Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharine Balolia, Senior Lecturer in Biological Anthropology, Australian National University

Of all the monkey species around the world, one stands out with its large, bizarre nose. In male proboscis monkeys, their bulbous noses will often hang past their mouths.

But why evolve such a strange feature? Are they a visual sign of health and status to potential female mates, and to other males? Or did they evolve to help the monkeys make honks and other loud sounds?

In our new study, published in Scientific Reports, we have deepened our understanding of these enlarged nasal structures by investigating what lies beneath: the structures in the skull.

Our findings help to explain how these noses function as visual and acoustic signals of health and status. They also add to a growing body of evidence that shows researchers can use close examinations of skulls to glean information about primate social behaviour.

A battle of noses

One of the largest monkey species in Asia, proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus) are endemic to the island of Borneo. They live in coastal mangroves, peat swamps and riverine forests, and have an unusual diet made up mostly of leaves.

They can swim quite well and have webbed fingers and toes. They typically live in harem groups, made up of a single adult male (who tends to have a large, bulbous nose), some adult females and their offspring.

Males don’t often get the opportunity to attract a harem until they reach middle age. These older, dominant and large-nosed males don’t easily tolerate other large-nosed males, often trying to ward them off aggressively with deep honks and “nasal roars” – loud calls they make using their noses.

Young adult males with smaller noses often live in all-male bachelor groups, and don’t tend to fight aggressively with each other. When these bachelor males get older and become large (and large-nosed) enough to compete with males that are part of a breeding group, they are in a position to overthrow the tenured male. Females then often choose to form a harem group with this new, high-status male.

What’s behind the nose?

We investigated the size and shape of the proboscis monkey nasal cavity. That’s the bony chamber of the skull that sits behind the fleshy nose. Our goal was to find out if the size and shape of the nasal aperture – the front part of the cavity, where the fleshy nose tissue attaches – can tell us more about why these peculiar appendages evolved.

Previous research that looked at the bulbous nose in males suggests it evolved to advertise status. In our new research, we wanted to better understand how this could be the case, this time using data taken from the skull.

We used 3D surface models, downloaded from a public repository, to take size and shape measurements from 33 adult proboscis monkey skulls. We compared these with the adult skulls of king colobus monkeys, blue monkeys and crab-eating macaques, three old world monkey species.

We chose some measurements to quantify the nasal cavity, and others to quantify the nasal aperture in all the species. We also looked at tooth wear, since older adult monkeys have more worn teeth than younger adults. That would allow us to find out if older adult males had a larger nasal aperture than younger adult males.

Better honks

If male proboscis monkeys have a different nasal cavity shape to females, and a unique shape compared to the other monkey species, it would support the idea these enhanced nasal structures – both the fleshy nose and the cavity behind it – evolved to allow for more effective honks and nasal roars.

That was indeed what we found. The shape of the male nasal cavity was low and long compared to females. This allows males to build up resonance (sound vibration) in their nasal cavities, allowing them to emit deeper and louder calls through their noses.

The nasal aperture shape was also different between the sexes. In males, it looks a bit like an eggplant, while in females it looks more like an upside-down pear. This unique opening shape in males allows for higher intensity sounds to be emitted through the nose.

The sex differences in cavity shape were also larger than what we found in other old world monkey species. This further supports the idea that the nasal cavity of male proboscis monkeys underwent an evolutionary change for the purpose of making certain sounds.

Lastly, the age. Older proboscis monkey males really do have larger nasal apertures than younger adult males, but the cavity itself didn’t increase with age. This supports the idea that the large noses act as a visual signal. It’s also consistent with the fleshy nose size increasing in middle-aged or older adult males, which we know from behavioural studies in the wild.

Our evidence from the skull allows us to better understand how nasal structures in male proboscis monkeys evolved for both acoustic and visual signalling.

The more we know about how regions of the skull function as social signals, the better chance we have of reconstructing extinct primate social behaviour using fossilised skull remains.

The author would like to acknowledge the paper’s co-author, former ANU Masters student Pippa Fitzgerald.

Katharine Balolia 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. Honk! These monkeys have truly legendary noses – now we better understand why they evolved – https://theconversation.com/honk-these-monkeys-have-truly-legendary-noses-now-we-better-understand-why-they-evolved-230012

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

The first human case of avian influenza (bird flu) in Australia was reported yesterday in Victoria. A child acquired the H5N1 strain of the virus in India and became ill upon returning home to Australia in March this year.

Based on information made available yesterday on the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID), we can ascertain the child is a two-year-old girl. She tested positive in early March and was reportedly very unwell but has since fully recovered.

According to the Victorian Department of Health, contact tracing revealed no additional cases, and the risk to others is very low.

Humans who acquire H5N1 generally have close contact with infected poultry; H5N1 does not spread easily between people. But the fatality rate in human cases is about 50%.

So what should we make of this latest development, as bird flu makes news locally and around the world?

H5N1

There’s no publicly available information on how this child became infected in India, or even where in India this case came from. However, the country is currently facing significant avian flu outbreaks in the states of Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra.

H5N1 is a strain of influenza A, which is further divided into variants called clades. GISAID data shows the virus the child was infected with belongs to the H5N1 clade 2.3.2.1a. The South Asian clade 2.3.2.1a was first identified in 2009 and is still circulating in birds in Bangladesh and India.

This is different from the clade behind outbreaks in dairy cattle making headlines in the United States (H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b). A second human case in the US associated with this outbreak has just been reported – a dairy worker in Michigan. Globally, a total of 14 human cases have been linked to this clade.

What about the poultry farms?

On the same day we heard about the child with H5N1, a bird flu outbreak was reported at an Australian egg farm in Meredith, Victoria.

This was a different strain, influenza A H7N3. H7 outbreaks are not new to Australia. The earliest H7 outbreak in Australia was an H7N7 outbreak in Melbourne, Victoria in 1976. The three most recent outbreaks occurred in free-range farms in Lethbridge, Victoria, in 2020.

While some strains of avian flu tend to produce mild or no visible disease (called low pathogenic), H5N1 and H7N3 are both highly pathogenic viruses. This means they cause severe illness in poultry and wild birds.

Wild birds are the source, and can infect farmed or domestic poultry. They can also infect animals such as pigs and horses.

Free range farms are at risk of avian flu, as they are outdoors and may be exposed to infected wild birds. But overall there have been very few highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreaks in Australian poultry, summarised in the table below.

The strain dominating Europe and the Americas, H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b, began in 2020 and spread globally to infect more than 300 avian and 40 mammalian species.

This is the most worrying clade, as it has spread further and more widely than any other avian flu virus. In mammals and birds it causes severe respiratory disease but also affects the brain.

Some good news

To date, H5N1 has not been detected in birds in Australia. It’s positive news that the egg farm outbreak is H7N3 rather than H5N1. The unrelated H5N1 infection in the child showed no evidence of spread, and the child recovered.

Australia has historically been protected from highly pathogenic avian flu because it’s spread by migrating ducks, geese and swans (known as waterfowl) from Asia. Their flyways bypass Australia.

However, with a range of different wild birds now infected by H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b, including in Antarctica, there may be new bird migration routes by which the virus could enter Australia.

The egg farm outbreak should be controlled quickly by culling infected birds. There are vaccines for poultry, but they are only partially effective and can mask outbreaks, so tend not to be used. France, which has had widespread outbreaks of H5N1 in its farms, began vaccinating poultry recently, but has experienced continued outbreaks.

What needs to happen now?

Past H7 outbreaks have been controlled rapidly in Australia, but we must remain vigilant. Meanwhile, an outbreak of low-pathogenic avian influenza virus H9N2 has been reported in a poultry farm in Western Australia today. The situation is being closely monitored.

There are often delays in reporting and sharing of avian flu data. Information on the child in Victoria was reported almost three months after the event, which is not ideal for preparedness.

Open source surveillance using publicly available data and intelligence, such as our Epiwatch platform, can provide more rapid information where there may be delays in updates to international reporting databases.

Avian influenza is a global concern, so heightened and timely surveillance in animals, birds and humans is crucial, as is global data sharing. The impact of avian flu on farming and the economy is substantial, but we also worry about a human pandemic arising.

H5N1 is so widespread globally now that the chance of it mutating to a point where it’s able to spread between humans is higher than ever.

C Raina MacIntyre receives funding from NHMRC (L3 Investigator grant and Centre for Research Excellence) and MRFF (Aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2 experimentally and in an intensive care setting) currently. She currently receives funding from Sanofi for research on influenza and pertussis. She is the director of EPIWATCH®️, which is a UNSW, Kirby Institute initiative.

Haley Stone receives funding from The Balvi Filantropic Fund. Haley Stone would like to acknowledge the support through a University International Postgraduate Award from the University of New South Wales.

– ref. Bird flu is hitting Australian poultry farms, and the first human case has been reported in Victoria. Here’s what we know – https://theconversation.com/bird-flu-is-hitting-australian-poultry-farms-and-the-first-human-case-has-been-reported-in-victoria-heres-what-we-know-230691

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

The energy debate has ramped up, with government and opposition trading blows over their respective plans to secure Australia’s energy future.

The budget announced big tax incentives for green energy projects. Earlier the government embraced the importance of gas up to 2050 and beyond. The Coalition is still promising its yet-to-be-announced nuclear policy, but that took a hit from a sceptical CSIRO report this week.

On the podcast Resources Minister Madeleine King pushes back against Coalition claims the green energy projects – developing green hydrogen, processing critical minerals – should stand on their own feet:

I think the opposition’s being a bit disingenuous in that regard, given when they were in government they also provided various forms of support to critical minerals projects. It’s very important to acknowledge that they’re not the same resources as the resources we might be used to in Australia. So it’s not iron ore, it’s not coal, which is a huge commodity export of this country.

King is confident tax-payer money will be going to the right places:

I don’t think there has been any bad money going into the critical minerals sector. They’re projects that have been supported by the former government and I. Some of them, of course, have had their challenges, but they are all projects that are progressing well, and even with some of the international challenges around pricing and market manipulation and, there will be guardrails, of course.

Whilst [the government assistance] incentivises investment and we want to international investment in this story, we want local investment in this story. For each dollar we put in we get more dollars out in terms of the jobs that are created right across the country.

King defends the government’s future gas strategy as a back-up to renewable’s and distances it from the Morrison government’s “gas-led recovery”:

The future growth strategy doesn’t come with any giveaways to gas companies or any funding at all. It was never intended to and actually never did and never will. It’s a million miles from the gas-led recovery. People [who] want to make that kind of comparison […] should perhaps read the future gas strategy and just look at what it’s based on, which is a thorough analysis.

Hopefully, there are other technologies like hydrogen that can supplant gas, and that would be great. And that’s what this government is investing in.

The responsibility of the federal government [is] to make sure we have a back up plan. So gas is the insurance on this.

While the opposition points to countries like Canada’s use of nuclear power as a model for Australia, King says it isn’t viable:

I went to Canada recently, and they’re only just sort of getting to the stage of […] disposing of [nuclear waste] permanently. And these reactors have been going for a number of decades. So, it’s hard to underestimate the challenge of nuclear power. I think the CSIRO have estimated the extraordinary cost, and why would you go down that path when it’s simply not needed?

Canada went down the nuclear path a long time ago, so they continue to use it, and that was their choice. They have a different establishment, they’re closer to North America, they’re able to have the technical cooperation, and I think they also don’t have the access to renewables like we do, given the weather there and the different geography. So it’s just a different story for a different place.

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. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Madeleine King on investment incentives and the pivotal role of gas – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-madeleine-king-on-investment-incentives-and-the-pivotal-role-of-gas-230772

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Englezos, Lecturer, Griffith Law School, Griffith University

OpenAI will be removing access to one of its ChatGPT voices, following objections by actor Scarlett Johansson that it sounds “eerily similar” to her own.

Earlier this week, the company said it was “working to pause” the voice of Sky, which is one of a few options users can choose when conversing with the app.

Johannson said OpenAI’s CEO, Sam Altman, had approached her in September and again in May, asking if she would allow her voice to be used in the system.

She declined, only to hear a voice assistant that sounded uncannily like her only days after the second request. She was, in her own words, “shocked, angered and in disbelief”. OpenAI replied by saying:

AI voices should not deliberately mimic a celebrity’s distinctive voice – Sky’s voice is not an imitation of Scarlett Johansson but belongs to a different professional actress using her own natural speaking voice.

Johansson is known to have voiced an AI in the past, for a role in the fictional 2013 film Her – which Altman has declared himself a fan of. He also recently tweeted the word “her” without much further explanation.

Johansson said she had to hire legal counsel to demand the removal of Sky’s voice and information on how the company created it.

This dispute provides a prescient warning of the future identity harms enabled by AI – harms that could reach any of us at any time.

Identity is a slippery subject

Artificial intelligence is developing at an incredible pace, with OpenAI’s ChatGPT being a game-changer. It’s very likely AI assistants will soon be able to meaningfully converse with users, and even form all sorts of “relationships” with them. This may be why Johansson is concerned.

One thing has become unassailably clear: we can’t out-legislate AI. Instead, we need a right to identity, and with that a right to request the removal, deletion (or otherwise) of content that causes identity harm.

But what exactly is “identity”? It’s a complex idea. Our identity may say nothing about our specific personal traits or qualities, yet it is fundamental to who we are: something we build through a lifetime’s worth of choices.

But it’s also about more than how we see ourselves, as celebrities demonstrate. It’s linked to our image. It is collaborative – cultivated and shaped by how others see us. And in this way it can be tied to our personal traits, such as our voice, facial features, or the way we dress.

Minor attacks against our identity may have limited impacts, but they can add up like death by a thousand cuts.

Legal defences

As AI democratises access to technologies that can manipulate images, audio and video, our identities are becoming increasingly vulnerable to harms not captured by legal protections.

In Australia, school students are already using generative AI to create sexually explicit deepfakes to bully other students.

But unlike deepfakes, most identity harms won’t breach criminal law or draw the ire of the eSafety Commissioner. Most legal avenues afford ill-fitted and piecemeal remedies that can’t heal the damage done. And in many Western democracies, these remedies require legal action that’s more expensive than most can afford.

AI can be used to manipulate or create content that shows “you” doing things you haven’t (or would never do). It could make you appear less competent, or otherwise undermine your reputation.

It could, for example, make you appear drunk in a professional setting, as with former US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It could show “you” vaping, when doing so would disqualify you from your sports team, or place you inside a pornographic deepfake video.

Australian law lags behind

The United States Congress recently proposed an actionable right to privacy. But even without this, US protections exceed those offered in Australia.

In the US, privacy is defended through a combination of legal claims, including the publication of private facts, presenting a subject in a false light, or the misappropriation of likeness (as in, co-opting some part of another’s identity and using it for your own purposes).

Based on the limited facts available, US case law suggests Johansson could succeed in action for misappropriation of likeness.

One pivotal case from 1988 featured American singer Bette Midler and the Ford Motor Company. Ford wanted to feature the singer’s voice in an ad campaign. When Midler declined, Ford hired a “sound alike” to sing one of Midler’s most famous songs in a way that sounded “as much as possible” like her.

Midler won, with one court likening Ford’s conduct to that of “the average thief” who simply takes what they can’t buy.

Australian public figures have no equivalent action. In Australia and the UK, the law will intervene where one party seeks to profit by passing off lesser quality look-alikes or sound-alikes as “the real thing”. But this applies only if consumers are misled or if the original suffers a loss.

Misrepresentation might also apply, but only where consumers believe a connection or endorsement exists.

Australia needs a rights-based approach akin to that in the European Union, which has a very specific goal: dignity.

Identity or “personality” rights empower those affected and impose an obligation on those publishing digital content. Subjects may receive damages or may seek injunctions to limit the display or distribution of material that undermines their dignity, privacy or self-determination.

Johansson herself has successfully sued a writer in France on the basis of these protections (although this win was ultimately more symbolic than lucrative).

With AI, it’s now child’s play to impersonate another’s identity. Identity rights are immensely important. Even where these rights co-exist with free speech protections, their very presence enables people to protect their image, name and privacy.

Elizabeth Englezos 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. Scarlett Johansson’s row with OpenAI reminds us identity is a slippery yet important subject. AI leaves everyone’s at risk – https://theconversation.com/scarlett-johanssons-row-with-openai-reminds-us-identity-is-a-slippery-yet-important-subject-ai-leaves-everyones-at-risk-230677

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marina Yue Zhang, Associate Professor, University of Technology Sydney

Globalisation is on shaky ground. As China rises, the United States and its allies are moving to reduce their reliance on the world’s factory.

The rivalry between the US and China is wide-ranging, from competition in technology over silicon chips and artificial intelligence to the critical minerals essential for green energy technologies such as grid batteries, wind turbines and electric vehicles.

At present, China dominates critical minerals. Beijing has secured supplies of rare earth elements and lithium, which have enabled it to take the lead in many green tech sectors, from solar to EVs. This has heightened geopolitical volatility.

But it also offers Australia a new pathway to export success – as well as fresh risks. A key part of the government’s flagship Future Made in Australia Act is an effort to fast-track mining of critical minerals – elements such as cobalt and lithium essential to the green energy transition.

That’s great. But who will buy them? If tensions between the US and China force us to pick a side, we might not be able to export our wealth of critical minerals to China, our largest customer.

What’s so important about Australia’s critical minerals?

Thermal and metallurgical coal, iron ore and gold have long dominated our mining exports. But this is changing. Under Australian soils are some of the world’s largest recoverable critical mineral deposits, including cobalt, lithium, manganese, rare earth elements, tungsten and vanadium.

Two years ago, the US government introduced the Inflation Reduction Act, an enormous stimulus bill aimed at speeding up the green transition. But it also contains nationalistic elements, prioritising American industries, workers and technologies over foreign competitors. The US also spearheaded a new multilateral Minerals Security Partnership aimed at reducing reliance on China.

Australia is one of the few mineral suppliers in the partnership. Most members are on the demand side, each with distinct mineral priorities for their industrial, technological and defence needs.

On budget night last week, Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the A$22.7 billion Future Made in Australia package “will help make us an indispensable part of the global economy”.

The framing is clear: Australia will mine and supply critical minerals for nations such as America, which is increasingly integrating us into its plans to reduce reliance on China.

About $7 billion of the Future Made funding will go to downstream refining and processing of the 31 critical minerals we have in deposits worth mining over the medium term.

These plans do not stand alone. They’re in part a response to other nation’s plans to boost processing and production, especially America, which will need reliable mineral sources to go green.

Who else is rich in critical minerals? Other middle-power, mineral-rich countries such as Argentina, Chile, Indonesia and Malaysia. These nations, by contrast, do not align their interests as closely with US strategies as Australia does.

