Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Mclaughlin, Adjunct Research Fellow, The University of Western Australia

It’s National Road Safety Week and it comes on the back of a year in which 1,286 people died on Australian roads. The rising road toll – up 8.2% for the year to March – included 62 children. Tragically, road deaths remain the number one killer of children in Australia.

Road deaths are not inevitable. In 2022, at least 180 cities worldwide recorded zero road deaths. More than 500 cities with populations of more than 50,000 have achieved zero road deaths multiple times.

So cities can eliminate road deaths, or greatly reduce them. At the same time, these cities are creating healthier streetscapes that people want to be active and spend time on. They have done this by taking action on several fronts to make roads safe.

Redirecting road funding

Walking and cycling infrastructure gets less than 2% of Australian transport funding. Reallocating funding from roads to walking and cycling, as for example France and Ireland have done, can increase road safety and reduce carbon emissions.

Australians want this shift in funding. Two-thirds of Australians support the idea that government should redirect road funding into walking and cycling infrastructure, according to a nationally representative survey by the Heart Foundation.

Reallocating street space

A disproportionate amount of road space is set aside for car travel and parking. For instance, across Melbourne’s busiest shopping strips footpaths are given 30% of the street space, on average, but account for almost 60% of all people using the street. Lanes for general traffic (cars, motorbikes and trucks) are also typically given around 30% of the space, but account for less than 20% of all people.

Similar results are found in cities elsewhere, from Budapest to Beijing.

Redesigning streets nudges people to drive at a safer speed. Before writing this article, we asked each other: “What would it look like if we designed our roads like footpaths, and our footpaths like roads?”

This question may seem unrealistic. But, as a design exercise, we wanted to explore what it could look like, to shine a light on footpath space.

We chose a random street, took a photo and set out to alter the image. We moved objects on the footpath – such as bins, signposts and mailboxes – to the edge of the roadway. Slightly more space was given for people walking, while still providing enough space for vehicles to operate safely within the roadway. Here’s this reimagination.

Across Paris, the Rues aux écoles initiative is reallocating street space on hundreds of “school streets” for children to play. The streets are designed to make it safe for children to play outside their school, for example, while waiting to be picked up.

Safer speed limits

The 100-plus-year experiment of cars on our streets is failing in Australia. But it’s not the cars per se, it’s the drivers speed that’s killing people. Speed and speeding are crucial factors in road safety. Australia’s 50km/h default speed limit in built-up areas is unsafe for many streets.

Globally, countries are adopting 30km/h speeds by default for side streets and urban centres, and it’s working. Reducing default speed limits to 30km/h reduces crashes, their severity and deaths.

Setting 30km/h as the default speed limit is a low-cost action that works to save lives. A majority of Australians support lower speed limits on neighbourhood streets. And, despite what drivers might fear, it has negligible impact on total journey times.

Lower speed limits make people feel safer, and that has a transformative impact. In Perth, for example, 2.8 million car trips a day are less than 5km – that’s two-thirds of all journeys. When people feel safe to walk, wheelchair or jump on their bikes for short journeys, such as popping out for milk or bread, they leave the car behind.

Swapping out these short car trips reduces congestion and carbon emissions. And it improves our health by boosting physical activity and mental well-being.

Where to start?

As researchers, we think it’s unacceptable to not act on the evidence of what works to boost road safety. We believe it’s time for urgent action. Here’s where to start:

1. zones around schools, especially reducing speed and more safe crossings
2. reallocating road funding and space to boost safety and efficiency
3. reducing speed limits in built-up areas by default.

Lower speed limits and redesigned streets should be backed up by public education campaigns and speed fines, to raise awareness of the deadly toll of speeding.

What can you do?

Be the change you want to see and become a champion of your local streets. When communities come together to call for change, it works.

Amsterdam, for example, wasn’t always a haven for walking and cycling. It took concerted community action against the high number of children dying on their roads.

Start a local group to champion safer and healthier streets in your neighbourhood. There are organisations to support you to take action, such as Better Streets.

Dr Matthew ‘Tepi’ Mclaughlin is a member of the Asia-Pacific Society for Physical Activity and the International Society for Physical Activity and Health. He is a Board Member of Better Streets and a member of the Active Transport Advisory Group of Westcycle. He has previously received research funding from the Australian government’s Medical Research Future Fund and the government of Western Australia’s Healthway. He also previously received salary support through the Australian Research Council’s Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course.

Chris De Gruyter receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management.

– ref. Hundreds of cities have achieved zero road deaths in a year. Here’s how they did it – https://theconversation.com/hundreds-of-cities-have-achieved-zero-road-deaths-in-a-year-heres-how-they-did-it-229127

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deanna Grant-Smith, Professor of Management, University of the Sunshine Coast

The federal government has announced a “Commonwealth Prac Payment” to support selected groups of students doing mandatory work placements.

Those who are studying to be a teacher, nurse, midwife or social worker will be eligible to receive A$319.50 per week while on placement. This amount is benchmarked to the single Austudy per week rate. Other support payments received by a student will not be affected.

The payment, which is part of the upcoming federal budget, is due to start in July 2025 and will be means-tested (the details of which are still to be worked out). It follows a recommendation from the Universities Accord final report and will be welcomed by many students facing “placement poverty” as they complete their degrees. But is it enough?

Why is a Prac Payment needed?

Unpaid work experience has become a compulsory rite of passage to paid employment in many areas of study.

This experience is thought to increase skills, knowledge, experience and students’ identity in the profession. Research also shows students believe work experience (whether paid or unpaid) builds job and social skills, helps them decide on a career path, and boosts their chances of getting a job when they graduate.

But due to their long hours and intensive nature, unpaid placements can also result in financial stress and have negative impacts on wellbeing as students juggle paid work, study obligations and unpaid work.

Being unable to afford to do mandatory unpaid work can also prevent some students from completing their degree on time or at all.

As more students are expected to undertake long or multiple unpaid placements, this also limits the types and amounts of paid work they can do while studying, making their financial and employment situation more precarious.

Does the plan go far enough?

Many degrees require students to do the equivalent of up to six months’ unpaid work.

For example, social work students are expected to complete 1,000 hours of full-time, unpaid work experience. Education students must do a minimum of 80 days. Both of these student groups will be eligible for the prac payment.

But many other degrees can require hundreds of hours of unpaid placement time but are not supported by the Commonwealth Prac Payment. This means other allied health students, such as occupational therapy students (who must complete a minimum of 1,000 unpaid hours), or speech pathology students who may be required to take a rural or remote placement, are excluded from the payment.

To enhance graduate employability, universities and other tertiary training institutions (such as TAFEs) have also expanded obligatory “work-integrated learning” into fields of study where there are no statutory or professional requirements for it. This includes areas such as urban planning, communication and creative industries, and journalism.

This means students do projects or placements with organisations outside of the university as part of their coursework.

When asked about broadening the set of courses involved, Education Minister Jason Clare told Radio National “that’s something that we’d have to look at down the track”.

Mandatory versus ‘voluntary’ unpaid work

On top of mandatory placements, it is common for students to also do other work experience on their own initiative while studying. Researchers call these “open-market internships”.

Sometimes this is billed as “voluntary” but the lines here can be very blurry. Students can see this unpaid work as necessary to develop networks and fill CVs to become more competitive for graduate jobs.

Unpaid work undertaken as part of a degree or vocational education program is lawful in Australia, but some open-market internships may not be.

