessions for natural resources in return for security services.

This pattern was repeated in Africa, where Prigozhin worked with Russian diplomats to amass mining and forestry concessions, while propping up some of the continent’s most brutal regimes.

In the process, Wagner mercenaries committed atrocities in the Central African Republic and Mali, which provoked international condemnation.

Read more:
Wagner group mercenaries in Africa: why there hasn’t been any effective opposition to drive them out

Prigozhin’s swift rise in power

Putin’s third gift to Prigozhin was the hollowing out of Russia’s state institutions.

As the Kremlin tightened its stranglehold over the electoral process, Russia’s parliament became accountable to the regime, not the people. Independent political parties were crushed. The media were progressively subjugated by the Kremlin and its allied oligarchs. Civil society was devastated through the passage of new laws against “foreign agents” and “undesirable organisations”. Instead of upholding the law, the judiciary and security agencies became tools of repression.

Read more:
Alexei Navalny: Novichok didn’t stop Russian opposition leader – but a prison sentence might

In this scorched, lawless landscape, Prigozhin flourished.

As an oligarch known for his private army and friends in the Kremlin, he operated with impunity. Investigative journalists who tried to shed light on the Wagner Group were harassed and sometimes died in unclear circumstances. His media empire, consolidated in 2019 as the Patriot Media Group, gave him a national platform.

It took Putin’s second invasion of Ukraine to transform Prigozhin from a dangerous regime proxy into a contender for power.

The first months of the war coincided with a draconian crackdown on the last remnants of political opposition, civil society and independent media in Russia. At the same time, the repeated defeats of Russian forces on the battlefield magnified the importance of Prigozhin’s Wagner mercenaries.

The simmering conflict between the Defence Ministry and Prigozhin revealed the erosion of Putin’s capacity to mediate between state institutions and non-state proxies.

In May, when Prigozhin warned of revolution and lambasted the “public, fat, carefree lives” of the children of the elite, he was striking at the foundations of the regime.

A month later, when Prigozhin mounted his armed rebellion and marched virtually unchallenged towards Moscow, he demonstrated that almost no one was prepared to defend the ageing dictator in his hour of need.

Having sown the wind, Putin has now reaped the whirlwind.

Robert Horvath has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

Isabella Currie has received a government RTP scholarship.

– ref. The rise of Yevgeny Prigozhin: how a one-time food caterer became Vladimir Putin’s biggest threat – https://theconversation.com/the-rise-of-yevgeny-prigozhin-how-a-one-time-food-caterer-became-vladimir-putins-biggest-threat-208450