China plays a critical role here as a technology and investment partner, enabling these nations to keep a larger share of economic benefits.

Mineral-rich countries in Africa and other parts of the global south are focused on attracting investment for mineral extraction and mining to achieve immediate economic returns and infrastructure development. Here, too, China has secured access to many important mines in these regions.

Both groups are competitors to Australia.

Over the past two decades, China has secured diverse sources of minerals and developed advanced mineral recycling technologies to reduce its reliance on the global supply of these resources.

It has also advanced its processing capabilities for most of these minerals.

China’s dominance of downstream green tech sectors has given it overcapacity. This enables Beijing to use its market power to significantly influence global supplies of critical minerals.

In response, nations like the US have slapped tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and batteries.

The risk for Australia

Politically, Australia’s decision to align closely with the US on critical minerals presents substantial risks.

For instance, to qualify for US government green subsidies, Australian mining companies must ensure Chinese companies or funds hold less than 25% ownership. The world’s largest hard-rock lithium mine, Greenbushes in Western Australia, is 26% owned by China’s Tianqi Lithium Energy.

As a result, such mining firms are having to reassess their relationship with Chinese companies and entities.

Chinese battery giants such as CATL and BYD that have partnerships or supply deals with Australian miners may respond by shifting their sourcing

For decades, Australia has tried to walk a tightrope between America, our military backer, and China, our top customer for minerals and ore. This is becoming less and less possible, as US-China tensions increase.

If Australia has to pick a side and decouple from China, it will hit our export revenues hard. Finding alternative markets with ore-processing capacities comparable to China’s will be challenging.

China remains a key export destination for Australia’s critical minerals. For instance, 97% of its lithium is exported to China. Lithium exports earned A$11.7 billion in the first half of 2023. Lithium has now overtaken liquefied natural gas (LNG) as Australia’s second-biggest export to China by revenue, behind iron ore.

What about processing the minerals here? To match China here would require massive investment, a large skilled workforce, huge scale and prolonged effort.

And even if we do, we might end up stuck being able to export these minerals to America and other partnership nations only when supplies from China are disrupted. If that happens, we might be confined to a niche role.

Can we think differently?

So what should we do? Rather than just competing for a share of green manufacturing, Australia should focus on developing enabling technologies, such as automated production lines and robotics for solar panel and battery manufacturing, as well as next-generation fireproof battery materials.

If the government takes the lead on building shared-use infrastructure such as laboratory facilities, transport and mineral processing hubs, it will help attract investors, inventors and entrepreneurs by reducing upfront capital costs and operational risks.

Success in these general-purpose technologies will position Australia as a unique and irreplaceable player in the global critical mineral supply chain.

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. Critical minerals for the world – or just for the US? Turning Australia into a green minerals powerhouse comes with risks – https://theconversation.com/critical-minerals-for-the-world-or-just-for-the-us-turning-australia-into-a-green-minerals-powerhouse-comes-with-risks-230212

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Furger, Graduate Researcher and Teaching Fellow in International Law, The University of Melbourne

This week, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) applied for arrest warrants for three Hamas leaders, as well as Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, in connection with the ongoing war in Gaza.

The reaction of the United States, Israel’s main backer, was swift. President Joe Biden condemned the prosecutor’s action against Israel’s leaders as “outrageous” and accused the ICC of drawing false moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel.

While it is not yet clear if the ICC’s judges will decide to issue the warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, the Biden administration has already hinted at the possibility of imposing US sanctions against ICC officials.

Yet, just a year ago, when the ICC issued arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and another Russian official for alleged international crimes in the Ukraine war, US officials were full of praise for the court. Biden welcomed the action, calling it “justified”.

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, in fact, the US has continually displayed its support for the ICC. One top US official, the ambassador-at-large for global criminal justice, said the ICC “occupies an important place in the ecosystem of international justice”.

The US’ apparent about-face when the court targeted its ally is nothing new. Nor is it surprising.

Rather, this vacillating approach is merely symptomatic of the US’ complicated relationship with the ICC since its creation in 1998. Its hostile reaction to the Israel-Palestine situation will certainly have been expected by court officials.

Wariness from the court’s inception

I worked for many years as a cooperation advisor at the ICC’s office of the prosecutor. During that time, Washington’s position towards the court shifted several times – it supported the court at certain times and criticised it at others.

This has largely been tied to a broader assessment of US foreign policy goals and the anticipated costs and benefits that supporting the court could bring.

The US was initially a keen supporter of the creation of a permanent international criminal court and was an active participant in the ICC treaty negotiations in the 1990s.

But it ultimately voted against the Rome Statute that created the court in 1998 due to concerns with the court’s jurisdictional framework. The US feared it could allow for the prosecution of Americans without US consent.

Although the US still signed the Rome Statute, President George W. Bush later effectively unsigned it, saying the US would not ratify the document and had no legal obligations to it.

The US remains a non-member state to the ICC today.

Once the ICC was created, the US adopted laws to restrict its interactions with the new court. Most importantly, it passed the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act of 2002 (ASPA) that prohibited providing any support to the ICC.

This law also allowed the US president to use “all means necessary” – a phrase understood to include armed force – to free American officials or servicemembers should they ever be detained for prosecution in The Hague, the seat of the ICC. This earned it the nickname of “The Hague Invasion Act”.

That same year, however, an amendment was passed to the law allowing exceptions for when the US could assist international courts to bring to justice:

Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosovic, Osama bin Laden, other members of al-Qaeda, leaders of Islamic Jihad and other foreign nationals.

The amendment created significant flexibility, demonstrating that the US was ready to assist international justice efforts as long as they targeted designated US “enemies” or other foreign nationals.

US support in African cases

The US soon adopted a pragmatic approach towards the court, supporting its activities depending on the circumstances and its interests.

In 2005, Washington allowed a UN Security Council referral to the ICC in relation to possible genocide and war crimes committed in Darfur, Sudan. The conflict was among the US’ top foreign policy priorities in Africa at the time.

Later, the Obama administration formally adopted a “case-by-case” strategy to cooperate with the ICC when it aligned with US interests.

Under this policy, the US played an important role in the 2011 referral of alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Libya to the ICC. This was, again, in line with US foreign policy interests.

US diplomats also provided vital support in the arrest of Congolese warlord Bosco Ntaganda, who was later sentenced to 30 years in prison by the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity. And the US assisted with the arrest of Dominic Ongwen of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda, who was later sentenced to 25 years.

Another falling out over Afghanistan

The relationship between the US and the court soon soured again, though, during the Trump administration.

This was in part because of developments in the ICC’s investigation into alleged crimes committed in Afghanistan, which marked the first time the court probed possible crimes committed by US forces.

In 2020, ICC judges authorised an investigation into US, Afghan and Taliban forces. Soon after, the US imposed sanctions on the ICC prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, and another senior ICC official.

After some delays, the investigation is continuing again, with a focus solely on crimes allegedly committed by the Taliban and Islamic State Khorasan Province. Other aspects of the investigation have been “deprioritised”, an implicit reference to the US and its allies.

Soon after taking office, the Biden administration lifted the sanctions against the ICC officials, returning to a seemingly more collaborative period in US-ICC relations.

These relations became closer following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, with the adoption of new laws that broadened the possibilities of US cooperation with the court. The goals of the US and ICC had seemingly aligned again, at least for the time being.

But this week’s request for arrest warrants for Israeli leaders demonstrates yet another shift in the US approach to the court. It continues the pattern of the US supporting the court when it suits it, prioritising its own foreign policy goals over wider international criminal justice efforts.

I have previously worked for the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (2010 – 2015 and 2017 – 2021).

– ref. US hostility towards the ICC is nothing new – it has long supported the court only when it suits American interests – https://theconversation.com/us-hostility-towards-the-icc-is-nothing-new-it-has-long-supported-the-court-only-when-it-suits-american-interests-230663

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vita Pilkington, Research Assistant, PhD Candidate, The University of Melbourne

Retiring from professional sport can be anguishing for some athletes.

In Australia, high-profile athletes such as Brendan Cannon, Nathan Bracken, Stephanie Rice and Lauren Jackson have spoken about the loss of identity, purpose and goals for the future, as well as depression and thoughts of suicide after retirement.

More recently, the death of former Australian Football League (AFL) player Cam McCarthy – who battled mental health issues during his career – brought on calls for more support for athletes during retirement, including from Fremantle coach Justin Longmuir.

Meanwhile, the sentencing of former St Kilda footballer Sam Fisher for drug offences has driven similar conversations about “life after footy”, as has become the go-to phrase for headline writers.

These discussions about the mental health challenges at the end of an athletic career are important – but there’s a missing piece of the puzzle.

The danger of the athlete identity

Reaching and maintaining peak performance as an athlete requires immense dedication and discipline.

As a result, athletes’ identities often become closely linked to their status as sportspeople. This means when something disrupts their ability to play sport, like injury or retirement, serious mental health problems can follow.

The good news is, sporting organisations are increasingly investing in retirement transition programs that support mental health during and after the end of athletes’ careers.

Programs typically aim to encourage athletes to develop more well-rounded identities, consider future careers and encourage help-seeking when needed.

Such programs are currently being delivered by the AFL, Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) and National Rugby League, among others.

This investment is encouraging. These programs can play important roles in preventing and responding to serious mental health problems among retiring athletes.

But more needs to be done to support athletes’ mental health at the start of their careers.

The importance of early intervention

As with all illnesses, early intervention is key. Taking preventative approaches to mental health is essential to build resilience and prevent symptoms from becoming severe.

There is a need for greater focus on prevention and early intervention for mental health issues in elite sport.

Elite athletes often have to navigate significant pressures and responsibilities from an early age. For example, the 2020 Tokyo Olympics showcased athletes such as Sky Brown, who competed in skateboarding and won bronze at the age of only 13.

Importantly, athletes are at the most vulnerable age for mental health problems when they enter elite sport settings, given 75% of these issues develop by age 24.

Coupled with this, the pressures young athletes face – performance pressure, high training loads, strict lifestyle demands and public and media scrutiny – exist alongside the normal challenges of adolescence: academic pursuits, increasing independence from caregivers, developing a sense of identity and navigating peer relationships and early romantic relationships.

This is clearly a lot for young people to be managing.

And yet so far, little emphasis has been given to promoting athlete mental health during this transition.

Importantly, these efforts need to start from entry into the high-performance system, rather than late in athletes’ careers.

What more can be done?

Our research team at Orygen – a youth mental health organisation – recently developed a framework for promoting mental health during the transition into elite sport. This highlights ways people in sport settings (such as coaches, teammates and staff) can support athlete mental health and wellbeing.

One recommended strategy is ensuring athletes understand the key challenges they’re likely to face throughout their careers. This can be complemented by helping them develop healthy strategies for overcoming these challenges.

Across the whole-of-sport system, there’s a need to ensure all athletes are valued as people – not just sportspeople. This requires building meaningful relationships in sport and preparing athletes for life beyond the athletic career.

Importantly, opportunities for mental health support should be provided regularly. Athletes need to know seeking help is part of maintaining optimal health and may even support performance.

Sports organisations are starting to make strides in this area. For example, the AFL delivers a curriculum to all Talent Pathways players on mental health literacy, resilience, stress management and coping, and skills to contribute to a safe and inclusive team culture.

Similarly, the AIS’s Start Strong program offers online learning that provides athletes and their parents with important information about the Australian high-performance sport system and topics such as personal values and overcoming obstacles.

Others, such as the Australian Cricketers’ Association, have begun to offer support for alternative education and career pathways earlier in a player’s career, to ensure they have options after retirement.

Next steps for everyone

These investments are the way forward but we need to push on with preventing mental health problems from the outset, ensuring athletes are best prepared to perform their roles and live healthy lives – physically and mentally – during their lifetimes.

And perhaps the rest of us – including sports fans and media – can use recent events and this Olympic and Paralympic year to remember that sportspeople are often in a developmentally critical period of life.

Vita Pilkington works as a researcher in Orygen’s Elite Sport and Mental Health team. She has contributed to a number of research projects and written reports commissioned by leading Australian sporting organisations, including some mentioned in this article.

– ref. It’s not just retiring athletes who need mental health support – young sportspeople need it, too – https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-retiring-athletes-who-need-mental-health-support-young-sportspeople-need-it-too-230296

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Philip C. Almond, Emeritus Professor in the History of Religious Thought, The University of Queensland

New norms for differentiating supernatural phenomena from the natural within Roman Catholicism took effect on May 19.

The new norms arise from the need to evaluate as quickly as possible the supernatural origin or otherwise of an array of phenomena occurring increasingly within the Catholic world and spreading quickly via social media.

Possible supernatural phenomena include apparitions – especially of Jesus or the Virgin Mary – interior or exterior voices, writings or messages from the beyond, the weeping or bleeding of sacred images, the bleeding of consecrated eucharistic hosts, and so on. Visions of the Virgin Mary, in particular, continue to occur regularly within Catholic Christendom.

The new document neither endorses supernatural phenomena nor rejects them. Rather, it provides a set of criteria and processes by means of which the church can officially discriminate between them and separate the authentic from the fake. So what do we need to know about these norms?

An old document replaced

The new norms replace an earlier document from 1978.

In this 1978 document, the decision whether to approve a phenomenon as supernatural or not was essentially left in the hands of a local authority – in most cases, a diocesan bishop.

According to criteria, the bishop decided on a choice of two options: supernatural, or not.

In the case of a judgment that a phenomenon was of supernatural origin, he could permit a public manifestation of devotion to the supernatural phenomenon equivalent to his saying, “for now, nothing stands in the way” (“pro nunc nihil obstat”).

Under this document, central control of the Vatican was minimal. Local authorities were in control.

The supernatural is under new management

The new document is intended to more effectively oversee the validation of such events.

It does so by centralising authorisation, management and control of the supernatural within the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, better known as “the Inquisition”. Any decision bishops or any other authority wish to make has to be submitted to the Dicastery for approval.

The new document declares the Holy Spirit may:

reach our hearts through certain supernatural occurrences such as apparitions or visions of Christ or the Blessed Virgin.

But the central authority of the church will now decide where, when and how God works, his wonders or miracles to perform.

Overall, God will be shown to be minimally directly intervening in the world.

Six new criteria to judge whether God is involved

Rather than a relatively simple judgment whether an event is supernatural or not, the church now provides six possible ways an event can be classified.

These range from “nihil obstat” (“nothing stands in the way”) to “declaratio de non supernaturalitate” (“declaration of non-supernaturality”).

But even where a nihil obstat is granted, as a rule, neither a diocesan bishop, nor any conference of bishops, nor the Dicastery itself “will declare that these phenomena are of supernatural origin”.

In short, a clear declaration of a supernatural event having taken place will virtually never happen (or, at least, unless the Pope intervenes).

A declaration of non-supernaturality will be made if it is discovered

the phenomenon was based on fabrication, on an erroneous intention, or on mythomania.

In short, if a fake or a hoax is discovered.

Between these two extremes lie four other possible judgments. Although there are positive signs of divine action in each of these, they each indicate increasing worries about credibility. The first two of these concern increasing doubts about the credibility of the phenomenon. The next two concern increasing doubts about the honesty of the people involved.

What are the new procedures?

If a diocesan bishop, after consultation, believes a supernatural phenomenon requires investigation, he alerts the Dicastery.

He then convenes an Investigatory Commission to carry out a “trial”. This trial will see witness examinations, sworn depositions, expert analysis of written texts, along with technical-scientific, doctrinal and canonical assessments. It is pretty much the traditional method of the Inquisition in modern dress (or vestments).

The commission finally makes a judgment on the truth of the matter based on positive and negative criteria.

Positive criteria include the reputation of persons involved, doctrinal orthodoxy, exclusion of fakery and the fruits of Christian life that have resulted from it.

Negative criteria include the possibility of manifest error, potential doctrinal errors, breeding of division within the church, an overt pursuit of profit, power, fame or social recognition, and the personal and public ethical rectitude of those involved, along with their mental health.

In the light of the commission’s work, the bishop proposes to the Dicastery a judgment following one of the six ways of classification. The Dicastery then makes a final judgment to be delivered to the bishop, who is obliged to implement the decision and make it public

Catholicism ‘disenchanting’ the world

There is deep concern within the Vatican over misinformation and disinformation about the supernatural.

The document informs us:

Now more than ever, these phenomena involve many people […] and spread rapidly across different regions and many countries.

The digital world is a place of multiple meanings where the supernatural occupies a space somewhere between reality and unreality. It is a domain where belief is a matter of choice and disbelief is willingly and happily suspended.

Ironically, the outcome of the new norms will be to minimise the number of phenomena recognised as “supernatural” within the Catholic Church. In effect, it will put stricter limits on God’s action within the world.

The new norms within the church to manage the supernatural are intended more to “disenchant” the world than further to “enchant” it.

Philip C. Almond 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 Vatican is cracking down on miracles. Here are the new rules for ‘supernatural’ occurrences – https://theconversation.com/the-vatican-is-cracking-down-on-miracles-here-are-the-new-rules-for-supernatural-occurrences-230544

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Welch, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Debates about infrastructure often turn around money – with good reason. It’s estimated New Zealand’s infrastructure deficit – the amount we would need to spend to modernise, upgrade and build what we need today – is more than NZ$100 billion.

And this will double by 2030 if we don’t significantly increase spending now to avoid the even higher cost of falling further behind and having to catch up.

These are big numbers, but they are just numbers. The real problem is political. No matter which major party is in office, no recent government has seriously addressed the country’s long-term infrastructure needs.

Priorities should include modernising water systems to prevent leaks and contamination, expanding and improving road and rail networks to reduce congestion and support economic growth, and ensuring infrastructure can withstand the impacts of climate change and natural disasters.

Next week’s budget seems likely to continue the trend. Spending and tax cuts, and reducing debt, have already been well signalled. Building a few more big roads and installing tunnels and pipes is no substitute for what is truly required.

A report made available to media today from the Helen Clark Foundation and environmental consulting firm WSP – Bridging the Infrastructure Gap: Funding and Financing Aotearoa New Zealand – argues there is a better way. Central to this will be greater political consensus and longer-term planning.

Wasteful and unproductive

While there are several ways to fund infrastructure, the report argues a significant portion will need debt financing. And it reminds us New Zealand is still a reasonably low-debt nation.

As of 2022, Crown debt sat at around 57% of GDP, compared to an OECD average of 89%. Given the strong Crown balance sheet, there is capacity for further government borrowing for infrastructure projects.

As the report argues, however, money isn’t the real problem – political willpower is. Above all, there is a lack of multiparty support for prioritising a resilient future.