Dubious arrangements include interns doing the same work as regular paid employees and undertaking work that does not predominantly involve observing or performing mock or simulated tasks.

What more is needed?

If employers and universities genuinely believe work experience is they key way students become employable graduates, they must find ways of making such experiences accessible to all students. Payment for placements and other meaningful financial support is a good place to start.

For example, earlier this year, the Queensland government announced a $5,000 cost-of-living allowance for eligible final-year nursing and midwifery students who do placements in regional, rural or remote Queensland.

But safeguarding the financial and general wellbeing of students is not just the responsibility of governments. Universities, vocational education and training providers (such as TAFEs) and employers also need to make sure the benefits of unpaid work placements are not outweighed by the costs.

We need to look at new regulations that limit how long an unpaid placement can last, and offer alternatives to an unpaid placements, such as “supervised service learning”. An example of this is the National Tax Clinic Program. Run through the Australian Taxation Office, students studying tax-related courses provide free tax advice to individuals and small businesses under the supervision of qualified professionals.

Employers also need to ensure they properly train, induct and pay graduates and students undertaking work that benefits their business.

As the Prac Payment details are worked out and evaluated, we need to make sure the government does indeed look again at the list of eligible courses, to make sure the scheme helps all students who need it.

Deanna Grant-Smith receives funding from the Australian Collaborate Education Network, World Association for Cooperative Education, and National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. She is a board member of the TJ Ryan Foundation and a Director of the Queensland Advisory Board of The McKell Institute.

Paula McDonald receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. What does the new Commonwealth Prac Payment mean for students? Will it do enough to end ‘placement poverty’? – https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-new-commonwealth-prac-payment-mean-for-students-will-it-do-enough-to-end-placement-poverty-229280

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nuurrianti Jalli, Assistant Professor of Communication Studies College of Arts and Sciences Department of Languages, Literature, and Communication Studies, Northern State University

Like many parts of the world, Southeast Asia has been experiencing information pollution in the public information space.

Distribution of unverified information and hoaxes is rampant. It’s particularly a problem on social media sites and text messaging apps like Whatsapp and Telegram.

Disinformation campaigns using cyber troopers to spread hateful rhetoric and hyper-partisan content have long been a part of communication artifices by political parties in the region.

And now, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Southeast Asian governments not only have to deal with the virus but also with the false information surrounding it.

In recent years, governments across Southeast Asia have introduced various measures to tackle the problem. This includes enacting stringent fake news laws and establishing government fact-checking bodies.

The region has witnessed an increasing number of independent fact-checking bodies to combat the information pollution ever since the ills of online manipulations as part of political warfare were put on full display.

However, these fact-checking agencies only gained significant public popularity since the outbreak of the COVID-19 health crisis in February 2020.

Fact-checking in Southeast Asia poses several unique challenges. This article will highlight three challenges based on my recent interactions with fact-checkers, researchers and journalists in the region.

Limited force

One of the challenges fact-checkers face is the abundance of content generated by internet users.

With a limited number of fact-checkers in the region, fact-checking all this content becomes a challenging task to complete.

Aribowo Sasmito, the co-founder of the Indonesian Anti-Slander Society (MAFINDO), told me recently many hoaxes are shared daily on the internet.

The profusion of content has made it difficult for fact-checkers to select which content to verify.

Thus, the most convenient solution is to focus on content that has gone viral on social media or text messaging apps like WhatsApp, or that is believed to be detrimental to the public.

But this raised questions among scholars and observers alike. Does that mean other misinformation is less important than the viral messages?

Another challenge journalists highlighted is time constraints on fact-checking while trying to be the first to report breaking news.

Speaking to several journalists in Southeast Asia, some raised concerns about the lack of proper documentation to prove certain people’s allegations relating to sensitive issues.

This problem is particularly prevalent when it comes to content related to local histories or political accusations.

The unavailability of documents or materials as references has made it even harder for journalists to corroborate information shared by their sources.

Various languages

The second challenge is the various languages used to create online content. This leads to fact-checkers overlooking hoaxes shared among indigenous groups who speak non-mainstream indigenous languages.

In Southeast Asia alone, at least 1,000 languages and dialects are spoken.

This has raised a legitimate concern among researchers about ensuring fact-checkers do not overlook false information shared using less popular languages, considering people in Southeast Asia are still relatively low-skilled in detecting false information.

Fact-checkers also noted that the public’s inability to understand the content in a different cultural context leads to the sharing of misinformation.

Cultural content or posts uploaded in other languages could be lost in translation and misinterpreted, with information taken out of context.

Meeko Angela Camba of VERA Files, a fact-checking agency based in the Philippines, told me fact-checkers also face problems in debunking claims with “a bit of truth in them but lacking in context, or presented in a false context”.

State pressures

Against the political backdrop in Southeast Asia, where press freedom is mostly limited, fact-checking agencies and journalists have also raised concerns about pressures applied by governments when fact-checkers’ findings are at odds with government political narratives.

For example, in countries like Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand, laws like the Defamation Act, Official Secrets Act and Lèse Majesté law hinder journalists, particularly those working or affiliated with government agencies, from doing fact-checking effectively due to “fear” of offending the government.

Intimidated by the potential repercussions for verifying information that casts doubt on government political narratives, journalists and fact-checkers practicse self-censorship on certain kinds of content.

While independent fact agencies are many in the Western world, independent agencies have yet to gain traction in Southeast Asia.

In Malaysia, the Ministry of Communication and Multimedia Malaysia established Sebenarnya.my in 2017. It’s the leading “one-stop centre” to check viral content shared on the internet.

Sebenarnya.my has increased in popularity since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak.

It has worked closely with other government agencies to debunk mainly health misinformation related to COVID-19. Yet critics doubt if Sebenarnya.my would be the best platform to get fact-checked information about political content.

Recently, two new fact-checking agencies were established in Malaysia, independent agency Faqcheck.org and Mycheck under Bernama, the Malaysian National News Agency. The founding of the two new agencies could contribute to more balanced information fact-checking in the country.

MAFINDO in Indonesia has also been criticised, particularly when fact-checking political content.

Aribowo said the fact-checking agency has been accused of either supporting the government or supporting the government’s political opponents, solely for fact-checking political content.

Critics see the collaboration between MAFINDO and the Indonesian government involving the General Election Commission (KPU) and the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) as discreet political support for the ruling power.

MAFINDO, however, claimed impartiality and asserted the agency is apolitical. It said it has been debunking hoaxes, even ones shared by government agencies.

Aribowo said such allegations are part and parcel of the process of fact-checking by MAFINDO and other fact-checkers and media outlets in the region.

Fact-checking agencies like MAFINDO, VERA Files and the Phillipines-based Rappler have received numerous threats, forcing the agencies to take safety precautions. This includes hiding their office address.

Nuurrianti Jalli tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Three fact-checking challenges in Southeast Asia – https://theconversation.com/three-fact-checking-challenges-in-southeast-asia-148738

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard B. (Ricky) Rood, Professor Emeritus of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, University of Michigan

Scenes from the Houston area looked like the aftermath of a hurricane in early May after a series of powerful storms flooded highways and neighborhoods and sent rivers over their banks north of the city.

More than 400 people had to be rescued from homes, rooftops and cars, according to The Associated Press. Huntsville registered nearly 20 inches of rain from April 29 to May 4, 2024.

Floods are complex events, and they are about more than just heavy rain. Each community has its own unique geography and climate that can exacerbate flooding. On top of those risks, extreme downpours are becoming more common as global temperatures rise.

I work with a center at the University of Michigan that helps communities turn climate knowledge into projects that can reduce the harm of future climate disasters. Flooding events like the Houston area experienced provide case studies that can help cities everywhere manage the increasing risk.

Flood risks are rising

The first thing recent floods tell us is that the climate is changing.

In the past, it might have made sense to consider a flood a rare and random event – communities could just build back. But the statistical distribution of weather events and natural disasters is shifting.

What might have been a 1-in-500-years event may become a 1-in-100-years event, on the way to becoming a 1-in-50-years event. When Hurricane Harvey hit Texas in 2017, it delivered Houston’s third 500-year flood in the span of three years.

Basic physics points to the rising risks: Global greenhouse gas emissions are increasing global average temperatures. Warming leads to increasing precipitation and more intense downpours, and increased flood potential, particularly when storms hit on already saturated ground.

Communities aren’t prepared

Recent floods are also revealing vulnerabilities in how communities are designed and managed.

Pavement is a major contributor to urban flooding, because water cannot be absorbed and it runs off quickly. The Houston area’s frequent flooding illustrates the risks. Its impervious surfaces expanded by 386 square miles between 1997 and 2017, according to data collected by Rice University. More streets, parking lots and buildings meant more standing water with fewer places for rainwater to sink in.

If the infrastructure is well designed and maintained, flood damage can be greatly reduced. However, increasingly, researchers have found that the engineering specifications for drainage pipes and other infrastructure are no longer adequate to handle the increasing severity of storms and amounts of precipitation. This can lead to roads being washed out and communities being cut off. Failures in maintaining infrastructure, such as levees and storm drains, are a common contributor to flooding.

In the Houston area, reservoirs are also an essential part of flood management, and many were at capacity from persistent rain. This forced managers to release more water when the storms hit.

For a coastal metropolis such as the Houston-Galveston area, rapidly rising sea levels can also reduce the downstream capacity to manage water. These different factors compound to increase flooding risk and highlight the need to not only move water but to find safe places to store it.

The increasing risks affect not only engineering standards, but zoning laws that govern where homes can be built and building codes that describe minimum standards for safety, as well as permitting and environmental regulations.

By addressing these issues now, communities can anticipate and avoid damage rather than only reacting when it’s too late.

Four lessons from case studies

The many effects associated with flooding show why a holistic approach to planning for climate change is necessary, and what communities can learn from one another. For example, case studies show that:

• Floods can damage resources that are essential in flood recovery, such as roads, bridges and hospitals. Considering future risks when determining where and how to build these resources enhances the ability to recover from future disasters. Jackson, Mississippi’s water treatment plant was knocked offline by flooding in 2022, leaving people without safe running water. Houston’s Texas Medical Center famously prepared to manage future flooding by installing floodgates, elevating backup generators and taking other steps after heavy damage during Tropical Storm Allison in 2001.

• Flood damage does not occur in isolation. Downpours can trigger mudslides, make sewers more vulnerable and turn manufacturing facilities into toxic contamination risks. These can become broad-scale dangers, extending far beyond individual communities.

• It is difficult for an individual or a community to take on even the technical aspects of flood preparation alone – there is too much interconnectedness. Protective measures like levees or channels might protect one neighborhood but worsen the flood risk downstream. Planners should identify the appropriate regional scale, such as the entire drainage basin of a creek or river, and form important relationships early in the planning process.

• Natural disasters and the ways communities respond to them can also amplify disparities in wealth and resources. Social justice and ethical considerations need to be brought into planning at the beginning.

Learning to manage complexity

In communities that my colleagues and I have worked with, we have found an increasing awareness of the challenges of climate change and rising flood risks.

In most cases, local officials’ initial instinct has been to protect property and persist without changing where people live. However, that might only buy time for some areas before people will have little option but to move.

When they examine their vulnerabilities, many of these communities have started to recognize the interconnectedness of zoning, storm drains and parks that can absorb runoff, for example. They also begin to see the importance of engaging regional stakeholders to avoid fragmented efforts to adapt that could worsen conditions for neighboring areas.

This is an updated version of an article originally published Aug. 25, 2022.

Richard Rood receives funding from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Science Foundation. He is a co-principal investigator at the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessment Center at the University of Michigan.

– ref. Houston area’s flood problems offer lessons for cities trying to adapt to a changing climate – https://theconversation.com/houston-areas-flood-problems-offer-lessons-for-cities-trying-to-adapt-to-a-changing-climate-229351

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Murakami Wood, Professor of Critical Surveillance and Securities Studies, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

There is a long history of planned city building by both governments and the private sector from Brasilia to Islamabad.

More recently, two trends have come together in a new wave of visionary urban planning.

On the one hand, there are the neoliberal “special economic zone” policies that accelerated in the 1980s and which have become an almost unquestioned global economic article of faith. On the other, there is the “smart city” in which ubiquitous sensing and surveillance generate big data, from which solutions to all the problems of cities are supposed to be found.

Read more:
What is The Line, the 170km-long mirrored metropolis Saudi Arabia is building in the desert?

Now, with the fairy dust of Artificial Intelligence (AI) sprinkled on top, we have the recipe for almost every current proposal for new cities. In essence, the contemporary ideal city is a data-driven, free-market paradise.

Shifting gears

The conservative and authoritarian Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is very much aware that the end is in sight for the fossil fuel economy that underpins its sovereign and private wealth. In anticipation of the inevitable end of fossil fuels, Riyadh is actively working to shift to new sources of income so as to future proof its economy in a carbon-zero world.

Some of this transitional work has involved the extension of Saudi Arabian “soft power” into areas that are of personal interest to the kingdom’s prime minister, and de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. This is perhaps most visible through the entangling of Saudi Arabia with lucrative professional sports from golf to tennis.

However, the other bet that Saudi Arabia has been making is in cities.

Under the banner of Vision 2030, it has been investing its oil profits in dozens of eye-catching urban projects from free ports to cities built around theme parks.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not have much in the way of homegrown digital or technological enterprises, so Riyadh is instead investing on the principle of if we build it, they will come. Simply put, Saudi Arabia is attempting to attract foreign entrepreneurs, manufacturers, logistics companies and tourists to ease its transition to a post-oil economy.

Look upon my works

NEOM is the most ambitious of all of Bin Salman’s plans to attract foreign investment. Indeed, the name NEOM is a portmanteau of the Greek ‘neo’ and the first letter of Mohammed Bin Salman’s name.

The published plans and publicity for NEOM are a sight to behold.

NEOM will include everything in one massive development. It will have a free port and logistics hub, a seaside tourist town and even a mountain sports playground. NEOM’s centrepiece attraction is unquestionably, however, The Line.

The Line was envisioned as a 170 km linear city clad in reflective material, that would cut into the deep desert from the Red Sea like one of the swords on the Saudi flag.

The evangelical advertisements for NEOM promised freedom and multiculturalism in one of the most authoritarian and monocultural nations on Earth, as well as total surveillance and advanced AI to underpin innovation for all its residents.

An early consultancy report was even more excessive than what the actual plans became, proposing an artificial moon, fleets of drones and that 50 per cent of the “population” would be service robots.