This became starkly evident with the recent change of government. Since the National-led coalition took office, we’ve seen infrastructure project cancellations and a significant shift in funding priorities.

As the Clark Foundation report highlights, the incoming government cancelled the iReX interisland ferry terminal project after $424 million had already been spent. Similarly, the previous Labour-led governments cancelled eight major road projects. Some of these have now been reinstated at a significantly higher cost.

This boom-bust cycle is wasteful and unproductive. The report emphasises the need for a stable, long-term vision supported by consistent investment levels across successive government terms.

Historically, this cycle has also led to many infrastructure assets reaching the end of their lives all at once. The need for substantial repairs or replacement leads in turn to urgent spending that could be avoided with better planning.

Big savings available

The lack of a long-term vision carries other costs, too. The decisions made today will affect multiple future generations. It is irresponsible to make critical, long-term, high-impact decisions about vital infrastructure on a three-year political cycle.

The Clark Foundation report recommends developing a 30-year national infrastructure plan. Not only would this provide greater certainty, it would unlock productivity benefits that could save between 13% and 26.5% on project costs.

But spending more and building more isn’t the only way to sustain infrastructure. We also need to use – and charge for – existing infrastructure more efficiently. There are examples of this already, such as a planned time-of-use charge for some Auckland roads, but far more can be done.

Other possibilities include new highway tolls and more targeted water-use charges. For instance, “volumetric charging” – metering – for water has had significant success on the Kāpiti Coast where it led to a 90% reduction in water lost to leakage, and a 26% decrease in private water use.

Transcending the political cycle

There are also more innovative and equitable ways to fund infrastructure that have long been used globally, including what is known as “value capture”. This is where an increase in rates revenue resulting from an infrastructure investment is used to fund or offset some of the cost of the infrastructure itself.

For example, in the United States, value-capture mechanisms were integral to funding the development of the Atlanta BeltLine, a 35-kilometre walking and cycling path, and eventual light rail route. Capturing the increase in property values along the corridor provided 40% of the project’s US$4.8 billion cost.

Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR) Corporation has successfully used value capture through land premiums and property development to fund its extensive rail network.

And in London, the Crossrail project (also known as the Elizabeth Line) partially funded its construction through a business rate supplement and a community infrastructure levy targeting properties that would benefit from the new rail line.

In New Zealand, targeted rates – a form of value capture – have been successfully used to fund projects such as the $400 Moa Point Sludge Minimisation Facility in Wellington. Financed through a levy on all city properties (excluding protected Māori land), the cost is spread over the life of the new facility.

It is not that feasible funding solutions for significant infrastructure investments don’t exist. Rather, as the Helen Clark Foundation and WSP report makes clear, it is the lack of a long-term plan transcending the political cycle that is holding the country back.

Bridging the Infrastructure Gap: Funding and Financing Aotearoa New Zealand will be publicly available on June 26.

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

– ref. How to end the wasteful boom-bust cycle driving NZ’s infrastructure gap: new report – https://theconversation.com/how-to-end-the-wasteful-boom-bust-cycle-driving-nzs-infrastructure-gap-new-report-230398

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin van der Sanden, Postdoctoral Fellow, Public Health, SHORE & Whāriki Research Centre, Massey University

Social media and messaging apps such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Messenger are increasingly used to buy and sell drugs in many countries. New Zealand is no exception.

This trend is particularly popular among young people, who are often involved in trading recreational drugs such as cannabis and MDMA. These deals are generally small scale, which means people believe the risks of getting caught and facing legal action are low.

But our new research shows how drug-linked “digital trace data” may lead to unexpected consequences in the future. Young people could see their data sold and used against them by job recruiters, insurance companies and others for decades to come.

Data harvesting is the new normal

Social media companies such as Meta are among the largest and most aggressive harvesters of user data.

These companies collect data on users beyond the confines of their platforms, generating profiles on individuals they can use to target advertising or sell to third-parties.

We interviewed 33 people as part of our study of social media drug trading in New Zealand. Participants had varying experiences buying and selling drugs via apps.

A core question we were interested in was how our interviewees navigated security and digital trace data as part of their drug trading.

Many participants were aware of and concerned about the impact a potential criminal record could have on their lives.

They also felt the collection of their digital trace data by social media companies could become another potential source of exposure to police, who can request their data from these companies. As one participant said:

Facebook probably knows I sell drugs.

But concerns went beyond just law enforcement. Some participants accepted their digital trace data could be used by other groups:

my data has been bought and sold 1,000 times by now, I don’t care what company has it anymore.

Some of our interviewees also reported receiving targeted adverts related to drug use on Meta platforms, ranging from cannabis edibles to rehab clinics.

This raises questions around how drug-linked digital trace data may influence different areas of people’s lives as it’s absorbed into the global data trade.

Increasingly, a person’s digital trace data is being accessed by different groups, from recruitment and insurance companies to law enforcement agencies.

Data may become the new criminal record

Criminal records have long had an impact on employment, housing access, insurance, loans and travel opportunities – also known as “collateral consequences”.

The 2004 Criminal Records Act included the clean slate scheme which allows eligible New Zealanders to request their criminal records be concealed from employers and third parties.

The scheme is meant to give hope to people grappling with the consequences of criminal records for minor offences, often committed in their youth. But critics have argued it doesn’t really work as intended in the digital age.

Today, archived digital content, such as media reports of an offence, often remain easily searched and accessible after official records have been removed.

But the rise of big data and the use of algorithms to analyse digital trace data sets and predict consumer behaviour further complicates this picture. Big data analytics are spreading beyond advertising into other private sectors such as insurance. This means the collateral consequences of criminal records – and any illegal behaviour – are expanding.

Collateral consequences in the age of big data

The fact our research participants viewed themselves as having a low risk of being caught by police is unsurprising, given the small scale of their drug trading.

But the collection and sale of digital trace data as part of social media drug deals means we need to broaden the understanding of collateral consequences beyond criminal records.

The spread of big data and predictive algorithms shows how criminal convictions could become just one of many sources of collateral consequences for individuals.

The targeted advertising of drug-related products and services to some participants in our research highlights how labels such as “drug consumer” may be applied to people based on their digital trace data. There is a high likelihood this classification will feed into other data sets as they are sold on to third parties.

And given the long-term storage of data by many public and private groups, it may well be that data gathered about an individual when they were 18 continues to affect them when they are 35.

These data sets may end up causing collateral consequences similar to criminal records, regardless of whether or not there was a criminal conviction.

The global data trade is likely to affect all of us in some form. But it may have a particularly harsh impact on people whose digital trace data links them to behaviours such as drug use or minor offending such as small-scale drug trading.

Robin van der Sanden recieved funding for this research from Royal Society Te Apārangi Marsden Fund grant (MAU1812).

Chris Wilkins received funding for this research from Royal Society Te Apārangi Marsden Fund grant (MAU1812) and from the Health Research Council (HRC) of New Zealand

Marta Rychert receives funding from the Royal Society Te Apārangi and the Health Research Council of New Zealand.

Monica Barratt has previously received funding from Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council, National Centre for Clinical Research into Emerging Drugs, and Criminology Research Council, and international funding from New Zealand’s Marsden Fund and U.S. National Institutes of Health.

– ref. ‘Facebook probably knows I sell drugs’ – how young people’s digital footprints can threaten their future prospects – https://theconversation.com/facebook-probably-knows-i-sell-drugs-how-young-peoples-digital-footprints-can-threaten-their-future-prospects-229994

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

Some children show signs of perfectionism from early on. Young children might become frustrated and rip up their drawing if it’s not quite right. Older children might avoid or refuse to do homework because they’re afraid to make a mistake.

Perfectionism can lead to children feeling overwhelmed, angry and frustrated, or sad and withdrawn.

And yet perfectionism isn’t considered all bad in our society. Being called a “perfectionist” can be a compliment – code for being a great worker or student, someone who strives to do their best and makes sure all jobs are done well.

These seemingly polarised views reflect the complex nature of perfectionism.

What is perfectionism?

Researchers often separate perfectionism into two parts:

1. perfectionistic strivings: being determined to meet goals and achieve highly

2. perfectionistic concerns: worry about being able to meet high standards, and self-criticism about performance.

While perfectionistic strivings can be positive and lead to high achievement, perfectionistic concerns can lead to a higher chance of children developing eating disorders or anxiety and depression, and having lower academic achievement.

Children and adolescents may experience perfectionism in relation to school work, sport, performance in art or music, or in relation to their own body.

Signs of perfectionistic concerns in children and adolescents may include:

• children being highly critical of themselves

• their reactions to mistakes seeming to be an overreaction

• intense preoccupation and worry over their standards and goals and/or procrastination

• significant change in performance, for example, lower academic results

• irritability and negative emotions, stress and feelings of worthlessness

• social problems with peers and friends, such as bullying and alienating themselves from peers.

A range of genetic, biological and environmental factors influence perfectionism in children. And as a parent, our role is important. While research evidence suggests we can’t successfully increase positive perfectionistic strivings in our children, harsh or controlling parenting can increase negative perfectionistic concerns in children.

Parents who are perfectionistic themselves can also model this to their children.

So, how can we walk the line between supporting our child’s interests and helping them to achieve their potential, without pressuring them and increasing the risk of negative outcomes?

Give them space to grow

A great metaphor is the gardener versus the carpenter described by psychology professor Alison Gopnik.

Instead of trying to build and shape our children by controlling them and their environment (like a carpenter), parents can embrace the spirit of the gardener – providing lots of space for children to grow in their own direction, and nourishing them with love, respect and trust.

We can’t control who they become, so it’s better to sit back, enjoy the ride, and look forward to watching the person they grow into.

However, there is still plenty we can do as parents if our child is showing signs of perfectionism. We can role model to our children how to set realistic goals and be flexible when things change or go wrong, help our children manage stress and negative emotions, and create healthy balance in our family daily routine.

Set realistic goals

People with perfectionistic tendencies will often set unattainable goals. We can support the development of flexibility and realistic goal setting by asking curious questions, for example, “what would you need to do to get one small step closer to this goal?” Identifying upper and lower limits for goals is also helpful.

If your child is fixed on a high score at school, for example, set that as the “upper limit” and then support them to identify a “lower limit” they would find acceptable, even if they are less happy with the outcome.

This strategy may take time and practice to widen the gap between the two, but is useful to create flexibility over time.

If a goal is performance-based and the outcome cannot be guaranteed (for example, a sporting competition), encourage your child to set a personal goal they have more control over.

We can also have conversations about perfectionism from early on, and explain that everyone makes mistakes. In fact, it’s great to model this to our children – talking about our own mistakes and feelings, to show them that we ourselves are not perfect.

Talk aloud practices can help children to see that we “walk the walk”. For example, if you burn dinner you could reflect:

I’m disappointed because I put time and effort into that and it didn’t turn out as I expected. But we all make mistakes. I don’t get things right every time.

Manage stress and negative emotions

Some children and adolescents have a natural tendency towards perfectionism. Rather than trying to control their behaviour, we can provide gentle, loving support.

When our child or adolescent becomes frustrated, angry, sad or overwhelmed, we support them best by helping them to name, express and validate all of their emotions.

Parents may fear that acknowledging their child’s negative emotions will make the emotions worse, but the opposite is true.

Creating healthy balance

The building blocks of healthy child development are strong loving family relationships, good nutrition, creative play and plenty of physical activity, sleep and rest.

Perfectionism is associated with rigidity, and thinking that there is only one correct way to succeed. We can instead encourage flexibility and creativity in children.

Children’s brains grow through play. There is strong research evidence showing that creative, child-led play is associated with higher emotion regulation skills, and a range of cognitive skills, including problem-solving, memory, planning, flexibility and decision-making.

Play isn’t just for young children either – there’s evidence that explorative, creative play of any kind also benefits adolescents and adults.

There is also evidence that getting active outdoors in nature can promote children’s coping skills, emotion regulation and cognitive development.

Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Gabriella King previously received a scholarship stipend from Deakin University to support their PhD candidature, which is an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.

Jade Sheen receives funding from Australian state and government research grants including the Victorian Government Department of Health.

– ref. Parenting a perfectionist? Here’s how you can respond – https://theconversation.com/parenting-a-perfectionist-heres-how-you-can-respond-224509

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Charles, Senior Lecturer in Education (Pedagogy and Curriculum), Deakin University

Students at all-girls’ schools do slightly better in their exams than girls at co-educational schools, according to new research from the United Kingdom.

This goes against previous studies that suggest it does not matter if students attend single-sex or co-ed schools.

What is the study?

This research was done by FFT Education Datalab. This is an independent research team specialising in education policy and statistics.

Using the United Kingdom’s National Pupil Database, the study looked at more than 580,000 students who attended more than 3,200 schools. All schools were government-funded (so were “public schools” in Australian termimology) and were either single sex or co-ed.

Students exam results were examined at the end of Year 11 and the study controlled for differences in schools and pupil characteristics, such as socioeconomic disadvantage or high levels of students who learned English as a second language.

What did the research find?

The research found girls who went to all-girls’ schools recorded a small improvement in their exam results compared to their peers in co-educational schools.

This is after adjusting their results to account for factors such as disadvantage.

The gap is small – around one month’s progress for each of the students. But it is noticeable.

Yet for boys’ schools, there wasn’t any difference in results between single sex and co-ed schools.

Why is this important?

While the UK study was not peer-reviewed, this finding is important because it contradicts other recent large-scale research, which has found no statistically significant academic advantage to single-sex schooling.

For example, a 2022 analysis of Irish students found no significant performance gaps between co-educational and single-sex schools.

A 2014 meta-analysis (an overview of many studies) across 21 countries also found no high-quality evidence of benefits to single-sex schooling.

What about Australia?

This new research plays into the renewed debate over single sex schooling in Australia in recent months.

This follows some prestigious all boys’ schools announcing moves to co-education (and some former students crying about the change). It also follows multiple examples of sexism and misogyny by male students at both all-boys and co-ed schools.

There is also a growing body of Australian research examining toxic behaviour of boys towards their female teachers and peers.

So the UK research could further entrench a perception girls are better off in single-sex schools.

This perception has a long history. Many girls schools were set up in the 1800s by pioneering headmistresses such as English educator Frances Buss, who believed in girls’ equal rights to education and girls’ schools were the best places to provide this.

Girls’ schools today retain an image of feminist progressivism, promoting the idea that “girls can achieve anything”. The perception is supported by some research evidence that girls in single-sex schools are more likely to feel confident in traditionally male-dominated subjects such as STEM.

What needs to be done?

This UK study raises many questions. Are girls indeed better off on their own? Are there aspects of single-sex education that could be applied in co-ed environments? How do we ensure that all schools are schools of choice for girls, including coeducational schools?

We can investigate these questions further by doing research with families to better understand their perceptions and experiences of single-sex schools today. We can also do more research into the impact of programs such as Respectful Relationships, which have been introduced to build positive gender cultures in schools.

Lucinda McKnight receives funding from the Australian Research Council via DECRA grant DE220100515.

Claire Charles 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. New research suggests girls in single-sex schools do slightly better in exams than girls in co-ed environments – https://theconversation.com/new-research-suggests-girls-in-single-sex-schools-do-slightly-better-in-exams-than-girls-in-co-ed-environments-230425

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mike W. Morley, Associate Professor and Director, Flinders Microarchaeology Laboratory, Flinders University

Humans arrived in Australia at least 65,000 years ago, according to archaeological evidence. These pioneers were part of an early wave of people travelling eastwards from Africa, through Eurasia, and ultimately into Australia and New Guinea.

But this was only one of many waves of migration in the story of the human colonisation of the globe. These waves were probably driven by climate change and the ability of groups to adapt to a wide range of environments.

In new research published in Nature Communications, we have found evidence that a large wave of migration reached the island of Timor not long after 50,000 years ago. Our work at Laili rock shelter suggests the people who first reached Australia some 65,000 years ago came via New Guinea, while Timor and other southern islands were only colonised by a later wave of settlers.

Potential routes to Australia

Timor has long been regarded as a potential stepping-stone island for the first human migration between mainland Southeast Asia and Australia and New Guinea. At the time of these ancient migrations, sea levels were lower, so many of what are now islands in Southeast Asia were joined to the mainland in a region known as Sunda, and Australia and New Guinea were joined together in a single continent known as Sahul.

The islands between Sunda to the west and Sahul to the east are known as Wallacaea. These islands have never been connected to each other or the mainland, owing to the deep channels that separate them. This has meant that even when sea levels were much lower than today they remained as islands.

The search for evidence of early migrations on Timor has been hampered by a lack of suitable sediments in caves and rock shelters.

However, we found a unique source of evidence at Laili rock shelter, overlooking the Laleia river in central-north Timor-Leste. Unlike other sites in the region, Laili preserved deep sediments dating between 59,000 and 54,000 years ago which contained no sign of human presence.

On top of these layers we found clear signs of human arrival, in the dirt occurring about 44,000 years ago. This provides clear evidence that while humans were initially absent from the site and the local landscape, they subsequently arrived in what must have been significant numbers.

From other research, we also know there is evidence of humans arriving at other sites in Timor-Leste and nearby Flores Island between 47,000 and 45,000 years ago. Taken together, all this evidence strongly supports the view that humans only arrived in this region around this time.

Evidence in the dirt

Our analysis of the sediment layers at Laili suggests humans arrived in a deliberate and large-scale colonisation effort, rather than ad-hoc settlement by a small population. This is clearly seen in the earliest traces of occupation, which include hearths, dense accumulations of stone artefacts, and the remains of a diet rich in fish and shellfish.

We used a technique called micromorphology to study the layers of sediment under the microscope.

We could see the sediment from before the time of occupation did not carry signs of human presence. But when humans moved in to the site, many traces of human occupation appeared abruptly, including compressed trampled layers caused by the passage of people on the shelter floor.

Island hopping to Sahul

Our findings may prompt a re-evaluation of the route and timing of the earliest human migration into Sahul. They also show movement to the islands was an ongoing process rather than a single event, with occupation of the southern islands occurring thousands of years after the initial settlement of Australia.

The intensity of the initial occupation we found at Laili suggests this migration may have been large enough to overwhelm previous migrations in the islands of Southeast Asia and Australasia.

The earlier dispersal waves, including the people using the ancient Madjebebe rock shelter in Australia, may have been small numbers of people coming from a different route further north via New Guinea. The later wave of dispersal through the Wallacean Islands may have formed a much more significant arrival of humans on Sahul.

The absence of human occupation on Timor before 50,000 years ago indicates that humans arrived on the island later than previously supposed. This supports the theory that humans first arrived in Australia via New Guinea rather than Timor.