The initial advisory board included the likes of British architect Norman Foster and the CEO of Google’s Sidewalk Labs, Dan Doctoroff. Most of the more famous advisers seem to have quietly disappeared from the project in recent years.

Scaled ambitions

Now, almost as soon as ground had been broken, it was announced that the centrepiece plan has been scrapped. The Line is no more and in its place are plans for a much smaller 2.4 km long city — a mere dash compared to The Line’s original misguided ambitions.

Was The Line all just a public relations exercise designed to generate likes and speculative foreign investment capital? In public there may have been much wonderment. However, behind the scenes the entire Line project has been nothing more than a weird, unsustainable and hubristic fantasy.

NEOM is planned to be built in one of the most geopolitically significant — and at times turbulent — areas of the world, where Saudi Arabia borders Egypt, Israel and Jordan. Perhaps even more significantly, NEOM will be built in a region where summer daytime temperatures are already heading above 50 C in our era of global heating.

Who was going to want to live at the far end of a 170-kilometre long parallel terrace from which your only means of exit was an “intelligent” train system? And how was security going to be managed for a place which promised freedom and legal systems compatible with international human rights norms in one of the most authoritarian nations in the world, both internally and externally?

How would NEOM stop Saudi dissidents from escaping to or through it? Security and surveillance have never been part of the published plans, but industry publications have revealed that Bin Salman was envisioning an entirely private police force and a specialist drone surveillance control centre for The Line.

The kingdom had already scheduled the execution of three members of the Howeitat tribe who had objected to this non-consensual development on their traditional lands.

Harsh lessons

It is currently unclear as to whether other parts of the NEOM plan will be scaled back.

Work has already started on the Red Sea tourist resort town of Sindalah and it is unlikely Bin Salman will abandon the potentially lucrative Port of NEOM. Beyond that is anyone’s guess.

Many plans for ideal cities have been impractical fantasies. But NEOM also typifies a massive and persistent failure of the imagination driven by a capitalism — blinded by fossil-fuel ideology — and unable to come to terms with the necessity of confronting the climate crisis, growing global inequality and the persistence of war and genocide.

Read more:
COP28: Why we need to break our addiction to combustion

It’s about time for wealthy corporations and nation-states with the historic and contemporary responsibility for driving the climate crisis, like Saudi Arabia, to start taking this responsibility seriously. The world should be investing in making existing cities sustainable and just at a human scale — not pouring money into speculative, unsustainable and authoritarian urban mega-projects.

David Murakami Wood receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

– ref. The scaling back of Saudi Arabia’s proposed urban mega-project sends a clear warning to other would-be utopias – https://theconversation.com/the-scaling-back-of-saudi-arabias-proposed-urban-mega-project-sends-a-clear-warning-to-other-would-be-utopias-227852

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Jacobsen, Henry J. Leir Chair in Global Migration, Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, Tufts University

Immigration has become a defining issue in the 2024 elections and a major challenge in many U.S. cities. Over the past several years, wars and armed conflict, violent persecution and desperate poverty have displaced millions of people worldwide and propelled the arrival in the U.S. of thousands seeking protection, mainly at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Large cities such as New York, Miami, Denver and Boston are struggling to house new arrivals and meet their basic needs. Cities are looking for ways to support these new arrivals – some for a short time, others for months, years or permanently.

I study forced migration, government responses to it, and how refugees and asylum-seekers integrate into new settings. My focus is on humanitarian arrivals – people who enter the U.S. legally as asylum-seekers, resettled refugees or under various temporary protection programs, also known as parole.

In total, the Biden administration has admitted or authorized admitting roughly 1.5 million people under these programs since 2021. Cities need help to cope with these waves of new arrivals. The good news is that with support, refugees and people receiving asylum successfully integrate into life in the U.S. and contribute more to the national economy than they cost.

Entering on humanitarian grounds

People immigrate to the United States for many reasons and receive different types of visas and treatment when they arrive. Here are the main types of humanitarian admissions:

– Humanitarian parole: The federal government can give certain groups permission to enter or remain in the U.S. if it finds “urgent humanitarian or significant public benefit reasons” for doing so. People who enter through parole programs must have an approved financial supporter in the U.S. They typically can stay for one to two years and may apply for authorization to work.

Currently, the federal government is admitting a maximum of 30,000 people per month under a parole program for immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The Biden administration has also admitted people from Afghanistan and Ukraine through other parole programs. In total, the Biden administration has admitted more than 1 million people through these programs.

– Refugees and asylees: People who can show that they have experienced persecution, or have a well-founded fear of being persecuted based on their race, religion, nationality, social affiliations or political opinion, can apply for refugee status or asylum. Asylum is granted to people who are already in the U.S. Refugee status is provided to people who are vetted abroad and approved for resettlement.

Resettled refugees and people granted asylum can apply for authorization to work in the U.S. After one year in the U.S., they are eligible to apply for legal permanent residence, also known as a green card.

For fiscal year 2024, Biden has approved a maximum of 125,000 refugee admissions. There is no limit on the number of people who may be granted asylum each year.

Applicants for asylum, however, must go before an immigration judge in the U.S., who will decide whether their fears qualify them to be allowed to remain. U.S. immigration courts are heavily backed up, with more than 2 million asylum applications pending. Asylum applicants can remain in the U.S. while their case is pending, but they cannot receive work permits for six months after they apply for asylum.

Where new immigrants settle

As has been the case since at least 2010, Texas and Florida are top U.S. destinations for migrants, along with cities in New York, Illinois and Colorado. Counties where new migrants make up more than 2% of the population include Queens, New York; Miami-Dade, Florida; and Denver, Colorado.

In cities, many humanitarian immigrants find work in the hospitality and health care industries. Others move to small towns in rural areas, where they work in long-standing migrant sectors such as meatpacking, health services and agriculture.

People who come with an intent to stay are motivated to put down roots and become part of their new communities. But becoming established can take time, and newcomers’ needs can stress city neighborhoods that are already struggling with housing and employment problems. The months immediately following their arrival is the time when refugee newcomers need support of all kinds.

Working with diaspora communities

New arrivals often move to particular towns or city neighborhoods because they know that people from their country are well established there. These residents are familiar with the new arrivals’ home language and cultures and understand their needs.

For example, there are over 40,000 Ukrainians in Rochester, New York, and about 134,000 in New York City. The U.S. also has large communities of parolees, including Haitians, Venezuelans and Cubans, and long-standing diasporas of resettled refugees and asylum recipients from many parts of the world.

I see established diasporas as a critical resource for supporting new immigrants and maximizing benefits for host communities. By working with diaspora individuals and families to support new arrivals, federal and state governments could redirect funds that are now going to hotels and shelters.

For example, Boston has struggled in recent months to house large numbers of Haitian immigrants, placing several thousand families at hotel and motel sites – an unusual and expensive practice born of necessity. An alternative might be to offer cash payments or tax breaks to some of the state’s 81,050 Haitian residents in return for housing new Haitian arrivals for a few months.

Diaspora households can offer information about navigating city bureaucracies, finding jobs and accessing banking services, in addition to the comfort of familiar food and company. These communities can be an enormous help to new immigrants as they become established and begin to contribute to the city.

Such incentives could also be aimed at non-diaspora communities and people who are willing to help newcomers. A direct community support system, with safeguards built in to protect both the refugees and their hosts, would cost a city or state much less than paying for hotel rooms.