This path is less direct, but it may be explained by the fact the southern islands including Timor have far fewer land-dwelling animals to eat. Early colonists would have needed the flexibility to live on fish and shellfish. So moving into these southern islands could have been more challenging than the northern islands which had more medium to large land animals.

Mike W. Morley receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Kasih Norman receives funding from the Leakey Foundation and Rock Art Australia.

Sue O’Connor receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Ceri Shipton and Shimona Kealy 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. A rare find in ancient Timorese mud may rewrite the history of human settlement in Australasia – https://theconversation.com/a-rare-find-in-ancient-timorese-mud-may-rewrite-the-history-of-human-settlement-in-australasia-228391

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter McDonald, Honorary Professor of Demography, Centre for Health Policy, The University of Melbourne

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has suggested the level of Australia’s permanent migration program be reduced from 185,000 – as proposed by the government in the budget – to 145,000. This is a significant reduction.

His rationale is extremely simple: fewer migrants means fewer people needing housing amid a housing crisis.

As tempting as this logic may be, it’s misleading to suggest issues around migration or housing are easy to fix. Far from it.

Instead, these measures could be counterproductive, leaving us with fewer people to fill important skill shortages and ultimately doing little to manage population growth.

Bidding for skills

Under the current system, there are two main streams of migration: family and skilled. Dutton’s announcement has prompted questions about which sorts of migrants would be cut.

As the number of new permanent residents in the family stream is dominated by the partners and dependent children of Australian citizens who have a legal right to Australian residence, Dutton’s proposed cut would have to come overwhelmingly from the skilled stream.

At present, the leading occupations in the skilled stream are nurses, teachers, IT workers and engineers. These are all occupations in high demand. If intake of these professions were cut, employers would need to look for alternative sources of people with these skills. This would be bad news for New Zealand, as Australian state governments would likely target its nurses and teachers.

In addition, state and territory governments would engage in a bidding war for people with these skills. The effect of this would be no decrease in housing demand in the states that won this war and empty houses in the states that lost.

This is not a solution to the housing crisis, which is due mainly to lack of adequate supply.

Also, more than 50% of people granted permanent residence are already living in Australia. Their conversion to permanent residence onshore does not free up housing.

Temporary vs permanent

For the past 18 years, the level of Australia’s permanent migration program has fluctuated in the narrow range of 160,000 to 195,000 under seven different prime ministers, beginning with John Howard. This has proven to be a successful, bipartisan policy, leading to the slowing of population ageing, maintenance of a high employment to population ratio (fewer dependants for each worker), and the provision of skills needed for economic development.

Much of the concern about immigration levels has arisen because net overseas migration, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, hit 518,000 in 2022–23. This is an extraordinarily high number by historical standards.

It is not well understood that almost all this net movement (90%) related to temporary residents, not permanent residents. This is important because temporary residents differ in many ways from permanent residents.

Excluding tourists and New Zealand citizens, there are around 1.7 million temporary residents in Australia. They are not eligible for most government services including Medicare, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, state education, domestic tertiary fees and many more. Temporary residents do not buy houses.

While temporary residents are in the housing rental market, most are mainly in dedicated student or backpacker housing, or live with a higher number of people per dwelling than the permanent population.

The differences between temporary and permanent residents are not taken into account in the calculations made for planning documents such as government budgets and intergenerational reports. It is primarily the permanent population that contributes to economic development and productivity. Planning and understanding would be greatly enhanced if the Bureau of Statistics divided the estimated resident population into permanent and temporary components.

Temporary arrivals in 2022–23 were about 200,000 higher than in 2018–19, the last pre-COVID year. This was due to the COVID-induced backlog of students and working holidaymakers wanting to come to Australia all arriving in the same year, along with the normal annual intake.

Temporary departures were about 100,000 fewer in 2022–23 than in 2028–19 due to an explosion of people switching between visas (known as “visa hopping”) onshore.

In 2022–23, an astounding 192,000 people on student and graduate visas hopped to the temporary employment visa (408), which gave them an additional two years’ residence. Eligibility for the 408 visa was extended during COVID to provide a means of employment for temporary residents stuck in Australia, but this figure was for the period after COVID.

In March 2024, around 40,000 former working holidaymakers were on the 408 visa or a bridging visa, the first time working holidaymakers have joined the visa-hopping bandwagon. If these visa hoppers had left Australia in 2022–23 rather than visa hopping, the net migration outcome would have been very different.

What about international students?

Both major parties have proposed caps on Australia’s international student intake.

The number of people on student visas in Australia at the end of March 2024 was only marginally higher than the pre-COVID peak. And the present number is high likely because of the backlog of enrolments created by COVID border closures.

Dealing with dodgy educational institutions that exploit international students is important, as is the genuine student test introduced by Labor, but capping numbers attending respectable universities is unnecessary and will likely have negative consequences. There could be staff reductions, the dropping of courses and a reduction in the level of university research.

So what could be done to manage migration more effectively?

The government could start by maintaining the permanent migration program at its 18-year average level. Instead of cutting from the overall intake, severely curtailing visa hopping by accepting fewer visa applications from people already in the country would better manage population growth.

This, combined with leaving international student intake as it is and cracking down on dodgy educational organisations, would be more useful than the current proposals from both major parties.

The Bureau of Statistics should also divide the estimated resident population into permanent and temporary components. This data would help create better migration planning and policy.

Peter McDonald has received funds from the Australian Research Council related to studies of migration. He has also received funds in the past from the various forms of the Commonwealth Department of Immigration, but not for more than ten years.

– ref. Peter Dutton wants to cut migration for the sake of housing. Here’s why that’s not a good idea – https://theconversation.com/peter-dutton-wants-to-cut-migration-for-the-sake-of-housing-heres-why-thats-not-a-good-idea-230298

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruth Morgan, Associate Professor of History, Australian National University

Last month, the leaders of the G7 declared their commitment to achieving net zero emissions by 2050 at the latest. Closer to home, the Albanese government recently introduced legislation to establish a Net Zero Economy Authority, promising it will catalyse investment in clean energy technologies in the push to reach net zero.

Pledges to achieve net zero emissions over the coming decades have proliferated since the United Nation’s 2021 Glasgow climate summit, as governments declare their commitments to meeting the Paris Agreement goal of holding global warming under 1.5°C. But what exactly is “net zero”, and where did this concept come from?

Stabilising greenhouse gases

In the early 1990s, scientists and governments were negotiating the key article of the UN’s 1992 climate change framework: “the stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic [human-caused] interference with the climate system”. How to achieve that stabilisation – let alone define “dangerous” climate change – has occupied climate scientists and negotiators ever since.

From the outset, scientists and governments recognised reducing greenhouse gas emissions was only one side of the equation. Finding ways to compensate or offset emissions would also be necessary.

The subsequent negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol backed the role of forests in the global carbon cycle as carbon sinks.

It also provided the means for well-forested developing countries to participate in the emerging carbon offset market, and to play their part in reaching the carbon accounting goal of “carbon neutrality”. Under those terms, the industrialised countries subject to the Kyoto Protocol could pay developing countries to offset their own emissions as a form of low-cost mitigation.

The Kyoto Protocol was unable to curtail soaring global greenhouse gas emissions, and a successor agreement appeared uncertain. As a result, interest turned in the late 2000s to the possibility of using highly controversial geoengineering techniques to remove greenhouse gas emissions. These proposals included sucking carbon dioxide out of the sky so the atmosphere would trap less heat, or reflecting sunlight away from the planet to reduce heat absorption. The focus on carbon sinks, whether through forests or direct air capture, would appear again in the idea of net zero.

Temperature targets

By this point, policymakers and advocates were shifting away from emissions reductions goals (such as Australia’s unusual first Kyoto target to limit emissions to 108% of 1990 emissions by 2012).

Instead, temperature targets became more popular, such as limiting warming to no more than two degrees above pre-industrial levels. The European Union had already adopted the 2°C threshold in 1996 and argued successfully for its relevance as a long-term objective for climate action.

What changed was scientists now had better ways of tracking how long carbon dioxide emissions would stay in the atmosphere, allowing better projections of our carbon budget.

These findings allowed the IPCC’s 2014 report to clearly state limiting warming to below 2°C would require “near zero emissions of carbon dioxide and other long-lived greenhouse gases by the end of the century”.

By this time, London-based environmental lawyer and climate negotiator Farhana Yamin had also set her sights on net zero by 2050. For Yamin, translating the 1.5°C ambition into climate negotiations meant focusing on net zero: “In your lifetime, emissions have to go to zero. That’s a message people understand.”

The concept of net zero offered a simple metric to assess mitigation efforts and hold parties legally accountable – an instrument she and colleagues proposed for the negotiation of a new legally binding agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol.

By late 2014, net zero had gained traction, appearing for the first time at a UN climate conference, the UN’s Emissions Gap Report, and in a speech by World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim that stressed “we must achieve zero net emissions of greenhouse gases before 2100”.

Zero in Paris

These efforts culminated in the 2015 Paris Agreement, which in addition to its well-known temperature targets of 1.5°C and 2°C, also added a complementary goal:

To undertake rapid [emissions] reductions … so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removal by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century.

This is what “net zero” means – a “balance” between carbon emissions and carbon sinks. It was subsequently enshrined in the IPCC’s Special Report on the importance of keeping warming under 1.5°C, in which 195 member states agreed to get to net zero emissions by 2050.

Slogan for greenwashing?

So, what’s next for net zero? Countries such as India have questioned what it means for fairness and equity between developing and developed nations, Instead, they favour the well-established approach of “common but differentiated responsibility” to mitigation. This justifies India’s aim to reach net zero emissions by 2070, as developed nations should lead the way and provide developing countries with funds and technologies necessary to support their mitigation ambitions.

The UN, by contrast, has warned the flexibility of net zero as a concept could make it a mere slogan for greenwashing by corporations and other non-state entities rather than a concrete objective.

As the chair of the UN’s High Level Experts group put it:

It’s not just advertising, bogus net-zero claims drive up the cost that ultimately everyone would pay. Including people not in this room, through huge impacts, climate migration and their very lives.

Given the chasm between pledges and practice documented in the 2023 UN Emissions Gap Report, there is a very real likelihood we will shoot past the temperature limits of the Paris Agreement.

Fossil fuel treaty

Net zero isn’t the only approach to tackle climate change. Other concepts are growing in popularity.

For instance, optimists say the temperature “overshoot” we’re on track for could be tackled with a “drawdown” of carbon emissions if we use “carbon dioxide removal” or “negative emissions technologies” such as carbon capture and storage, soil carbon sequestration, and mass tree planting and reforestation.

But beware: the IPCC’s Special Report cautioned that while some of these options might be technologically possible, they have not been tested on a large scale.

Can these untested technologies be relied on to halt and reverse the chaos likely to be unleashed by dangerous levels of global heating?

What does overshoot mean for the low-lying island nations who rallied around “1.5°C to stay alive”?

Momentum has been building for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty since 2022, when Vanuatu called on the UN General Assembly to phase out the use of fossil fuels.

Such a treaty, Vanuatu President Nikenike Vurobaravu said, would “enable a global just transition for every worker, community and nation with fossil fuel dependence”.

At the Dubai climate conference late last year, held in the wake of the International Energy Agency’s revised Net Zero Roadmap, the negotiations culminated in a first for the UNFCCC – an explicit statement endorsing:

transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.

Will net zero become more than hot air? That remains to be seen. While the science behind the concept is broadly sound, the politics of achieving net zero are a work in progress.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions to the point where they are zeroed out by carbon sinks by 2050 requires just and credible planning. We must prioritise the phase-out of fossil fuels sooner rather than later.

Ruth Morgan receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She was a Lead Author (Working Group 2) of the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

– ref. What is ‘Net Zero’, anyway? A short history of a monumental concept – https://theconversation.com/what-is-net-zero-anyway-a-short-history-of-a-monumental-concept-229901

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pamela Hanrahan, Emerita Professor, UNSW Business School, UNSW Sydney

Large businesses will have to publicly disclose detailed information about what they are doing to reduce carbon emissions and other climate-related financial information under legislation before federal parliament.

Under the new legislation companies will have to include a separate sustainability report in their annual report.

And, as with the financial component of the annual report, the sustainability document will be formally adopted by the company’s board.

The UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow in 2021 (known as COP26) identified mandatory climate-related financial disclosure as necessary for combating climate change.

Disclosure makes a company’s climate-related risks, opportunities, metrics and targets transparent to its investors and other stakeholders.

The planned laws do not change what companies are required to do in response to climate change, but they allow regulators and stakeholders to monitor the company’s progress towards internationally agreed net-zero targets.

For that reason, the disclosures companies produce are likely to be closely scrutinised.

What will the disclosure laws look like?

The specific – and lengthy – content requirements for the sustainability report are being developed by the Australian Accounting Standards Board in line with global sustainability reporting standards produced after COP26.

Companies will have to disclose information about their scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions.

Scope 1 emissions are those produced by a company’s own operations and scope 2 emissions are from the production of the energy it uses to do business. Scope 3 are the emissions produced by its supply chains, for example in the production of materials from suppliers or from the activities of businesses it funds.

To account for their scope 3 emissions, companies preparing sustainability reports will need detailed information from the businesses with which they deal.

Australia already has a regime – known as the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme – that requires companies with a big climate impact to report their emissions, energy production and energy consumption to the government each year.

The new sustainability reporting requirement is wider than this, and will apply much more broadly.

Which businesses will be affected?

When the new laws are fully implemented, they will apply to all companies covered by the existing NGER scheme, all investment trusts and funds (including superannuation funds) with assets over A$5 billion, and other companies that meet two out of three proposed size thresholds. The proposed thresholds are: assets above $25 million, revenue above $50 million and 100 or more employees.

For now, the sustainability report will focus on climate-related issues. But the legislation flags the possibility of adding other environmental disclosures (for example, covering nature and biodiversity impacts) in later years.

In first few years, the disclosure laws will be enforced by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) only, and private plaintiffs including climate advocates will be locked out of courts.

If the company’s disclosure is misleading, and ASIC can demonstrate the company didn’t take all reasonable steps to ensure it was accurate, the company can face civil penalties. These, for very large companies, can run to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Statements about the future will be taken to be misleading unless the company can demonstrate reasonable grounds for making them.

Once the transition arrangements expire, companies can also expect shareholders and climate advocates to be active in the courts to punish misleading disclosure.

New pressure on company directors

Making the sustainability report a component of the annual report – rather than a separate document – has important legal consequences for company directors.

For the first few years of the new reporting regime, the directors will have to declare whether, in their opinion, the company has taken reasonable steps to ensure the sustainability report accords with the law.

After that, they will be required to declare whether, in their opinion, the report complies with the sustainability reporting standards set by the Australian Accounting Standards Board and accurately includes all required disclosures.

Directors have a statutory duty to ensure the company meets the legal requirements for annual reporting, a duty that will extend to the sustainability report.

Also, the laws that make directors personally liable for defects in mandatory corporate disclosure documents will apply.

These provisions, which can be enforced by ASIC, carry a maximum civil penalty for individuals of $1,565,000.

Will the new disclosure laws change sustainability governance?

For many decades, board members have been expected to take personal responsibility for what their company says in its financial report.

They cannot simply leave it to the management team or the auditors to ensure the disclosure is accurate. As a result, the financial information is carefully reviewed and directors ask detailed questions about the data and assumptions on which it based.

The financial report provides stakeholders with a clear picture of the company’s financial viability and performance. But it also forces the board to pay close attention these issues.

Under the new laws directors will have personal responsibility for what the company says in the sustainability report. Designing the law this way will force directors to pay the same close attention to the company’s climate-related disclosures.

They will need to understand and question the data and assumptions that underpin the disclosure.

This will affect the company’s broader governance, by elevating sustainability issues in boardroom discussions and bringing climate-related risks, opportunities, targets and metrics closer to the centre of boardroom deliberations.

It should make directors much more aware of – and sensitive to – their company’s climate impact.

Pamela Hanrahan 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. Businesses and directors could face multi-million dollar penalties if they fail to disclose their climate impact – https://theconversation.com/businesses-and-directors-could-face-multi-million-dollar-penalties-if-they-fail-to-disclose-their-climate-impact-229889

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dan Trudeau, Professor of Geography, Macalester College

What makes a city a good place to live? Practical features are important, such as well-maintained streets, good public transit and reliable trash collection. So are amenities that make cities attractive and interesting, such as museums and public parks. Access to green space is especially valuable for residents who may not be able to travel easily beyond city limits.

On May 22, 2024, the nonprofit Trust for Public Land released its annual ParkScore report which ranks U.S. cities based on the quality of their parks. Beyond tallying how many parks a city has, the rankings also consider the share of residents who live within 10 minutes’ walk of a park. This recognizes that in the U.S. and other wealthy countries, affluent white neighborhoods often have more parks than low-income areas and communities of color.

Access is important, but I believe making people feel included and welcome is equally important. If parks do this well, people will be more willing to use them.

I am an urban geographer and study how parks affect social interaction in diverse communities. My students and I are examining how people interact with the built environment of Phalen Regional Park in St. Paul, Minnesota, to understand what leads people to experience this park as a welcoming and inclusive space. I believe Phalen Park offers useful strategies that other cities can emulate.

Something for everyone

Phalen Park is among St. Paul’s largest parks, covering 494 acres (2 square kilometers) – three times the size of Disneyland. It includes a 198-acre lake encircled by a trail, watercraft rentals, scenic views, a golf course, an amphitheater, sculptures, a playground and two pavilions for picnics, performances and other gatherings.

One important feature is St. Paul’s sole public beach with lifeguard services. Many low-income households around the park don’t have access to places where they can swim for free. Providing a safe place to swim helps reduce this inequity.

People in the Twin Cities use parks in a variety of ways. For example, Asian American park visitors are 2.5 times more likely than others to attend family events in parks, while Black park visitors are 1.75 times more likely than others to go fishing there. In surveys and interviews I have conducted, people from many social groups report that they use Phalen Park because there are so many things to do there and there are diverse groups of people in the park.

Community organizations use the park’s green spaces and shoreline for year-round public events and festivals. The park hosts cultural performances, community gatherings such as movie screenings, and regional events such as freshwater stewardship activities and dragon boat races.

These free events cater to many different age groups, attract diverse crowds and promote cultural learning and positive interracial encounters. Phalen Park is one of the most-visited parks in the Twin Cities, with an estimated 1.1 million visits in 2021.

Investing in parks is good for cities

There are many practical reasons for cities to invest in public parks. Studies have found that visiting green spaces reduces stress and that people who live within half a mile of a public park tend to get more exercise than those who lack access to safe places for walking, biking and recreation. Public parks provide spaces where people can gather for free, or sometimes for a nominal permit fee.