Faster work permits

Speeding up work authorizations for new arrivals can shorten the time they need support from the government. Under federal law, most nonresident foreign nationals must obtain an employment authorization document in order to apply for jobs in the U.S.

Currently, although the Biden administration is trying to move more quickly, these applications are taking more than six months to process. Once immigrants have work permits in hand, diasporas and host neighborhoods could receive tax breaks or other economic benefits in return for helping them find work.

There are other things cities and the federal government can do to support new humanitarian arrivals. Banks could be encouraged to support refugee business, as some are already doing. For example, Re:start Financial is a neobank – a tech company that provides online banking services – based in Austin, Texas, and founded in 2021 by a group of immigrants. It allows immigrants who do not yet have permanent addresses or Social Security numbers to open free online banking accounts with nontraditional documentation from their home countries.

With adequate support, new arrivals usually find their feet and become self-reliant within a few months. Using federal and state resources to enlist host neighborhoods and diaspora communities in this process would help ensure that everyone benefits.

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

– ref. Many immigrants to the US are fleeing violence and persecution − here’s how the federal government can help cities absorb them – https://theconversation.com/many-immigrants-to-the-us-are-fleeing-violence-and-persecution-heres-how-the-federal-government-can-help-cities-absorb-them-220575

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

Fifty years ago, Australian feminist Anne Summers denounced “the ideology of sexism” governing over so many women’s lives. Unfortunately, sexism is as lethal today as it was then.

Thousands have rallied across Australia in recent weeks demanding greater action against the violent deaths of women. In response, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the country not only has change its legal system, but also its culture. These changes, he said, must be pursued in the long term, “year after year.”

In Latin America, governments have been doing exactly this for years. Nearly all countries in the region have passed laws that have criminalised either femicide or feminicide (the gendered killing of women and girls).

Latin America still has some of the highest overall homicide rates in the world due to entrenched inequality, organised crime and military involvement in law enforcement. And femicides, in particular, remain high compared to other parts of the world.

However, Central and South America experienced a modest decline in female homicides yearly from 2017 to 2022, by 10% and 8% respectively. Though much work remains to be done, many hope this is a step in the right direction.

So, why has the Latin American model been successful, and what can Australia learn from it?

What exactly is femicide and feminicide?

In 1801, the English writer John Corry first used the term “femicide” to describe any murder of a woman. The concept did not evolve to its current meaning, however, until the 1970s when the feminist author Diana Russell testified about misogynist murders at the International Tribunal on Crimes Against Women in Belgium.

Inspired by the unpublished work of fellow feminist Carol Orlock, Russell redefined femicide as the killing of women by men because they are women. She framed the violent killings of women as arising from the patriarchy – femicidal violence was the most extreme form of male violence and control over the female body.

In the 1990s, Marcela Lagarde, a Mexican feminist and anthropologist, translated Russell’s concept to Spanish. In doing so, she mutated “femicide” into “feminicide” (feminicidio).

This coincided with the disturbing appearances of young women’s bodies – many showing signs of beatings, rape and mutilation – in the desert outside Ciudad Juárez, Mexico. The nature of the killings suggested the women had been punished for challenging gender stereotypes by achieving economic independence and enjoying sexual freedom.

Mexican civil servants were later found to be negligent in their investigations of the murders. The government was also indifferent to the crimes and failed to enforce policies to prevent more killings. The victims were frequently labelled as sex workers or involved in the drug trade.

In Lagarde’s view, the failure of the Mexican state to protect women’s lives made it ultimately complicit in reinforcing and normalising violence against women. She then redefined “feminicide” as a crime of the state if public officials fail to properly address gender discrimination and do not adequately punish offenders of sexual violence and other crimes.

Her work was hugely influential in the feminist movement in Latin America. It also led to the passing of the first Mexican law criminalising femicide in 2007. Today, the terms femicide and feminicide are used interchangeably in Latin American and international human rights law.

A societal change in Mexico

In Latin American countries, femicide is considered a hate crime that specifically requires a human rights based approach to enforcement.

In 2009, for example, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found Mexico in violation of women’s rights to life and non-discrimination for failing to prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish femicides in Ciudad Juárez. The government was required not only to implement stronger measures to prevent similar crimes from occurring, but also to offer the victims reparations.

This was not aimed purely at restitution for the victims. The ruling was also intended to begin rectifying the discrimination and systemic violence that has enabled countless other men to commit femicide in the country.

After the ruling, the Mexican government undertook a major institutional overhaul to align its laws and policies with its obligations to protect the rights of women under United Nations treaties and international law.

In doing this, Mexico adopted a broad gender-based perspective to all of its laws, examining the inequalities and discrimination women encounter in their everyday lives.

For example, in several cities, catcalling and other forms of public harassment have been outlawed. Public officials are required to undergo training to ensure they effectively apply gender equality in their work and policies.

The courts also have a legal duty to consider a gender perspective in deciding cases. Gender parity in government bodies is also ensured through a strict quota system at the federal and state level. Both leading candidates in next month’s presidential election are women – a first for anywhere in North America.

How other countries are following suit

Thanks to the work of activists, the criminalisation of femicide has spread from Mexico to other Latin American countries.

After femicide was defined as a distinct crime in Argentina in 2012, it sparked a grassroots feminist movement called “Ni Una Menos” (Not One Woman Less). Several years later, the discovery of a 14-year-old pregnant girl’s body in the patio of her boyfriend’s family home prompted nationwide protests. Argentina then created a national register of femicides that also includes trans women.

Responding to activists’ calls for further action, the Argentine Congress passed the Micaela Act (“Ley Micaela”) in 2019, which requires all levels of government to train officials on violence against women. The act was named after Micaela García, a “Ni Una Menos” member who was raped and killed in 2017.

The movement also called for a stronger gender perspective on media coverage of femicides and gender issues more broadly. As a result, the daily newspaper, Clarín, became the first mainstream news outlet in Argentina to create the role of gender editor.

“Ni Una Menos” has since grown into a regional movement. In Mexico, it inspired the musician Vivir Quintana to compose Canción sin Miedo (Fearless Song) to raise awareness of femicides in Mexico.

These ideas are starting to spread beyond Latin America, too. Last year, the European Institute for Gender Equality recommended the adoption of femicide as a distinct crime to respond to gender-based violence in European Union countries. So far, only two countries have such a crime: Cyprus and Malta.

This concept, developed in the Global South, could provide hope now to Australian women – a shared path of sorority toward a life free from the fear of gender-based violence.

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. What Australia can learn from Latin America when it comes to tackling violence against women – https://theconversation.com/what-australia-can-learn-from-latin-america-when-it-comes-to-tackling-violence-against-women-228988

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Breadon, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, Grattan Institute

Sugary drinks cause weight gain and increase the risk of a range of diseases, including diabetes.

The evidence shows that well-designed taxes can reduce sugary drink sales, cause people to choose healthier options and get manufacturers to reduce the sugar in their drinks. And although these taxes haven’t been around long, there are already signs that they are making people healthier.

It’s time for Australia to catch up to the rest of the world and introduce a tax on sugary drinks. As our new Grattan Institute report shows, doing so could mean the average Australian drinks almost 700 grams less sugar each year.

Sugary drinks are making us sick

The share of adults in Australia who are obese has tripled since 1980, from 10% to more than 30%, and diabetes is our fastest-growing chronic condition. The costs for the health system and economy are measured in the billions of dollars each year. But the biggest costs are borne by individuals and their families in the form of illness, suffering and early death.

Sugary drinks are a big part of the problem. The more of them we drink, the greater our risk of gaining weight, developing type 2 diabetes, and suffering poor oral health.

These drinks have no real nutrients, but they do have a lot of sugar. The average Australian consumes 1.3 times the maximum recommended amount of sugar each day. Sugary drinks are responsible for more than one-quarter of our daily sugar intake, more than any other major type of food.

You might be shocked by how much sugar you’re drinking. Many 375ml cans of soft drink contain eight to 12 teaspoons of sugar, nearly the entire daily recommended limit for an adult. Many 600ml bottles blow our entire daily sugar budget, and then some.

The picture is even worse for disadvantaged Australians, who are more likely to have diabetes and obesity, and who also consume the most sugary drinks.

Sugary drink taxes work

Fortunately, there’s a proven way to reduce the damage sugary drinks cause.

More than 100 countries have a sugary drinks tax, covering most of the world’s population. Research shows these taxes lead to higher prices and fewer purchases.

Some taxes are specifically designed to encourage manufacturers to change their recipes and cut the sugar in their drinks. Under these “tiered taxes”, there is no tax on drinks with a small amount of sugar, but the tax steps up two or three times as the amount of sugar rises. That gives manufacturers a strong incentive to add less sugar, so they reduce their exposure to the tax or avoid paying it altogether.

This is the best result from a sugary drinks tax. It means drinks get healthier, while the tax is kept to a minimum.

In countries with tiered taxes, manufacturers have slashed the sugar in their drinks. In the United Kingdom, the share of products above the tax threshold decreased dramatically. In 2015, more than half (52%) of products in the UK were above the tax threshold of 5 grams of sugar per 100ml. Four years later, when the tax was in place, that share had plunged to 15%. The number of products with the most sugar – more than 8 grams per 100ml – declined the most, falling from 38% to just 7%.

The Australian drinks market today looks similar to the UK’s before the tax was introduced.

Health benefits take longer to appear, but there are already promising signs that the taxes are working. Obesity among primary school-age girls has fallen in the UK and Mexico.

Oral health has also improved, with studies reporting fewer children going to hospital to get their teeth removed in the UK, and reduced dental decay in Mexico and Philadelphia.

One study from the United States found big reductions in gestational diabetes in cities with a sugary drinks tax.

The tax Australia should introduce

Like successful taxes overseas, Australia should introduce a sugary drink tax that targets drinks with the most sugar:

• drinks with 8 grams or more of sugar per 100ml should face a $0.60 per litre tax
• drinks with 5–8 grams should be taxed at $0.40 per litre
• drinks with less than 5 grams of sugar should be tax-free.

This means a 250ml Coke, which has nearly 11 grams of sugar per 100ml, would cost $0.15 more. But of course consumers could avoid the tax by choosing a sugar-free soft drink, or a bottle of water.

Grattan Institute modelling shows that under this tiered tax, Australians would drink about 275 million litres fewer sugary drinks each year, or the volume of 110 Olympic swimming pools.

The tax is about health, but government budgets also benefit. If it was introduced today, it would raise about half a billion dollars in the first year.

Vested interests such as the beverages industry have fiercely resisted sugary drink taxes around the world, issuing disingenuous warnings about the risks to poor people, the sugar industry and drinks manufacturers.

But our new report shows sugary drink taxes have been introduced smoothly overseas, and none of these concerns should hold Australia back.

We certainly can’t rely on industry pledges to voluntarily reduce sugar. They have been weak and misleading, and failed to stick.

It will take many policies and interventions to turn back the tide of obesity and chronic disease in Australia, but a sugary drinks tax should be part of the solution. It’s a policy that works, it’s easy to implement, and most Australians support it.

The federal government should show it’s serious about tackling Australia’s biggest health problems and take this small step towards a healthier future.

Peter Breadon’s employer, Grattan Institute, has been supported in its work by government, corporates, and philanthropic gifts. A full list of supporting organisations is published at www.grattan.edu.au.

Jessica Geraghty 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. A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one – https://theconversation.com/a-tax-on-sugary-drinks-can-make-us-healthier-its-time-for-australia-to-introduce-one-228906

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jose Antonio Lara-Hernandez, Senior Researcher in Architecture, Auckland University of Technology

The COVID-19 pandemic and the hybrid work patterns it fostered have changed the way we think about office space, and central business districts in general. While fears of urban centre “ghost towns” may have been premature, many cities around the world still face dilemmas over how best to adapt.

New Zealand is feeling this pressure too. Office vacancy rates, while dropping slightly, have remained above 12%. At the same time, there is demand for high-quality, modern spaces that fit new work and collaboration models.

This isn’t an entirely new phenomenon. Throughout history, cities and buildings have been designed with specific functions in mind. As environmental and social needs change, however, these designs struggle to meet contemporary demands.

So, what can be done with the empty buildings and unleased floors scattered through cities everywhere? In our new book, Architectural Exaptation: When Function Follows Form, we examine the process by which existing structures or features are re-imagined and re-utilised.

In architecture, the concept of “exaptation” refers to this adapting of buildings and structures for new uses. It is becoming increasingly relevant as a transformative response to sustainable and resilient urban development.

The benefits of adapting

Exaptation in architecture requires us to view built environments not just as physical spaces, but as complex living systems that can adapt and transform.

Reusing and repurposing existing structures also helps reduce waste, CO₂ emissions and energy use, supporting more sustainable urban growth. At the same time, by reusing rather than rebuilding, the historical and cultural fabric of cities is preserved, as well as their inhabitants’ sense of identity.

A famous example is Venice, which has continuously adapted its historic structures to meet modern needs, while maintaining their unique character.

Sometimes seen as a static relic of the past, Venice is in fact a dynamic example of how urban spaces can evolve. The city’s ability to repurpose spaces and structures – turning palazzos into museums or residential buildings into boutique hotels – demonstrates architectural exaptation in practice.

The Highline in New York provides another good example. Rather than demolish an old elevated railway, it was repurposed as a pedestrian walkway, becoming a now iconic public space.

The social life of cities

The notion and application of architectural exaptation also has profound implications for the way we approach urban planning and development. In particular, it challenges the linear thinking and conventional growth models behind building new structures.

Encouraging the creative reuse of existing structures not only reduces resource use, it also embeds a layer of history and culture that enriches the urban experience.

The concept goes beyond the physical to encompass the social and cultural dimensions of city life. By fostering built environments that adapt to the needs of their communities, cities can become more inclusive and responsive to their inhabitants’ needs.

This also aligns with the idea of the “15-minute city”, which aims to fulfil the daily needs of residents within a short walk or bike ride – not unlike a medieval city or town, in that sense.

A paradigm shift

There are economic and logistical challenges with implementation, of course, including structural capacity. Some older buildings may require upgrades to meet required standards for their intended new function.

Building codes and regulations in some places are complex, which may not always align with the intended reuse. Moreover, depending on the infrastructure requirements of the new building’s use – power, plumbing, heating and ventilation systems – upgrades and compatibility work can be needed.

In some heritage buildings, the sensitivity of the architect in balancing preservation and modernisation becomes a key factor. And sometimes it is simply cheaper to build from scratch than to adapt.

But the main challenge is deeper still: encouraging a paradigm shift away from a conventional development model towards a more sustainable one.