However, it’s important for visitors to feel safe and welcome. Due to a legacy of racial segregation, and to uneven investment in parks, that doesn’t always happen.

In Chicago, for example, white and Hispanic groups have clashed over using certain segments of The 606, an elevated park that follows the path of an old rail line. These encounters have led some Hispanic visitors to avoid using parts of the park. In turn, white visitors say this distancing makes them feel suspicious of groups of Hispanic people in the park.

A visitor mix that looks like St. Paul

The Twin Cities typically perform well in ParkScore ratings – for 2024, Minneapolis ranks second among U.S. cities, followed by Saint Paul – but there’s still room to improve. The Trust for Public Land has identified significant differences in park access between people of color and white residents in Minneapolis and St. Paul. Neighborhoods in St. Paul where people of color are the predominant group have access to 24% less park space per person than the city’s average neighborhood.

St. Paul has a diverse population that measures 54.3% white, 18.3% Asian, 15.6% Black and 8.6% Hispanic, according to 2023 census estimates. Neighborhoods within a mile of Lake Phalen Park are comparably mixed, with 34.8% white residents, 34.4% Asian residents, 14% Black residents and 11.2% identifying as Hispanic.

I analyzed data from StreetLightData.com, which gathers mobile phone user data, to study visitor demographics at Phalen Park from 2019 to 2021. During that time, 54.8% of visitors were white, 23.9% were Asian, 11.8% were Black and 8.9% identified as Hispanic. These findings show that the park attracts a mix of people that mirrors St. Paul’s demographics.

What else would increase the park’s appeal as a place for diverse communities to gather? Visitors say they want more restroom facilities in the park and want them to be cleaner. Restroom availability affects how long people will stay at a park or whether they will even come. Perceptions that a park’s restrooms are dirty threaten visitors’ sense of safety and welcome.

People also want clearer guidance about park amenities, such as signs explaining public art and offering multilingual directions for using the beach, boat ramps and trails. Addressing these concerns can help reduce uncertainty and foster a sense of safety and belonging.

Expanding or improving paved trails can reduce conflicts over common spaces, such as clashes between cyclists and pedestrians. The master plan for Phalen Regional Park calls for widening the park’s trails and separating walking from biking. These changes have occurred in a few locations but not throughout the park.

Parks are like a city’s living room. Designing, building and managing them well makes people more likely to go there and stay a while. Investing resources to make parks attractive to different groups and inviting for everyone is a sure way to boost inclusion. As city leaders digest this year’s ParkScore ratings, Phalen Park offers a model for other diverse urban communities.

Dan Trudeau is a volunteer member of the Minnesota Parks and Trails Legacy Advisory Committee, which works with government agencies that invest in and manage state and regional parks and trails.

– ref. Successful city parks make diverse communities feel safe and welcome − this Minnesota park is an example – https://theconversation.com/successful-city-parks-make-diverse-communities-feel-safe-and-welcome-this-minnesota-park-is-an-example-226869

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Doug Drury, Professor/Head of Aviation, CQUniversity Australia

A little bit of turbulence is a common experience for air travellers. Severe incidents are rare – but when they occur they can be deadly.

The recent Singapore Airlines flight SQ321 from London to Singapore shows the danger. An encounter with extreme turbulence during normal flight left one person dead from a presumed heart attack and several others badly injured. The flight diverted to land in Bangkok so the severely injured passengers could receive hospital treatment.

Air turbulence can happen anywhere, but is far more common on some routes than on others.

Climate change is expected to boost the chances of air turbulence, and make it more intense. In fact, some research indicates turbulence has already worsened over the past few decades.

Where does turbulence happen?

Nearly every flight experiences turbulence in one form or another.

If an aircraft is taking off or landing behind another aircraft, the wind generated by the engine and wingtips of the lead aircraft can cause “wake turbulence” for the one behind.

Close to ground level, there may be turbulence due to strong winds associated with weather patterns moving through the area near an airport. At higher altitudes, there may be wake turbulence again (if flying close to another aircraft), or turbulence due to updraughts or downdraughts from a thunderstorm.

Read more:
What is air turbulence?

Another kind of turbulence that occurs at higher altitudes is harder to predict or avoid. So-called “clear-air turbulence” is invisible, as the name suggests. It is often caused by warmer air rising into cooler air, and is generally expected to get worse due to climate change.

At the most basic level turbulence is the result of two or more wind events colliding and creating eddies, or swirls of disrupted airflow.

It often occurs near mountain ranges, as wind flowing over the terrain accelerates upward.

Turbulence also often occurs at the edges of the jet streams. These are narrow bands of strong, high-altitude winds circling the globe. Aircraft often travel in the jet streams to get a speed boost – but when entering or leaving the jet stream, there may be some turbulence as it crosses the boundary with the slower winds outside.

What are the most turbulent routes?

It is possible to map turbulence patterns over the whole world. Airlines use these maps to plan in advance for alternate airports or other essential contingencies.

While turbulence changes with weather conditions, some regions and routes are more prone to it than others. As you can see from the list below, the majority of the most turbulent routes travel close to mountains.

In Australia, the highest average turbulence in 2023 occurred on the Brisbane to Sydney route, followed by Melbourne to Sydney and Brisbane to Melbourne.

Climate change may increase turbulence

How will climate change affect the future of aviation?

A study published last year found evidence of large increases in clear-air turbulence between 1979 and 2020. In some locations severe turbulence increased by as much as 55%.

In 2017, a different study used climate modelling to project that clear-air turbulence may be four times as common as it used to be by 2050, under some climate change scenarios.

What can be done about turbulence?

What can be done to mitigate turbulence? Technology to detect turbulence is still in the research and development phase, so pilots use the knowledge they have from weather radar to determine the best plan to avoid weather patterns with high levels of moisture directly ahead of their flight path.

Weather radar imagery shows the pilots where the most intense turbulence can be expected, and they work with air traffic control to avoid those areas. When turbulence is encountered unexpectedly, the pilots immediately turn on the “fasten seatbelt” sign and reduce engine thrust to slow down the plane. They will also be in touch with air traffic control to find better conditions either by climbing or descending to smoother air.

Ground-based meteorological centres can see weather patterns developing with the assistance of satellites. They provide this information to flight crews in real time, so the crew knows the weather to expect throughout their flight. This can also include areas of expected turbulence if storms develop along the intended flight route.

It seems we are heading into more turbulent times. Airlines will do all they can to reduce the impact on planes and passengers. But for the average traveller, the message is simple: when they tell you to fasten your seatbelt, you should listen.

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

– ref. Are some routes more prone to air turbulence? Will climate change make it worse? Your questions answered – https://theconversation.com/are-some-routes-more-prone-to-air-turbulence-will-climate-change-make-it-worse-your-questions-answered-230666

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

The Singapore Airlines turbulence incident that has sadly left one person dead and others hospitalised has made many of us think about the risks of air travel.

We’ll hear more in coming days about how the aircraft came to drop so suddenly on its route from London to Singapore earlier this week, injuring passengers and crew, before making an emergency landing in Thailand.

But thankfully, these types of incidents are rare, and much less-common than injuries from other types of transport.

So why do we sometimes think the risk of getting injured while travelling by plane is higher than it really is?

How common are turbulence injuries?

Turbulence is caused by the irregular movement of air, leading to passengers and crew experiencing abrupt sideways and vertical jolts.

In the case of the Singapore Airlines flight, this type of turbulence is thought to be a severe example of “clear-air turbulence”, which can occur without warning. There are several other types.

About 25 in-flight turbulence injuries are reported to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau each year, although it is thought many more are un-reported. Some of these reported injuries are serious, including broken bones and head injuries. Passengers being thrown up and out of their seat during turbulence is one of the most common type of head injury on a plane.

Other injuries from turbulence are caused by contact with flying laptops, or other unsecured items.

In one example of clear-air turbulence that came without warning, cabin crew, passengers and meal trolleys hit the ceiling, and landed heavily back on the floor. Serious injuries included bone fractures, lacerations, neck and back strains, a dislocated shoulder and shattered teeth. Almost all of those seriously injured did not have their seat belts fastened.

But we need to put this into perspective. In the year to January 2024, there were more than 36 million passengers on international flights to Australia. In the year to February 2024, there were more than 58 million passengers on domestic flights.

So while such incidents grab the headlines, they are exceedingly rare.

Why do we think flying is riskier than it is?

When we hear about this recent Singapore Airlines incident, it’s entirely natural to have a strong emotional reaction. We might have imagined the terror we might feel if we were on the aircraft at the time.

But our emotional response alters our perception of the risk and leads us to think these rare incidents are more common than they really are.

There is a vast body of literature addressing the numerous factors that influence how individuals perceive risk and the cognitive biases we are all subject to that mislead us.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Daniel Kahneman covers them in his bestselling book Thinking, Fast and Slow.

He describes the way we respond to risks is not rational, but driven by emotion. Kahneman also highlights the fact that our brains are not wired to make sense of extremely small risks. So these types of risks – such as the chance of serious injury or death from in-flight turbulence – are hard for us to make sense of.

The more unusual an event is, and this was a very unusual event, Kahneman says the more impact it makes on our psyche and the more likely we are to overestimate the risk.

Of course, the more unusual the event, the more likely it is for it to be in the media, amplifying this effect.

Similarly, the easier it is to imagine an event, the more it affects our perception and the more likely we are to respond to an event as if it were much more likely to occur.

How can we make sense of the risk?

One way to make sense of activities with small, hard-to-understand risks is by comparing their risks to the risks of more familiar activities.

If we do this, the data shows very clearly that it is much more risky to drive a car or ride a motorbike than to travel by plane.

While events such as the Singapore Airlines incident are devastating and stir up lots of emotions, it’s important to recognise how our emotions can mislead us to over-estimate the risk of this happening again, or to us.

Apart from the stress and anxiety this provokes, overestimating the risks of particular activities may lead us to make bad decisions that actually put us at greater risk of harm.

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

– ref. How risky is turbulence on a plane? How worried should I be? – https://theconversation.com/how-risky-is-turbulence-on-a-plane-how-worried-should-i-be-230665

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

The Queensland state election will be held in October. A Resolve poll for The Brisbane Times, conducted over four months from February to May from a sample of 947, gave the Liberal National Party 43% of the primary vote (up six since September to December), Labor 26% (down seven), the Greens 13% (up one), One Nation 8% (up one), independents 8% (up one) and others 2% (steady).

Resolve doesn’t usually give a two-party figure, but The Poll Bludger estimated the LNP would lead in this poll by 56–44.

A Queensland YouGov poll in April gave the LNP a 56–44 lead and a March Newspoll gave them a 54–46 lead. So this poll is another indicating Labor is headed for a heavy defeat in October.

Labor Premier Steven Miles had a net likeability of -15, compared with former premier Annastacia Palaszczuk’s -17 in December. LNP leader David Crisafulli’s net likeability improved five points to +14. Crisafulli led Miles by 39–28 as preferred premier (39–34 against Palaszczuk in December).

Victorian Labor also slumps

A Victorian state Resolve poll for The Age, conducted with the federal Resolve polls in mid-April and mid-May from a sample of 1,104, gave the Coalition 37% of the primary vote (up two since March), Labor 28% (down five), the Greens 13% (steady), independents 16% (up four) and others 6% (down one).

Analyst Kevin Bonham estimated this poll would be a 50–50 tie after preferences, a three-point gain for the Coalition since March.

The 16% “independent” vote is very likely exaggerated, as a suitable independent won’t stand in all seats at a general election. The surge for independents likely reflects disgruntled former Labor voters who currently say they will vote independent but may change their minds by the next election, which isn’t due until 2026.

Labor Premier Jacinta Allan led the Liberals’ John Pesutto as preferred premier by 31–26 (34–25 in March). Treasurer Tim Pallas had a 38–26 poor over good rating. By 52–32, voters thought taking away funding from major infrastructure projects promised at the last election was a broken promise over a practical change.

Federal Freshwater poll remains tied

A national Freshwater poll, conducted May 17–19 from a sample of 1,000, had a 50–50 tie, unchanged from April. Primary votes were 40% Coalition (steady), 32% Labor (up one), 14% Greens (up one) and 14% for all Others (down two).

These primary votes suggest an increased two party vote for Labor that was presumably lost in rounding. Freshwater has been leaning to the Coalition this term relative to other pollsters.

Albanese’s net approval was down two to -9, with 45% unfavourable and 37% favourable. Dutton’s net approval was steady at -9. Albanese led Dutton as preferred PM by 46–37 (45–39 in April).

The Coalition had a three-point lead over Labor on cost of living and a ten-point lead on economic management, but Labor improved on both since April by three to four points.

On the effect of the May 14 budget on household finances, 24% thought they would be better off, 46% no different and 23% worse off. On the budget’s effect on interest rates, 39% thought they would increase, 28% have no effect and 11% decrease.

Essential poll: Coalition retains narrow lead

A national Essential poll, conducted May 15–19 from a sample of 1,149, gave the Coalition a 47–46 lead including undecided, unchanged from early May. Primary votes were 34% Coalition (steady), 31% Labor (steady), 10% Greens (down three), 8% One Nation (up one), 1% UAP (steady), 8% for all Others (up one) and 6% undecided (down one).

By 64–27, voters did not think the budget would make a meaningful difference on cost of living. On the A$300 electricity bill rebate, 60% thought only those on low and middle incomes should receive it, 35% all households and 5% nobody.

On government intervention in the economy, 48% said the government should intervene more, 16% less and 36% thought the current level of intervention about right.

By 44–17, voters supported the government’s plan for the approval of new gas projects to 2050 and beyond. On renewables vs gas, 74% thought we need a long-term gas supply for times when renewables are unable to meet demand, while 26% thought allowing the gas industry to continue only delays the transition to renewables.

Morgan poll: Labor down but just ahead

A national Morgan poll, conducted May 13–19 from a sample of 1,674, gave Labor a 50.5–49.5 lead, a 1.5-point gain for the Coalition since the May 6–12 Morgan poll. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (steady), 30.5% Labor (down 1.5), 14.5% Greens (up one), 5.5% One Nation (steady), 8.5% independents (up one) and 4% others (down 0.5).

Additional Resolve questions

I previously covered the weak post-budget Resolve poll for Labor, which was conducted for Nine newspapers. On the immigration level of 528,000 people last year, 66% thought it too high, 23% about right and 2% too low.

On the forecast immigration of 260,000 per year, 50% thought it too high, 35% about right and 4% too low. The too high number on the forecast dropped five points since December.

By 41–29, voters rated Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ performance good over poor, down from a 47–20 good rating after the May 2023 budget. Former Liberal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg had a 53–28 good rating after the March 2022 budget, but the Coalition still lost the May 2022 election.

By 57–31, voters agreed that if they had a major expense of a few thousand dollars, they would struggle to afford it (55–34 in April). This is the highest level of agreement in Resolve’s polls on this question. By 52–24, voters thought interest rate rises more about domestic factors in Australia than international factors beyond the government’s control (48–26 in April).

Adrian Beaumont 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. Labor takes a hit in Resolve polls in Queensland and Victoria – https://theconversation.com/labor-takes-a-hit-in-resolve-polls-in-queensland-and-victoria-230415

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Wille, Senior research fellow, The University of Melbourne

A dangerous strain of avian influenza (bird flu) is now wreaking havoc on every continent except Australia and the rest of Oceania. While we remain free from this virus for now, it’s only a matter of time before it arrives.

Penguins in Antarctica, pelicans in Peru, sea lions in South America and dairy cows in the United States have all been hit by fast-spreading and often lethal high pathogenicity avian influenza, known as HPAI H5N1.

Indeed, avian influenza is knocking on our door right now. Just today, a case of avian influenza was reported in a return traveller, and Victorian authorities have confirmed avian influenza on an egg farm. Importantly, authorities have confirmed the virus affecting chickens is not the virus we are most worried about. Authorities are responding and we expect more information to come in the days ahead.

Researchers and biosecurity authorities are on high alert, monitoring poultry farms and testing wildlife. They could do with our help. Anyone who comes across dead or dying birds – or mammals – should report them to the Emergency Animal Disease Watch Hotline.

The rise of an animal pandemic

Avian influenza is a viral disease that infects birds, but can infect other animals.

There isn’t just one strain of avian influenza found in wild birds – there’s a diversity of subtypes and strains. Most cause no disease at all, and are naturally found in wild birds, including in Australia.

But others are deadly. The HPAI H5N1 clade was first detected in a goose in China, back in 1996. HPAI viruses cause high levels of sickness and death in both wild birds and poultry. It spreads rapidly and kills many of the birds – and animals – it infects.

HPAI H5N1 has been endemic in poultry in Asia for decades, driving virus evolution and the emergence of a diversity of different virus clades (a clade is similar to a variant).

In 2005 we saw the first mass mortality event in wild birds. The virus spread to Europe and Africa through both poultry trade and potentially wild birds.

In 2014 the virus again entered Europe with wild birds, with spread to North America the same year, and in 2016, to Africa.

But the real change came in 2020. The number of outbreaks in poultry and wild birds dramatically increased. In 2021, reports streamed in of mass mortality events in Europe and the virus rapidly travelled the world. The world was in the grip of a “panzootic” – a global pandemic in animals.

This particularly lethal clade of the virus jumped the Atlantic and reached North America around October 2021. A few months later, it again jumped to North America, but this time across the Pacific. In around October 2022, the virus entered South America, where it travelled an astonishing 6,000 kilometres to the southern tip of the continent in approximately six months.

The first cases were detected on the sub-Antarctic islands in October 2023 in brown skuas, scavenging birds. It’s since been found in penguins, elephant seals, fur seals and Antarctic terns. By February this year, the virus was detected on the Antarctica Peninsula).

Globally, millions of wild birds are likely to have been affected. In South America alone, about 650,000 wild birds were reported dead. Many more are never reported.

This virus is threatening the survival of entire species. For example, 40% of all Peruvian pelicans in Peru have died. Scientists spent years trying to bring back Californian condors from extinction, only to watch them succumb in 2023.

It will take years to fully comprehend the impact this panzootic has had around the world. Some populations of birds and even entire species may never recover.

Scientists are especially concerned about Antarctic wildlife.

Most Antarctic species are found nowhere else on Earth. Many live in large colonies, which makes it easier for the virus to spread.

Questions remain over whether the virus will persist in Antarctica over winter and how it will spread in spring or summer.

From birds to mammals

More than 50 species of predatory and scavenging mammals have now been recorded dying from avian influenza, most likely after eating dead birds.

Particularly concerning are the deaths of 30,000 South American sea lions, 18,000 southern elephant seal pups in Argentina and dairy cows on at least 51 farms across the US.

A recent study from Uruguay shows sea lions were dying before mass bird deaths, suggesting mammal-to-mammal spread may be driving outbreaks in coastal South America.

Since the virus appeared in dairy cows in America, it has spread to herds across ten US states. We are still learning about how the virus affects cows, but infected cows produce less milk because of infection in their udders. A recent study suggests this is because udders have receptors similar to those found in birds.

The US Food and Drug Administration states pasteurisation is effective against this virus.

Globally, only 13 human cases have been confirmed due to this particular variant of HPAI H5N1, but noting that over 800 cases have been recorded since 2005. So far, one dairy worker is known to have caught the virus from cows.

The World Health Organization considers the risk of human infection to be low although the risk is higher (low to medium) for poultry farmers and other animal-exposed workers. There is no sign of human-to-human transmission.

Australia, the lucky country

To date, Australia and New Zealand have avoided HPAI H5N1. Australia has a nationally coordinated surveillance system for wild birds. This includes long-distance migratory birds such as shorebirds and seabirds.

Millions of migratory birds arrive from northern Asia each year in spring. That means August to November will be our highest risk period.

In response, in both 2022 and 2023 we collected almost 1,000 samples from recently arrived migratory birds without detecting the virus. Routine testing of dead birds by others around Australia has also come back negative.

We know migratory birds have arrived carrying other strains of avian influenza into Australia. It is only a matter of time before this HPAI H5N1 arrives.

Ducks have played a crucial role in moving the virus from place to place in the Northern Hemisphere. Studies in Asia and North America have shown some duck species are able to migrate while infected, as not all ducks die from the infection. One reason we think that Australia may have been spared so far because no ducks migrate here from Asia.

When the virus does arrive, it will likely threaten entire species. Black swans are highly susceptible. Overseas, pelicans, cormorants, penguins, gannets, terns, gulls and seals have been amongst the hardest hit.

This spring, please look out for sick or dead wild birds or marine mammals and report it. Surveillance could help us manage the virus.

Read more:
The next pandemic? It’s already here for Earth’s wildlife

Michelle Wille receives project funding from the Victorian Department of Health, and has previously received funding from Wildlife Health Australia, Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Chickens, ducks, seals and cows: a dangerous bird flu strain is knocking on Australia’s door – https://theconversation.com/chickens-ducks-seals-and-cows-a-dangerous-bird-flu-strain-is-knocking-on-australias-door-230013

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Wille, Senior research fellow, The University of Melbourne

A dangerous strain of avian influenza (bird flu) is now wreaking havoc on every continent except Australia and the rest of Oceania. While we remain free from this virus for now, it’s only a matter of time before it arrives.

Penguins in Antarctica, pelicans in Peru, sea lions in South America and dairy cows in the United States have all been hit by fast-spreading and often lethal high pathogenicity avian influenza, known as HPAI H5N1.

Indeed, avian influenza is knocking on our door right now. Just today, a case of avian influenza was reported in a return traveller, and Victorian authorities have confirmed avian influenza on an egg farm. Importantly, authorities have confirmed the virus affecting chickens is not the virus we are most worried about.

Researchers and biosecurity authorities are on high alert, monitoring poultry farms and testing wildlife. They could do with our help. Anyone who comes across dead or dying birds – or mammals – should report them to the Emergency Animal Disease Watch Hotline.

The rise of an animal pandemic

Avian influenza is a viral disease that infects birds, but can infect other animals.

There isn’t just one strain of avian influenza found in wild birds – there’s a diversity of subtypes and strains. Most cause no disease at all, and are naturally found in wild birds, including in Australia.

But others are deadly. The HPAI H5N1 clade was first detected in a goose in China, back in 1996. HPAI viruses cause high levels of sickness and death in both wild birds and poultry. It spreads rapidly and kills many of the birds – and animals – it infects.

HPAI H5N1 has been endemic in poultry in Asia for decades, driving virus evolution and the emergence of a diversity of different virus clades (a clade is similar to a variant).

In 2005 we saw the first mass mortality event in wild birds. The virus spread to Europe and Africa through both poultry trade and potentially wild birds.

In 2014 the virus again entered Europe with wild birds, with spread to North America the same year, and in 2016, to Africa.

But the real change came in 2020. The number of outbreaks in poultry and wild birds dramatically increased. In 2021, reports streamed in of mass mortality events in Europe and the virus rapidly travelled the world. The world was in the grip of a “panzootic” – a global pandemic in animals.

This particularly lethal clade of the virus jumped the Atlantic and reached North America around October 2021. A few months later, it again jumped to North America, but this time across the Pacific. In around October 2022, the virus entered South America, where it travelled an astonishing 6,000 kilometres to the southern tip of the continent in approximately six months.

The first cases were detected on the sub-Antarctic islands in October 2023 in brown skuas, scavenging birds. It’s since been found in penguins, elephant seals, fur seals and Antarctic terns. By February this year, the virus was detected on the Antarctica Peninsula).

Globally, millions of wild birds are likely to have been affected. In South America alone, about 650,000 wild birds were reported dead. Many more are never reported.

This virus is threatening the survival of entire species. For example, 40% of all Peruvian pelicans in Peru have died. Scientists spent years trying to bring back Californian condors from extinction, only to watch them succumb in 2023.

It will take years to fully comprehend the impact this panzootic has had around the world. Some populations of birds and even entire species may never recover.

Scientists are especially concerned about Antarctic wildlife.

Most Antarctic species are found nowhere else on Earth. Many live in large colonies, which makes it easier for the virus to spread.

Questions remain over whether the virus will persist in Antarctica over winter and how it will spread in spring or summer.

From birds to mammals

More than 50 species of predatory and scavenging mammals have now been recorded dying from avian influenza, most likely after eating dead birds.

Particularly concerning are the deaths of 30,000 South American sea lions, 18,000 southern elephant seal pups in Argentina and dairy cows on at least 51 farms across the US.

A recent study from Uruguay shows sea lions were dying before mass bird deaths, suggesting mammal-to-mammal spread may be driving outbreaks in coastal South America.

Since the virus appeared in dairy cows in America, it has spread to herds across ten US states. We are still learning about how the virus affects cows, but infected cows produce less milk because of infection in their udders. A recent study suggests this is because udders have receptors similar to those found in birds.

The US Food and Drug Administration states pasteurisation is effective against this virus.

Globally, only 13 human cases have been confirmed due to this particular variant of HPAI H5N1, but noting that over 800 cases have been recorded since 2005. So far, one dairy worker is known to have caught the virus from cows.

The World Health Organization considers the risk of human infection to be low although the risk is higher (low to medium) for poultry farmers and other animal-exposed workers. There is no sign of human-to-human transmission.

Australia, the lucky country

To date, Australia and New Zealand have avoided HPAI H5N1. Australia has a nationally coordinated surveillance system for wild birds. This includes long-distance migratory birds such as shorebirds and seabirds.

Millions of migratory birds arrive from northern Asia each year in spring. That means August to November will be our highest risk period.

In response, in both 2022 and 2023 we collected almost 1,000 samples from recently arrived migratory birds without detecting the virus. Routine testing of dead birds by others around Australia has also come back negative.

We know migratory birds have arrived carrying other strains of avian influenza into Australia. It is only a matter of time before this HPAI H5N1 arrives.

Ducks have played a crucial role in moving the virus from place to place in the Northern Hemisphere. Studies in Asia and North America have shown some duck species are able to migrate while infected, as not all ducks die from the infection. One reason we think that Australia may have been spared so far because no ducks migrate here from Asia.

When the virus does arrive, it will likely threaten entire species. Black swans are highly susceptible. Overseas, pelicans, cormorants, penguins, gannets, terns, gulls and seals have been amongst the hardest hit.

This spring, please look out for sick or dead wild birds or marine mammals and report it. Surveillance could help us manage the virus.

Read more:
The next pandemic? It’s already here for Earth’s wildlife

Michelle Wille receives project funding from the Victorian Department of Health, and has previously received funding from Wildlife Health Australia, Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Chickens, ducks, seals and cows: a dangerous bird flu strain is everywhere but Australia, for now – https://theconversation.com/chickens-ducks-seals-and-cows-a-dangerous-bird-flu-strain-is-everywhere-but-australia-for-now-230013

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justine Humphry, Senior Lecturer in Digital Cultures, University of Sydney

This month the Australian government announced a A$6.5 million commitment to trial an age-verification program that will restrict children’s exposure to inappropriate online content, including pornography and potentially social media. The announcement came out of a National Cabinet meeting geared towards addressing gender-based violence in Australia.

Much has been said about age-checking technologies in the weeks since. Experts point out implementing these tools effectively (so they aren’t easily by-passed) will be complicated – and any such system could come with data security risk. Internet freedom groups have criticised the decision on account of its potential to erode privacy.

There is, however, an important dimension missing from these discussions: the voice of young people and parents. In our research into social media use and online harms affecting Australian teenagers, we asked young people and their parents what they themselves thought about age verification. We found mixed reactions from both groups.

Our findings suggest age verification is generally supported, but participants think it likely would not work. Instead, they said more safety education, face-to-face dialogue, and accountability from social media companies would be better approaches to keeping young people safe online.

Young Australians and social media

Young Australians use social media for a variety of reasons, from keeping in touch with friends and family, to seeking information and entertainment.

Our latest research found almost a quarter of young people 12 to 17 use WhatsApp daily. One in two are daily Snapchat users. Instagram and YouTube are the most frequently used platforms, used daily by 64% and 56% of young people respectively.

These patterns are especially significant for culturally and linguistically diverse Australians, who are more likely to use social media to socialise, maintain familial and cultural ties and learn about the world.

That said, social media and the internet more broadly do present risks to young people. These risks include online bullying, grooming and unsolicited contact, privacy breaches, misinformation and content that is pornographic, racist, sexist, homophobic and/or violent.

Studies have found associations between social media use and poor mental health and self-esteem, although direct causation is difficult to establish. It’s also important to note risk doesn’t equate with harm, and young people themselves commonly demonstrate skills, judgement and agency in negotiating online risks.

In an environment of heightened concern, decisions are now being made that will have significant impacts on both young people and their parents. These decisions are being fuelled by media brands, celebrities and ex-politicians seeking to influence discourse.

Elsewhere in the world, the UK’s Online Safety Bill is attempting to restrict young people’s access to online pornography, through either government-issued documents or biometrics. The UK regulator Ofcom is set to publish guidance on age-assurance compliance in early 2025. France has also been testing a system to verify age based on a user intermediary, after it enacted a law in 2023 to restrict social media use for people under 15.

The details of the trial in Australia haven’t yet been released, but it could use one or a combination of approaches.

The missing perspective

Our research, which focused on Australian teenagers aged 12–17 and their parents, drew from focus groups and a national survey in 2022–23. Overall, the survey showed broad support for age verification. Specifically, 72% of young people and 86% of parents believed more effective age limits would improve online safety for young people.

But we also heard about several drawbacks. For instance, young people saw age verification as something that would benefit adults. One participant said:

I guess it benefits parents who want to be in the right mindset that their kids are safe on social media.

Another young person said:

I feel like in the case of lot of controlling parents it would be bad for the kid because then if the parents are controlling and they don’t have any social media to talk to people, I feel like that could negatively impact the kid. Maybe they’d get lonely, or they wouldn’t be able to use it as an outlet.

Some young people noted they could find ways around age-verification tools:

It would be simple just to get a VPN and change my country if it was going to create this obstacle.

They also pointed out such tools don’t account for evolving maturity levels and differing capabilities among young individuals.

Parents shared concerns about the burden of providing proof of their age and managing consent:

I mean depending on what kind of site it is would you be comfortable providing your passport information or your driver’s licence?

Both groups were worried about the risk of data breaches and leaks of sensitive information. As one parent told us:

Well, it certainly makes you think about it a lot more. What are they using that data for? Is it really just for age verification, or is it for something more nefarious?

Another young person also had privacy concerns:

But if I would say that I was OK with it, I think I’d be lying. Because, I’m a really private person, privacy really matters. And yeah, I do think to be safe, I think we really should be having our own privacy as well.

So what should be done?

Governments, parents, educators and platforms all have an important role to play in ensuring young people’s safety online.

Beyond age verification, there’s a growing consensus social media companies should be doing more to ensure users’ safety. Until that happens, the best approach is for parents and children to talk to each other to determine the appropriate age for a child to be on social media. By working together, families can develop guidelines and expectations for appropriate use.

Schools can also help by developing young people’s digital literacy and online safety skills.

Ultimately, if we want young people to thrive in online environments, we need to involve them in the decisions that will directly affect them.

Justine Humphry has received funding from the Office of the eSafety Commissioner under the Online Safety Grants Program.

Catherine Page Jeffery has received funding from the Office of the eSafety Commissioner under the Online Safety Grants Program. She is affiliated with Children and Media Australia.

Jonathon Hutchinson received funding from the eSafety Commissioner to conduct this research.

Olga Boichak received research funding from the eSafety Commissioner Online Safety Grants Program.

– ref. Age verification for social media would impact all of us. We asked parents and kids if they actually want it – https://theconversation.com/age-verification-for-social-media-would-impact-all-of-us-we-asked-parents-and-kids-if-they-actually-want-it-230539

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justine Humphry, Senior Lecturer in Digital Cultures, University of Sydney

This month the Australian government announced a A$6.5 million commitment to trial an age-verification program that will restrict children’s exposure to inappropriate online content, including pornography and potentially social media. The announcement came out of a National Cabinet meeting geared towards addressing gender-based violence in Australia.

Much has been said about age-checking technologies in the weeks since. Experts point out implementing these tools effectively (so they aren’t easily by-passed) will be complicated – and any such system could come with data security risk. Internet freedom groups have criticised the decision on account of its potential to erode privacy.

There is, however, an important dimension missing from these discussions: the voice of young people and parents. In our research into social media use and online harms affecting Australian teenagers, we asked young people and their parents what they themselves thought about age verification. We found mixed reactions from both groups.

Our findings suggest age verification is generally supported, but participants think it likely would not work. Instead, they said more safety education, face-to-face dialogue, and accountability from social media companies would be better approaches to keeping young people safe online.

Young Australians and social media

Young Australians use social media for a variety of reasons, from keeping in touch with friends and family, to seeking information and entertainment.

Our latest research found almost a quarter of young people 12 to 17 use WhatsApp daily. One in two are daily Snapchat users. Instagram and YouTube are the most frequently used platforms, used daily by 64% and 56% of young people respectively.

These patterns are especially significant for culturally and linguistically diverse Australians, who are more likely to use social media to socialise, maintain familial and cultural ties and learn about the world.

That said, social media and the internet more broadly do present risks to young people. These risks include online bullying, grooming and unsolicited contact, privacy breaches, misinformation and content that is pornographic, racist, sexist, homophobic and/or violent.

Studies have found associations between social media use and poor mental health and self-esteem, although direct causation is difficult to establish. It’s also important to note risk doesn’t equate with harm, and young people themselves commonly demonstrate skills, judgement and agency in negotiating online risks.

In an environment of heightened concern, decisions are now being made that will have significant impacts on both young people and their parents. These decisions are being fuelled by media brands, celebrities and ex-politicians seeking to influence discourse.

Elsewhere in the world, the UK’s Online Safety Bill is attempting to restrict young people’s access to online pornography, through either government-issued documents or biometrics. The UK regulator Ofcom is set to publish guidance on age-assurance compliance in early 2025. France has also been testing a system to verify age based on a user intermediary, after it enacted a law in 2023 to restrict social media use for people under 15.

The details of the trial in Australia haven’t yet been released, but it could use one or a combination of approaches.

The missing perspective

Our research, which focused on Australian teenagers aged 12–17 and their parents, drew from focus groups and a national survey in 2022–23. Overall, the survey showed broad support for age verification. Specifically, 72% of young people and 86% of parents believed more effective age limits would improve online safety for young people.

But we also heard about several drawbacks. For instance, young people saw age verification as something that would benefit adults. One participant said:

I guess it benefits parents who want to be in the right mindset that their kids are safe on social media.

Another young person said:

I feel like in the case of lot of controlling parents it would be bad for the kid because then if the parents are controlling and they don’t have any social media to talk to people, I feel like that could negatively impact the kid. Maybe they’d get lonely, or they wouldn’t be able to use it as an outlet.

Some young people noted they could find ways around age-verification tools:

It would be simple just to get a VPN and change my country if it was going to create this obstacle.

They also pointed out such tools don’t account for evolving maturity levels and differing capabilities among young individuals.

Parents shared concerns about the burden of providing proof of their age and managing consent:

I mean depending on what kind of site it is would you be comfortable providing your passport information or your driver’s licence?

Both groups were worried about the risk of data breaches and leaks of sensitive information. As one parent told us:

Well, it certainly makes you think about it a lot more. What are they using that data for? Is it really just for age verification, or is it for something more nefarious?

Another young person also had privacy concerns:

But if I would say that I was OK with it, I think I’d be lying. Because, I’m a really private person, privacy really matters. And yeah, I do think to be safe, I think we really should be having our own privacy as well.

So what should be done?

Governments, parents, educators and platforms all have an important role to play in ensuring young people’s safety online.

Beyond age verification, there’s a growing consensus social media companies should be doing more to ensure users’ safety. Until that happens, the best approach is for parents and children to talk to each other to determine the appropriate age for a child to be on social media. By working together, families can develop guidelines and expectations for appropriate use.

Schools can also help by developing young people’s digital literacy and online safety skills.

Ultimately, if we want young people to thrive in online environments, we need to involve them in the decisions that will directly affect them.

Justine Humphry has received funding from the Office of the eSafety Commissioner under the Online Safety Grants Program.

Catherine Page Jeffery has received funding from the Office of the eSafety Commissioner under the Online Safety Grants Program. She is affiliated with Children and Media Australia.

Jonathon Hutchinson received funding from the eSafety Commissioner to conduct this research.

Olga Boichak received research funding from the eSafety Commissioner Online Safety Grants Program.

– ref. Age verification for porn and social media would impact all of us. We asked parents and kids if they actually want it – https://theconversation.com/age-verification-for-porn-and-social-media-would-impact-all-of-us-we-asked-parents-and-kids-if-they-actually-want-it-230539

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharine Kemp, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney

Australians don’t know and can’t control how data brokers are spreading their personal information. This is the core finding of a newly released report from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).

Consumers wanting to rent a property, get an insurance quote or shop online are not given real choices about whether their personal data is shared for other purposes. This exposes Australians to scams, fraud, manipulation and discrimination.