To achieve that, building codes and regulations will need adjusting to be more flexible. Economic stimulus packages and financial and tax incentives will underpin any real shift to a new approach.

From Venice to Auckland

A city need not be as ancient and unique as Venice for this to work. Take Auckland, for example, where architectural exaptation could be applied to transform its moribund centre from a “dormitory” CBD into a vibrant and lively precinct.

Auckland’s remaining historic buildings have the potential for adaptive reuse and the incorporation of arts and culture into everyday spaces. This would foster a more dynamic environment, even after business hours. The Britomart precinct is a good example of this already happening.

More than that, given the challenges presented by climate change, architectural exaptation provides a blueprint for making cities more resilient, sustainable and flexible. This goes beyond architectural theory and is a call to action. It urges architects, planners and city dwellers to rethink the role of the built environment.

By learning from the adaptive strategies of the past, we can forge a future where our cities are not only sustainable, but also vibrant and culturally rich centres of human life.

Jose Antonio Lara-Hernandez 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. As New Zealand CBDs evolve post-pandemic, repurposing old or empty spaces should be on the drawing board – https://theconversation.com/as-new-zealand-cbds-evolve-post-pandemic-repurposing-old-or-empty-spaces-should-be-on-the-drawing-board-228880

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

Opposition leader Peter Dutton argues Australia needs nuclear power to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.

But nuclear power is not feasible for Australia. It is too slow, too expensive and inappropriate for our energy needs.

As a result, plans to build nuclear power plants, big or small, are completely unrealistic.

What’s more, insisting that nuclear power is the only answer to Australia’s net zero commitments is a classic move from the playbook of those who oppose urgent action on climate change.

The climate obstruction playbook

These obstructionist tactics have played out over the 15 years I’ve spent teaching international and environmental politics while researching topics such as energy security and climate justice.

I developed an interest in the evolving strategies of climate change deniers in Australia, and regularly teach this in my environmental politics course. Since Dutton became opposition leader, I’ve included new strategies related to nuclear energy.

Fossil fuel industries and associated right-wing think-tanks, such as the Heritage Foundation in the United States and the Institute of Public Affairs in Australia, have long sought to undermine the science of climate change. Their strategies and tactics are similar to those once used by tobacco companies to undermine links between smoking and lung cancer.

Books such as Merchants of Doubt (2010), and the associated film (2014), documented tactics to “discredit the science, disseminate false information, spread confusion and promote doubt”.

Denying the science of climate change, or downplaying its significance, is an article of faith for many conservatives. While mainstream conservatives in Europe have traditionally agreed with urgent action on climate change, it is increasingly an issue that polarises views between progressive and conservative parties.

In the US, where the climate wars are reminiscent of those in Australia, a large majority of Republicans argue in favour of increasing fossil fuel production over renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar.

But mounting scientific evidence, along with Australia’s international obligations to reduce emissions and people’s personal experience of extreme events such as the 2019–20 Black Summer bushfires, has made outright climate denial largely indefensible for a mainstream political party in this country.

This shift in the Australian electorate has required various shifts in strategy by those who deny either the science of climate change or the urgency of climate action. They have followed what I argue are the six stages of climate obstruction, moving from one stage to the next as the last proved untenable. The latest stage is active support for large-scale nuclear power.

Stage 1: climate change is not happening (arsonists cause bushfires, not climate change)

Stage 2: climate change is happening but is not human-induced (solar activity causes climate change, not humans)

Stage 3: Australia’s emissions are too small to make a difference, so why should we try?

Stage 4: climate change is happening and human-induced but there are other more pressing priorities (the “coal is good for humanity” argument)

Stage 5: nuclear small modular reactors are the only viable path to net zero (these reactors are an example of a “burgeoning nuclear industry” in the US)

Stage 6: if small nuclear reactors turn out not to be viable, large nuclear reactors are the only path to net zero.

But why nuclear?

The point of all these arguments is to delay the rollout of renewable energy technologies such as wind and solar. Delaying renewables would require extensions in the life of coal-fired and other fossil-fuelled power stations while other technologies are brought online.

In New South Wales, the government is negotiating with Origin Energy to provide subsidies to keep Eraring power station – Australia’s largest coal-fired power station – open for a further four years beyond 2025. Estimates suggest this could cost A$600 million over four years ($150 million a year) for just two of its four units.

This is largely due to the long delays for renewable energy project approvals in NSW compared with elsewhere in the country. But keeping the Eraring power station open would further crowd out, and undermine, private investment that would otherwise drive the transition to renewable energy.

Delaying renewables also feeds into the culture wars. Suggestions that the last election could mark the end of the climate wars have proven premature, to say the least.

The latest shift – from small modular reactors to large-scale nuclear – came after the cancellation in November of the NuScale project in Idaho. This, the only small modular reactor approved in the US, was terminated before construction began after it became increasingly clear the power produced would be too expensive.

Now this technology has been partially sidelined with the Coalition pivoting to large-scale nuclear in more recent policy announcements.

Research has demonstrated people concerned about climate change generally tend to have a dim view of nuclear power. Even in countries with existing nuclear industries, the strategy of promoting nuclear energy has been used over the past few decades to delay investment in renewables. Nuclear advocates then extract vast subsidies and other taxpayer funds from governments rather than addressing climate change.

The Coalition made no progress towards a nuclear power industry during its nine years in government. Its vociferous backing for a nuclear industry has only emerged since it has been in opposition.

This tactic nevertheless seems to be bearing fruit, in political terms at least. A recent Guardian Essential Poll found more people thought renewables were more expensive than nuclear, when most objective reports suggest nuclear is at least three times more expensive than renewables.

Nuclear power also produces high-level radioactive waste. Given Australia’s inability to develop a permanent radioactive waste storage facility for even intermediate level waste, a high-level waste facility seems unlikely to built anytime soon.

Aside from the obvious facts that building nuclear power plants will take too long, be too expensive and fail to meet Australia’s future energy needs, the policy has failed to garner support from state-based Liberal leaders. In Queensland – Australia’s most conservative state and Dutton’s home turf – LNP Leader David Crisafulli is categorically opposing the nuclear push. So there is no realistic chance nuclear power plants will ever be built in Australia.

But for climate obstructionists that is not the point. Their aim is to delay, if possible indefinitely, the impending closures of Australia’s fossil fuel power stations and undermine investment in the renewable energy industry.

Adam Simpson 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. Nuclear power makes no sense for Australia – but it’s a useful diversion from real climate action – https://theconversation.com/nuclear-power-makes-no-sense-for-australia-but-its-a-useful-diversion-from-real-climate-action-226838

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dale Boccabella, Associate Professor of Taxation Law, UNSW Sydney

There’s a good reason your local volunteer-run netball club doesn’t pay tax. In Australia, various nonprofit organisations are exempt from paying income tax, including those that do charitable work, such as churches.

These exemptions or concessions can also extend to other taxes, including fringe benefits tax, state and local government property taxes and payroll taxes.

The traditional justification for granting these concessions is that charitable activities benefit society. They contribute to the wellbeing of the community in a variety of non-religious ways.

For example, charities offer welfare, health care and education services that the government would generally otherwise provide due to their obvious public benefits. The tax exemption, which allows a charity to retain all the funds it raises, provides the financial support required to relieve the government of this burden.