In fact, many don’t even know what kind of data has been collected about them and shared or sold by data firms and other third parties.

Our privacy laws are due for reform. But Australia’s privacy commissioner should also enforce an existing rule: with very limited exceptions, businesses must not collect information about you from third parties.

What are data brokers?

Data brokers generally make their profits by collecting information about individuals from various sources and sharing this personal data with their many business clients. This can include detailed profiles of a person’s family, health, finances and movements.

Data brokers often have no connection with the individual – you may not even recognise the name of a firm that holds vast amounts of information on you. Some of these data brokers are large multinational companies with billions of dollars in revenue.

Consumer and privacy advocates provided the ACCC with evidence of highly concerning data broker practices. One woman tried to find out how data brokers had got hold of her information after receiving targeted medical advertising.

Although she never discovered how they obtained her data, she found out it included her name, date of birth and contact details. It also included inferences about her, such as her retiree status, having no children, not having “high affluence” and being likely to donate to a charity.

ACCC found another data broker was reportedly creating lists of individuals who may be experiencing vulnerability. The categories included:

• children, teenage girls and teenage boys
• “financially unsavvy” people
• elderly people living alone
• new migrants
• religious minorities
• unemployed people
• people in financial distress
• new migrants
• people experiencing pain or who have visited certain medical facilities.

These are all potential vulnerabilities that could be exploited, for example, by scammers or unscrupulous advertisers.

How do they get this information?

The ACCC notes 74% of Australians are uncomfortable with their personal information being shared or sold.

Nonetheless, data brokers sell and share Australian consumers’ personal information every day. Businesses we deal with – for example, when we buy a car or search for natural remedies on an online marketplace – both buy data about us from data brokers and provide them with more.

The ACCC acknowledges consumers haven’t been given a choice about this.

Attempting to read every privacy term is near impossible. The ACCC referred to a recent study which found it would take consumers over 46 hours a month to read every privacy policy they encounter.

Even if you could read every term, you still wouldn’t get a clear picture. Businesses use vague wording and data descriptions which confuse consumers and have no fixed meaning. These include “pseudonymised information”, “hashed email addresses”, “aggregated information” and “advertising ID”.

Privacy terms are also presented on a “take it or leave it” basis, even for transactions like applying for a rental property or buying insurance.

The ACCC pointed out 41% of Australians feel they have been pressured to use “rent tech” platforms. These platforms collect an increasing range of information with questionable connection to renting.

A first for Australian consumers

This is the first time an Australian regulator has made an in-depth report on the consumer data practices of data brokers, which are generally hidden from consumers. It comes ten years after the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) conducted a similar inquiry into data brokers in the US.

The ACCC report examined the data practices of nine data brokers and other “data firms” operating in Australia. (It added the term “data firms” because some companies sharing data about people argue that they are not data brokers.)

A big difference between the Australian and the US reports is that the FTC is both the consumer watchdog and the privacy regulator. As our competition and consumer watchdog, the ACCC is meant to focus on competition and consumer issues.

We also need our privacy regulator, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), to pay attention to these findings.

There’s a law against that

The ACCC report shows many examples of businesses collecting personal information about us from third parties. For example, you may be a customer of a business that only has your name and email address. But that business can purchase “data enrichment” services from a data broker to find out your age range, income range and family situation.

The current Privacy Act includes a principle that organisations must collect personal information only from the individual (you) unless it is unreasonable or impracticable to do so. “Impracticable” means practically impossible. This is the direct collection rule.

Yet there is no reported case of the privacy commissioner enforcing the direct collection rule against a data broker or its business customers. Nor has the OAIC issued any specific guidance in this respect. It should do both.

Time to update our privacy laws

Our privacy law was drafted in 1988, long before this complex web of digital data practices emerged. Privacy laws in places such as California and the European Union provide much stronger protections.

The government has announced it plans to introduce a privacy law reform bill this August.

The ACCC report reinforces the need for vital amendments, including a direct right of action for individuals and a rule requiring dealings in personal information to be “fair and reasonable”.

Katharine Kemp has received funding from the UNSW Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation. She is a Member of the Expert Panel of the Consumer Policy Research Centre, and the Australian Privacy Foundation.

The ACCC referred to the joint research of Katharine Kemp and the Consumer Policy Research Centre in this report.

– ref. Worried your address, birth date or health data is being sold? You should be – and the law isn’t protecting you – https://theconversation.com/worried-your-address-birth-date-or-health-data-is-being-sold-you-should-be-and-the-law-isnt-protecting-you-230540

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark A Gregory, Associate Professor, School of Engineering, RMIT University

On Tuesday, Telstra announced it will be cutting up to 2,800 jobs as part of a major restructure.

Of these layoffs, 377 will take effect immediately from within the Telstra Enterprise business unit. Most of the remaining cuts will be announced in detail soon and finalised by the end of the year.

The announcement followed a review of the company’s enterprise division, which services large business and government clients.

Providing voice calls and other network services to these clients has historically been an important part of Telstra’s business. But recently, low-cost internet-based competitors have been whittling away at this revenue.

Speaking at a press conference, Telstra CEO Vicki Brady said while the company continues to see solid growth across its mobile network, it now faces a changing business landscape:

Our industry and the world we are operating in are changing. We have new and different competitors. We have rapid advances in technologies happening. Our customer needs continue to evolve and we have ongoing inflationary and cost pressures.

But it’s possible these job cuts are also part of a strategy to boost Telstra’s flagging share price, which fell to a low of A$3.57 the day of the announcement.

This was down from its 52-week high of $4.46 and well below its ten-year high of $6.61 in February 2015.

How did we get here?

In February, Telstra reported a 66.7% drop in EBITDA – an important measure of earnings – for its fixed-enterprise business unit.

Telstra said this fall-off was the result of a continued decline in income from call charges, business connectivity, network applications and services.

It’s possible the slowing Australian economy may have exacerbated the decline, impacting businesses’ spending on telecommunications products and services.

Telstra has been under pressure to find savings under its ambitious “T25” target to achieve a $500 million reduction in net costs by the end of financial year 2024–25.

Telstra expects this major restructure to incur a one-off cost of between $200 million to $250 million over this period.

The company also said it would focus on reducing other cost categories, including non-labour-related costs. One such cost is energy usage, a major expense for telcos.

Now, the company expects to achieve $350 million of its cost reduction target by the 2025 deadline.

Telstra hasn’t directly tied this latest round of cuts to the broader adoption of artificial intelligence (AI). But the company has been exploring ways of using the technology.

Telstra announced in February it was moving forward with AI technologies it had developed in-house, following pilot trials with frontline team members.

The company was at pains to point out that these particular technologies aim to assist existing human staff, for example, by summarising interactions with customers or better searching for information from internal databases.

Down the line, however, further adoption of AI could eventually impact employee numbers as Telstra and other telecommunications companies aim to ramp up and exploit cost-cutting uses of the technology.

Mobile tells a stronger story

Telstra’s core mobile business has meanwhile performed strongly, with subscriber numbers growing steadily over the last year.

The company’s latest announcement included a significant change to the terms of its postpaid mobile plans.

Prices of these plans have historically been automatically indexed to the consumer price index each financial year. That will no longer happen, bringing postpaid mobile plans into line with most of Telstra’s other products. There will be no increase this July.

Brady said the move would give the company greater flexibility:

This approach reflects there are a range of factors that go into any pricing decision, and will provide greater flexibility to adjust prices at different times and across different plans based on their value propositions and customer needs.

The change does mean consumers might see relief from large automatic price increases when the consumer price index is high.

But it will likely cause concern among consumer groups. There will now be uncertainty on the exact timing of price changes for postpaid mobile plans, and their size and direction will be largely up to Telstra.

Telstra’s future direction remains unclear

There are other pressures looming for Telstra.

Before the next election, the government is expected to announce the outcome of a review into the universal service obligation (USO), a consumer protection that guarantees Australians “reasonable access to fixed telephone and payphone services”.

Telstra is Australia’s nominated USO provider, and this delivery contract has been a key driver of its dominant position in regional and remote areas. But there’s no guarantee it will be renewed with Telstra in 2032.

Telstra says its restructuring aims to put the company in better financial shape. But the announcement does not offer strong guidance on how Telstra plans to grow its business in coming years.

Telstra is facing increasing competition in a maturing market and its growth appears to be based primarily on expanding its customer base rather than introducing new products and services.

In the short term, Telstra continues to struggle to reduce costs at a time of what it calls “higher-than-expected inflation” and high energy costs.

Mark A Gregory received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network and the AuDA Foundation.

– ref. Telstra says slashing almost a tenth of its workforce will help save $350 million. Why is the business under pressure? – https://theconversation.com/telstra-says-slashing-almost-a-tenth-of-its-workforce-will-help-save-350-million-why-is-the-business-under-pressure-230533

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Sherlock, Visiting Fellow, Department of Political and Social Change, Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Australian National University

Indonesia’s president-elect, Prabowo Subianto, won February’s presidential election in a landslide victory of nearly 59% of the nationwide vote, more than double his nearest challenger.

But his party, Gerindra, fell far short of a majority in the parliamentary elections that took place at the same time. Gerindra was founded by Prabowo and its political fortunes are inseparable from his personal popularity. Yet, the party won just 14.8% of the seats in Indonesia’s House of Representatives (DPR).

And even the addition of all the parties that supported Probowo’s presidential candidacy only brings his numbers up to 48% of the seats in the assembly. This support is also not a given when it comes to legislation or approval of budgetary allocations.

So, is this a recipe for confrontation and deadlock after the new president and parliament are sworn into office in October?

What’s on Prabowo’s agenda?

Under Indonesia’s presidential system, Prabowo does not need a parliamentary majority to stay in office, but a troublesome parliament would be a major impediment for his government.

The parliament can be a check on executive power and the president’s fiscal initiatives, as well as a tool for contesting his legislative program. Prabowo will therefore need to build a coalition of parties to back him.

In the previous two elections he lost to Joko “Jokowi” Widodo in 2014 and 2019, he waged divisive campaigns. He presented himself as an ultra-nationalist strongman figure and mobilised extreme elements of Indonesia’s majority Islamic community. This was approach was seen by many analysts as threatening the traditionally inclusive nature of Indonesian politics and society.

In this year’s election, however, Prabowo projected a more moderate image and largely committed himself to a continuation of Jokowi’s programs. He did not campaign on major new policy initiatives or structural reforms.

Jokowi’s programs have largely emphasised economic development, especially infrastructure, such as the construction of a new capital city, Nusantara, on Borneo.

Prabowo has also been a vocal advocate for the economic nationalist policies embraced by Jokowi. These include restrictions on the import of rice and other agricultural commodities to support local production and restrictions on the export of minerals to encourage domestic downstream processing.

Also in Prabowo’s favour: the composition of the new parliament is remarkably similarly to the one elected in 2019.

Former President Megawati Sukarnoputri’s party, Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (or PDI-P), will be the largest in the parliament to be inaugurated in October, with 110 seats. Next is the Golkar Party with 102 seats and then Prabowo’s Gerindra with 86.

None of the parties are opposed to the economic nationalist consensus that has long dominated Indonesian policy, including under Jokowi.

The only issues that generate real policy debate among the parties relate to sensitive questions over the state’s involvement in religious affairs, especially regarding the status of women in public and private life.

Defence could be contentious

Given these factors, is Prabowo’s lack of a parliamentary majority really a problem?

It can be. If Prabowo and his ministries do not manage their relationships with lawmakers the right way, it can be a source of irritation and even obstruction.

Party loyalties can be tenuous and legislators are notorious for being mostly concerned with pork-barrelling and patronage in their own constituencies. They often use their seats to advance their own personal business interests.

For example, Prabowo could encounter problems in one of the few areas where his administration may try to make a mark: defence policy and procurement. As a former military officer and defence minister, he appears committed to building up Indonesia’s military capability and asserting a leading role in regional security and the ASEAN bloc.

But when it comes to major defence budget allocations, his administration will need to satisfy powerful lawmakers who are linked to domestic contractors and others who benefit from military spending.

His controversial decision as defence minister to purchase outdated fighter jets from Qatar in 2023 was shelved after being criticised in parliament. His apparently off-the-cuff proposal for a Russia-Ukraine peace plan at a conference in June 2023 was criticised, as well.

Let the politicking begin

So, how will Prabowo manage the problem of the parliament?

He will almost certainly follow the same approach of his predecessors – tempt as many parties as possible into his tent by giving out attractive ministerial positions.

This is where the politicking for parliamentary positions and jockeying for cabinet posts are directly related. A party’s numbers in the parliament are its main bargaining chip for a place in cabinet. And the gifting of a ministerial post is the key to the president gaining support from rivals.

If experience is any guide, most parties will join his alliance if a ministry is on offer. The majority of parties did this under Susilo Bambang Yudhyono’s administration from 2004–14, as well as during Jokowi’s time in office. Prabowo benefited himself when Jokowi gave him the defence portfolio in 2019.

So far, no parties have come forward to publicly lobby for a post in Prabowo’s government, but this is undoubtedly part of the game of playing hard-to-get.

It is possible that Megawati’s party, PDI-P, may stay out of the cabinet and attempt to lead a parliamentary opposition. She likely still feels jilted by Jokowi, a former member of PDI-P, after he decided to support Prabowo instead of his own party’s presidential candidate during the campaign.

But other parties are likely to be receptive to cabinet posts. While it is true that a healthy legislature requires a healthy opposition, most Indonesian parties are more attracted by a share of the spoils of government than they are by the notion of keeping government accountable in opposition.

So, from now until the October inauguration, we will see a flurry of backroom meetings, flirtations and negotiations between Prabowo and the leaders of the parties to patch together a cabinet. Then, for Prabowo, comes the even harder task of trying to govern with such an unwieldy coalition, while maintaining some semblance of policy coherence and coordination.

Stephen Sherlock 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. He won Indonesia’s election in a landslide. Now, backroom meetings and horse-trading will determine whether Prabowo can govern – https://theconversation.com/he-won-indonesias-election-in-a-landslide-now-backroom-meetings-and-horse-trading-will-determine-whether-prabowo-can-govern-228405

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Byron, Lecturer in Psychology, University of Wollongong

“I’m looking for a man in finance,” the TikTok user, @girl_on_couch, says blandly, looking around the room and then into the camera. “Trust fund. 6’5. Blue eyes. Finance.” In the caption, she urges someone to turn her sound bite into “an actual song plz”.

From this little bit of spoken audio sprang the song that’s suddenly everywhere on social media: I’m looking for a man in finance.

A quick browse on Spotify reveals several music producers, such as Billen Ted, Hiko and Ketno, have since featured this spoken phrase on various dance tracks. Billen Ted even show how they did it.

The result is undeniably an earworm – a song that all-too-easily gets stuck in your head. On TikTok and Instagram, users are making their versions of the song, dancing to it around lounge rooms or dance festivals, or muttering adaptations of it as they work or multitask.

Sampled speech in song

It is, of course, not the first time a little bit of spoken audio has formed the central pillar of a wildly popular dance track.

Remember Get on the Beers? This viral track sampled a then-Victorian Premier Dan Andrews speech imploring people to stay home during the early days of the COVID pandemic. The song, by Mashd N Kutcher, was later described as “an unofficial anthem for Melbournians coming out of lockdown”.

Older readers will remember Pauline Pantsdown’s I don’t like it, which cheekily included unauthorised vocal samples from conservative politician Pauline Hanson.

Another memorable example is The Avalanches’ hugely acclaimed song Frontier Psychiatrist, with its surreal mix of samples and repeated spoken refrain: “that boy needs therapy”.

So what makes a great speech sample in a song, and why are they often so memorable?

Recogniseable but recontextualised

I’m a music researcher with a special interest in earworms, and wrote about memorable audio samples in my book with Jadey O’Regan, Hooks in Popular Music.

As we argue in our book, an audio sample such as “I’m looking for a man in finance” has to capture our attention and be memorable to be a hook. There is a barrage of noise on the internet and in our phones. For a sample to rise above that barrage, it has to have attention-grabbing audio properties, but also fit with our expectations and desires.

One way to become salient and memorable in this way is by being recognisable but recontextualised. If we already have some memory of a particular bit of spoken word, then hearing it in a new context such as a dance song will more easily capture our attention. We respond to what we recognise. Many people had seen and heard the original @girl_on_couch TikTok, so recognised it readily in the dance tracks that sampled it.

Another way to become salient and memorable is to reflect the way we feel, or the way we want to feel. Get on the Beers is another great example.

Australians were glued to their TVs to hear the daily speeches of state premiers during COVID lockdowns. It was a tense time. A lot of the big hits in that lockdown era were quite sad songs about being lonely, such as The Weeknd’s Blinding Lights and Heatwaves by Glass Animals.

Then Get on the Beers, which originally came out in 2020, experienced a surge of popularity as lockdowns ended. Thanks to some creative remixing, Dan Andrews seemed now to urge us to get to the pub asap. His soundbite was recognisable but recontextualised, in a track that felt cathartic for a populace very sick of lockdowns.

Accent, cadence and rhythm

The other thing that can make a speech sound bite memorable and ripe for remix in a song has to do with patterns of speech. That includes tone of voice and accent (there’s something catchy about @girl_on_couch’s deliberately hammed-up valley girl Californian accent, with all its vocal fry).

A staccato rhythm, an accidental rhyme, the cadence of a sentence – factors like these can conspire to create a line that is unusual, memorable and endlessly repeatable.

Southend’s song The Winner Is…, which focuses on the moment it was announced Sydney would host the 2000 Olympics, is another example. It captures a moment of celebration and release.

It’s hard to know whether this song would have been as popular if it wasn’t for the brilliantly memorable way former Olympics chief Juan Antonio Samaranch, originally from Spain, pronounced the word “Sydney”.

Speech as music

When you sample some speech and put it on a loop, people stop paying attention to the meaning of the words. They start paying attention to the sound, rhythm and melody of the voice. People hear speech as music.

This is what Diana Deutsch, a professor of psychology at the University of California, called the “speech-to-song illusion”. Her research looked at how the phrase “sometimes behave so strangely” suddenly
appears “to burst into song”, even if no other musical elements are added.

That is playing a role in all successful spoken samples. The effect is even stronger once you emphasise the rhythm of speech by putting it to a dance beat.

Add in the viral power of TikTok, which makes it easier than ever for users to rework and recontextualise video and audio, and it’s no great surprise I’m looking for a man in finance has become such an earworm.

Timothy Byron 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. ‘I’m looking for a man in finance’: how a sampled sound bite can turn a dance track into an earworm – https://theconversation.com/im-looking-for-a-man-in-finance-how-a-sampled-sound-bite-can-turn-a-dance-track-into-an-earworm-230542

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Strong, Associate Professor, Music Industry, RMIT University

The perennial question of what to do with musicians and their work when they are found to have been abusive has arisen again this week, as distressing video footage of rapper Sean “Diddy” Combs assaulting his then girlfriend Cassandra Ventura in a hotel in 2016 was released by CNN.

Last year, Combs settled a lawsuit brought against him by Ventura, which accused him of sexual and physical violence over the course of more than a decade.

Following the video’s release, Combs posted an apology video in which he states “My behaviour […] is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions in that video”. This is at odds with a 2023 post in which he wrote “I did not do any of the awful things being alleged. I will fight for my name, my family and for the truth”.

But why does it matter if artists are abusers? And what impact does it have on fans when these cases emerge?

A crisis of men’s violence

High-profile cases can play an important role in shaping community understandings of gender-based violence, although unfortunately commentary often reproduces problematic understandings about men’s violence, such as calling sexual violence “sex”, or by blaming the victim for the violence they experienced.

At a time when gender-based violence is at crisis levels in many places, how Combs’ actions are framed, and society’s subsequent response, can send a powerful message about our tolerance of men’s violence, and whether men who use violence will be held to account for their actions.

A long history

There is a long history of musicians being implicated in gender-based violence and domestic abuse, but nevertheless being protected by the industry.

Decades ago, abusive behaviour towards women was often hidden behind “sex, drugs and rock’n’roll” mythologies or excused as part of their artistic “genius”.

In the #MeToo era, we have seen many women come forward with experiences of abuse, assault and sexual harassment, often committed by our favourite artists, directors or actors.

This has not stopped abuse from happening. Artists and record labels have various legal tactics they can deploy to prevent information about abuse being circulated and keep survivors silent, including quick payouts with non-disclosure clauses attached to defamation lawsuits.

Protecting the reputation – and commercial value – of artists has been central to such tactics. Their success can be seen in the number of artists whose abuse has been described as an “open secret” continuing until the weight of evidence becomes overwhelming.

How do fans respond?

Some fans argue they can separate art from an artist’s alleged misconduct, whereby an artist’s actions will have little to no bearing on how the music is consumed. Allegations, no matter how well supported by evidence, will not affect their fandom or relationship to the music.

Other fans see the artist and the art they create as inseparable. They will no longer listen to their music, and will get rid of any merchandise and memorabilia.

For these fans, learning of allegations about an artist might lead to extreme measures, such as removing or covering up any tattoos they have dedicated to the artist. In this way, depending on the strength of their fandom, disconnecting from an artist can have implications for fans’ self-identity.

A fan’s response may also depend on how important it is for them to be seen as an ally for victims, as well as their own social position in relation to both the victim and perpetrator.

Research on fans has found that race and musical genre play a role in how perpetrators are framed and what the fans’ reactions to their misdeeds are. Hip hop fans’ understanding of the struggles of black artists and the ways the media frames black men as more violent than white men can lead to a sympathetic, if not entirely forgiving, approach to their actions.

These perspectives suggest holding an artist to account does not necessarily entail a punitive response.

A long way to go

As fans, we have power to shape the narrative. Do we respond in a way that minimises and excuses the actions of men who use violence and the industry that enables them, or act in solidarity with survivors?

A refusal to listen to the music of abusive artists can be a powerful political response. However, it’s clear many fans do continue to listen. Given this, two of us have argued elsewhere that, if we do continue to listen, we have an ethical obligation to listen with an awareness of the broader social and political context in which violence is perpetrated.

We must listen with an obligation: not to excuse or ignore the violence of these artists; to meaningfully listen and engage with the experiences of survivors; and to challenge and disrupt the complicity of the music industry.

This can be done by incorporating the stories of survivors into the histories of these artists, an important first step in ensuring these misdeeds are not so easily forgotten.

We can still recognise an artist’s work or achievements, but at the same time ensure they remain accountable for their actions. And we must not forget the survivors and their stories, which might also fall out of focus if an abuser is shunned and forgotten.

It is not the sole responsibility of individual fans to hold artists to account. There is an urgent need for structural change within the music industry to ensure perpetrators of gender based violence are no longer given a “free pass”, and to ensure violence is not normalised within the industry.

As in wider society, we still have a long way to go on these issues.

Catherine Strong receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Victorian Music Development Office.

Bianca Fileborn receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the City of Sydney.

Paige Klimentou 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. Diddy is just the latest in a long line of musical abusers. How should fans respond? – https://theconversation.com/diddy-is-just-the-latest-in-a-long-line-of-musical-abusers-how-should-fans-respond-230426

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melanie Ashe, PhD Candidate, School of Media, Film & Journalism, Monash University

The Mad Max films are set in an arid, barren, post-apocalyptic world known in the movies as “the wasteland”. This is a world of environmental and civil collapse caused by humans. Resources like water are scarce. Clothes, food and transport – such as the film’s famous customised cars – are cobbled together from found and scavenged objects.

The films present a future of mega drought: a possible future scenario for climate change.

The latest film in the franchise, Furiosa, hits cinemas this week. What does the wasteland have to tell us about the role the Australian environment has played in shaping the Mad Max films?

A colonised wasteland

Film scholar Ross Gibson argued the landscape shown on Australian film reflects how white settlers saw the land when they first arrived: hostile, barren and lifeless. Mad Max’s wasteland is a classic example of this, alongside films like Wake in Fright (1971) or Wolf Creek (2005).

This understanding is shaped by problematic attitudes that see the Australian environment as a “wilderness” devoid of life and structure. These attitudes deny the liveliness of the land and deny the fact that Indigenous people have lived on the continent for tens of thousands of years.

The Mad Max wasteland uses this colonial lens in a knowing way. The films state the wasteland was created through resource extraction and conflict. All but one of the Mad Max films were shot in Australia, and they were similarly filmed in places that have been impacted by heavy resource extraction.

By using settings that are visibly degraded by these industries, Mad Max suggests the apocalyptic wasteland is only “barren” and “lifeless” due to recent human impact.

Mad Max 2 (1981) and Furiosa were shot on location in far west New South Wales near Broken Hill. This region is known for its silver, lead and zinc mining history. The spaces around the town were majorly transformed in the 1800s through tree clearing and degradation caused from mining, including major soil erosion.

Rather than a landscape which has always been devoid of structure and people, Furiosa presents a landscape that shows heavy impact through recent industry. The vast expanses of desert horizon that vehicles tear across in the film are bare, but they show a damaged environment caused by humans since colonisation.

Both in the film and in the real world, this is a post-mining landscape.

Greening the desert

Broken Hill is in a semi-arid biosphere known for having a “boom and bust” ecosystem. While this area may look like “the wasteland” after years of drought, the region is also prone to sudden and heavy rainstorms. With the rain arrives a wave of dense, lush desert greenery.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) was originally planned to shoot around Broken Hill, but they relocated after the area was “too green” post heavy rainfall in 2011.

“The Mad Max landscape looks like Wales”, director George Miller reported. The production relocated to the sparse and arid environment of Namibia.

But Mad Max 2 was shot in 1981 around Broken Hill under similar circumstances. Following record rainfall, Broken Hill was lush and green, with plants and shrubs clearly seen in behind the scenes footage.

To deal with this issue, the production team used colour grading: where the tones of the film shot are altered to create a different image quality. This gave an onscreen landscape which was more washed out and warm in tone.

During the shooting of Furiosa in 2022, the area was again looking verdant after months of rain. To transform into “the wasteland” while shooting an epic chase scene on location at a local pastoral station, teams removed wide stretches of green desert shrubbery and extra detail in the background was removed with post-production visual effects.

To shoot in Australia, or not?

There is a complex and sometimes fractious relationship between the economic bottom line, on-location film production and the Australian environment.

Given Furiosa and Mad Max 2 came up with creative solutions to film in the unexpectedly green Broken Hill, why did Fury Road relocate away from the region?

These three films demonstrate the environment is easily shaped for film production when convenient and cost effective. Both Mad Max 2 and Furiosa received tax rebates or government funding packages which made filming in Australia attractive, even when the environment needed to be physically changed during production or in post-production.

Fury Road, on the other hand, was in pre-production in 2011 when the Australian dollar was almost on parity with the United States dollar, and any grants or tax benefits the film could receive for shooting in Australia would be offset by increased production costs. This means it made sense financially to relocate offshore where the film could be made cheaper.

The future of Australian screen

The wasteland of Mad Max films comment on the tradition of the Australian landscape as “barren”: this stereotype is actually due to recent human development and industry.

Understanding the environmental rhythms of the location behind the wasteland helps to think about how the geophysical world shaped the franchise. While these environments may be impacted by human industry, they are still very much alive. Rain and plant growth have shifted production through changing set and location design processes.

With the boom and bust cycle intensifying due to our changing climate, thinking about how environment shapes film production will be vitally important for the future of Australian screen.

Understanding how Mad Max’s wasteland was produced on screen reveals the underlying realities of climate catastrophe.

Melanie Ashe receives funding from Australian Research Council Discovery Projects funding scheme (project DP190101178).

– ref. Turning the outback into post-apocalyptic wasteland: what Mad Max films tell us about filming in the Australian desert – https://theconversation.com/turning-the-outback-into-post-apocalyptic-wasteland-what-mad-max-films-tell-us-about-filming-in-the-australian-desert-229632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Bartley, Postdoctoral Fellow, RMIT Centre for Cyber Security Research and Innovation, RMIT University

In the occupied far east of Ukraine, Russian forces are aiming waves of missiles against Ukrainian civilian targets. Each of Russia’s state-of-the-art missile launch systems costs more than US$100 million (A$150 million). They allow Russia to launch attacks from safe positions many kilometres behind the front lines.

The S-300 surface-to-air missile launcher is designed to avoid detection. Their locations are closely guarded secrets. However, using publicly available satellite images, we have detected telltale signs of the operation of these weapons that give away their location.

This is just one example of why the strategic and tactical use of publicly available data on the internet has become an increasing source of concern for militaries. So-called “open-source intelligence” (or OSINT) has become a top priority of intelligence agencies worldwide.

As more and more data is digitised and placed online, open-source intelligence has become a powerful tool. Social media platforms, satellite images and leaked data can all be sources of intelligence information.

We have seen significant use of open-source intelligence via social media in the Ukraine conflict. The movements of soldiers and military vehicles have been widely documented. Russian information operations attempting to falsely portray Ukrainian forces as targeting civilians have also been exposed.

Open-source intelligence is a cheap and efficient way for analysts to inform decision-making. In a conflict such as the Russia–Ukraine war, open-source intelligence can act as a force multiplier.

Tracking missile systems online

In 2018, researchers discovered an unexpected use of the Sentinel-1 satellite, a public-access scientific satellite operated by the European Space Agency. It could reveal the location of the United States’ Patriot surface-to-air missile systems. The Sentinel-1 picks up radar emissions from the missile system’s radar, which shows up as bands of interference in the imagery.

Surface-to-air missile systems are usually designed to be highly mobile, so they can be deployed anywhere to surprise enemies. Open-source intelligence means anyone with an internet connection may now be able to locate these assets.

This poses new challenges for military leaders. The strategies and processes they have developed to protect civilians, soldiers and critical infrastructure – as well as their own weapons and other assets – from enemy drones, missiles, or targeted ground assaults may no longer be effective.

How vulnerable are Russian systems?

For Russia and Ukraine, these challenges are playing out in real time. We used Sentinel-1 to locate active and mobile Russian S-300 surface-to-air missile systems in Eastern Ukraine – and if we can find them, so can anyone else.

How did we do it? First, we analysed multiple social media sources for confirmed locations of S-300s. We then viewed Sentinel-1 imagery of these locations and increased the sensitivity to reveal radar interference from the missile systems. The interference patterns show the radar source sits along a certain line.

The above image shows how it works. With a known location, it took only a few minutes to acquire the image and reveal the radar interference. This image shows an S-300 system from the Kherson Oblast, a Russian-occupied region of Ukraine, which was neutralised days after the satellite captured the interference.

The S-300 is widely regarded as Russia’s counterpart to the US Patriot system. In Russia’s war on Ukraine, it is tasked with defending against missiles and aircraft but has recently been used to target Ukrainian civilians.

To date, only around nine Russian S-300 missile launchers have been confirmed destroyed over the course of the war. This illustrates how rare and highly protected they are, reserved for protecting the most vital assets and regions of the Russian military.

For better and worse

The S-300 is exported to Iran, China and many other nations. Russia’s is not the only military that may be compromised by the location of S-300 systems through public satellite imagery. Of course, these systems need to be in operation to emit interference.

This grants advantages to non-state combatants and states with less sophisticated militaries. These forces may be able to locate and potentially destroy hundred-million-dollar assets with publicly available data.

Ukraine’s military has shown how efficient low-cost drones can be in destroying expensive air defence systems. Open-source data, such as the electronic emissions collected from scientific satellites, illustrates how ordinary and even innocuous tools can be used for warfare.

The overall ethical implications of open-source intelligence are mixed. Public data may be used by malicious non-state actors or terrorist groups, for example.

On the other hand, analysts and journalists can use such processes and methods of data gathering and analysis to investigate war crimes and abuses of human rights or create more accurate reporting of events. The Institute for the Study of War, for instance, has employed satellite imagery and social media documentation to demonstrate Russia’s military buildup on Ukraine’s borders in 2021 and 2022, thereby exposing Russian intentions.

The future of open-source intelligence

Open-source intelligence, and the critical skills required to examine public data, have become increasingly important for militaries and intelligence organisations. However, open-source data platforms, such as satellite imagery provided by the European Space Agency, are likely to produce ongoing challenges for militaries.

How will the world respond? Institutions, business, government sites and other bodies may decide to cut off the flow of public data in order to reduce its unintentional impact.

This too would create challenges. Censorship of publicly available data would pose risks to transparency of information and degrade public trust in companies and public institutions. Removing public access to information would mean people and organisations with less money could no longer access it.

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. We tracked secret Russian missile launchers in Ukraine using public satellite data – https://theconversation.com/we-tracked-secret-russian-missile-launchers-in-ukraine-using-public-satellite-data-230424

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna DeMello, Research Fellow, University of Otago

Despite measures to reduce young people’s access to vapes, many countries are recording rising use by underage adolescents, especially since refillable “pod mods” and disposable devices have become widely available.

Vapes appeal to young people because of their sleek designs and flavours, but these products also carry risk. Vapes containing nicotine can cause addiction and non-smoking young people who vape are more likely to take up cigarette smoking.

Some countries have set a minimum legal sales age to curb underage use. In New Zealand, vapes are a notifiable product and, like tobacco products, must not be sold to people under 18. Australia has gone further, requiring a prescription to access nicotine-containing vapes.

However, youth vaping has continued to rise in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and in New Zealand, where the latest health survey found 20% of people between 15 and 17 had vaped in the past month. Nearly 28% of Māori youth vaped regularly, which suggests inequities similar to those observed in tobacco smoking.

We wanted to know how underage youth obtain vapes. We reviewed international research and found “social sourcing” (sharing between friends) was the most common access route. Underage vape users were also able to buy from commercial retailers, and some steal vapes.

Sharing appears rampant and opportunistic

We also conducted interviews with 30 New Zealand adolescents (aged 16-17) who vape to probe how they accessed vaping products. This research explains the varied ways these adolescents obtain nicotine-containing vapes and exposes serious gaps in current policy.

All participants reported sharing vapes with friends and family members, work acquaintances or people they met socially. Sharing helped participants bond more deeply with their friends and connect to new social groups.

We all try each other’s [vapes …] I can’t even explain how big [this] is […] If I’m with my friends, I’m probably not using my vape, I’m using theirs.

Sharing others’ vapes allowed some participants to avoid owning their own device (or purchasing infrequently, on special occasions). They felt uncommitted to vaping and in control of their use.

I still just do it socially […] for fun. In the three years I’ve been vaping, I’ve never owned one. I’ve tried to keep it under control, not let it affect me too much.

Relying on ‘proxies’ to purchase vapes

Most participants asked “proxies” (older friends or siblings over 18) to purchase vapes for them. Once participants had an established buyer they tended to rely on this person, who would often supply a wider underage peer group.

There’s always [someone with] an older sibling or [person] that’s fine with buying for them. [So] everybody will ask them whenever they want [product].

Proxies typically supplied people they knew at no extra cost, but sometimes charged a fee (up to NZ$10 above the cost of the vapes and e-liquid refills).

There’s that one 18-year-old at school always doing it. He charges $5 more than what a vape costs […] that’s why they come to him. They know he’ll be available, no questions asked.

A minority asked “randoms” (people they did not know) who they met on social media to buy vapes for them. Alternatively, some approached people they saw outside retail shops and asked if they would purchase products for them.

Underage youth purchase vapes themselves

Nearly all participants knew of retailers who sold to underage people; many had bought vaping products from a “dodgy dairy” that did not ask them for an ID. Several knew peers who used fake IDs.

There [are] certain dairies that people always know of [by] word of mouth. Someone would go in and not get ID’d, then tell people.

Many also knew of younger adolescents who had purchased vapes in person.

There’s so many kids who do that. That’s how the 13 and 14-year-olds get it, because they wouldn’t be friends with 18-year-olds. They just try their luck.

Our study found access routes sit on a continuum from spontaneous sharing to “proxy” purchasing to self-purchasing.

Reports that underage people buy vapes directly from small shops support the government’s proposal to introduce escalating retailer fines. But it also suggests we need stronger retailer monitoring and enforcement.

It is also crucial to disrupt social supply routes, including sharing and proxy purchasing. We believe we need upstream policy measures that reduce the widespread availability and appeal of vaping products, including the following:

• limiting product sales to age-restricted specialist shops

• capping vape retailer numbers to lower density

• restricting all (current and future) general and specialist vape retailers from operating within 500 metres of schools and marae

• monitoring the impact of a ban on sales of disposable vapes (as the government plans to do) to ensure this measure is not undermined by, for instance, allowing new low-cost refillable devices to enter the market.

Janet Hoek receives funding from the Heatlh Research Council and NZ Cancer Society; she has previously received funding from the Royal Society Marsden Fund. She is a member of several advisory committees, including the Health Coalition Aotearoa and international government and NGO groups. She has received travel support to speak at international conferences and small gifts in recognition for having spoken at conferences.

Anna DeMello 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. Underage vaping is on the rise: here’s how young New Zealanders are finding it so easy to access – https://theconversation.com/underage-vaping-is-on-the-rise-heres-how-young-new-zealanders-are-finding-it-so-easy-to-access-230384