The nonprofit sector is often called the third sector of society, the other two being government and for-profit businesses. But in Australia, this third sector is quite large. Some grassroots organisations have only a tiny footprint, but other nonprofits are very large. And many of these bigger entities – including some “megachurches” – run huge commercial enterprises. These are often indistinguishable from comparable business activities in the for-profit sector.

So why doesn’t this revenue get taxed? And should we really give all nonprofits the same tax exemptions?

Why don’t churches pay tax?

The primary aim of a church is to advance or promote its religion. This itself counts as a charitable purpose under the 2013 Charities Act. However, section five of that act requires a church to have only charitable purposes – any other purposes must be incidental to or in aid of these.

Viewed alone, the conduct of a church with an extensive commercial enterprise – which could include selling merchandise, or holding concerts and conferences – is not a charitable purpose.

But Australian case law and an ATO ruling both support the idea that carrying on business-like activities can be incidental to or in aid of a charitable purpose. This could be the case, for example, if a large church’s commercial activities were to help give effect to its charitable purposes.

Because of this, under Australia’s current income tax law, a church that is running a large commercial enterprise is able to retain its exemption from income tax on the profits from these activities.

There are various public policy concerns with this. First, the lost tax revenue is likely to be significant, although the government’s annual tax expenditure statement does not currently provide an estimate of the amount of tax revenue lost.

And second, the tax exemption may give rise to unfairness. A for-profit business competing with a church in a relevant industry may be at a competitive disadvantage – despite similar business activities, the for-profit entity pays income tax but the church does not. This competitive disadvantage may be reflected in lower prices for customers of the church business.

What about taxing their employees?

Churches that run extensive enterprises are likely to have many employees. Generally, all the normal Australian tax rules apply to the way these employees are paid – for example, employees pay income tax on these wages. Distributing profits to members would go against the usual rules of the church, and this prohibition is required anyway for an organisation to qualify as a charity.

Some churches may be criticised for paying their founders or leaders “excessive” wages, but these are still taxed in the same way as normal salaries.

It’s important to consider fringe benefit tax – which employers have to pay on certain benefits they provide to employees. Aside from some qualifications, all the usual fringe benefit tax rules apply to non-wage benefits provided to employees of a church.

Just like their commercial (and taxable) counterparts, the payment for “luxury” travel and accommodation for church leaders and employees when on church business will not generate a fringe benefits taxable amount for the church.

One qualification, though, is that a church is likely to be a rebatable employer under the fringe benefit tax regime. This means it can obtain some tax relief on benefits provided to each employee, up to a cap.

We may need to rethink blanket tax exemptions for charities

Back in an age where nonprofits were mainly small and focused on addressing the needs of people failed by the market, the income tax exemption for such charities appeared appropriate.

But in the modern era, some charities – including some churches – operate huge business enterprises and collect rent on extensive property holdings.

Many are now questioning whether we should continue offering them an uncapped exemption from income tax, especially where there are questions surrounding how appropriately these profits are used.

Debates about solutions to the problem have focused on various arguments. However, more data may be needed on the way charities apply their profits to a charitable purpose, particularly those involved in substantial commercial activities.

An all-or-nothing rule exempting the whole charitable sector may no longer be fit for purpose if it fails to take into account the very different circumstances of different nonprofits.

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. Australian churches collectively raise billions of dollars a year – why aren’t they taxed? – https://theconversation.com/australian-churches-collectively-raise-billions-of-dollars-a-year-why-arent-they-taxed-228901

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marina Deller, Casual Academic, Creative Writing and English Literature, Flinders University

Comedy is opening up spaces for silences to be broken and trauma stories to be told.

In 2018, Hannah Gadsby started a revolution with Nanette, asking audiences to rethink what comedy was for. In the hour-long stand-up act, which touched on their life and experiences growing up in Tasmania, Gadsby offered a mandate to comedians to tell truths and, if needed, to seek reparation for trauma.

Other comedians have followed suit. Bo Burnham’s excellent TV special Inside (2021), filmed during the COVID pandemic, is a dark experimental comedy exploring mental health and isolation through songs, stand-up and social commentary.

Stand-up comedy has always been autobiographical, but now a new generation of comedians are adapting their lives (or versions of them) into scripted series. Mae Martin’s Feel Good (2020–21) and Richard Gadd’s Baby Reindeer (2024) offer us particularly potent examples of when trauma and comedy intersect – “traumedy” – and how comedians are using autofiction to explore these dark stories.

The autofictional self

Autofiction represents real events from the author’s life, but blends in fictional elements. The fiction might be useful for creative or narrative effect, or for protecting identities.

In Feel Good, Martin plays a version of themselves, also named Mae. They face and process addiction, realising their severe mental health issues and addiction are results of grooming and abuse they suffered as a queer teenager in the Toronto comedy scene. They build a romantic relationship with George (Charlotte Ritchie), a young woman who is not yet “out” to her loved ones.

Despite its often dark subject matter, Feel Good is awkwardly hilarious and effortlessly charming. Humour is found in Mae’s interactions with eccentric side characters: their sponsor who “teaches meditation to dogs”, a hat-wearing oddball housemate, and Mae’s well-meaning but unfiltered mother.

Episodes also frequently feature Mae’s unique brand of stand-up. In the first episode they joke, “I feel like I’m full of birds… like pelicans? Like very greasy pelicans in my chest.” The only person in the audience to laugh is George.

Baby Reindeer is a thriller set across bars and comedy clubs of London and at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. Aspiring comedian Donny (a version of Gadd) is being stalked by Martha (Jessica Gunning) while he processes previous sexual abuse inflicted by a trusted mentor from the comedy world. It is a chilling and deeply compelling account of layered trauma.

Aspects of the comedy are overtly funny. Martha’s character, with her crude sexual humour and misspellings, and the seemingly hapless Donny’s ill-received “anti-comedy” (featuring weird props and crass blue humour) provide laugh-out-loud moments. The comedic tone provides structure for Gadd’s exploration of traumatic memories.

The power of uncomfortable truths

There is strength in both Martin and Gadd’s honesty. Working with autofictional characters, they could choose to present idealised selves. Instead they chose flawed portrayals.

In Baby Reindeer, Donny lies frequently about his identity and motivations. He exposes the people he loves to danger. In Feel Good, Mae lies, steals and runs from problems.

They are categorically not perfect victims.

There is power in illuminating how traumatised individuals can make confusing or seemingly irrational choices.

At the end of Baby Reindeer, Donny visits his former mentor and makes an unexpected choice. On this controversial scene, Gadd told GQ Magazine he wanted to show

an element of abuse that hadn’t been seen before […] the deeply entrenched, negative, psychological effects of attachment you can sometimes have with your abuser.

This is similar to the ending of Feel Good, when Mae tearfully confronts their abuser Scott (John Ross Bowie). Mae and Scott end up saying they love each other – and Mae also vows never to see him again.

Though presented within broadly comedic shows, these scenes are unflinching portrayals of traumatised individuals. They resist relying on humour to break the tension. Jokes come before and after, but rarely during, true moments of horror and heartbreak.

The contrast provided by this approach may give audiences emotional whiplash, further emphasising the complex landscape of trauma.

Scholars from psychology and literature and humour studies have considered the ways in which humour might be restorative for both the artist and the audience.

Autofictional traumedies experiment with the potential and limits of comedic representations of trauma.

The ethics of traumedy and audience input

Martin told The Guardian strangers approach them on the street and ask “intimate questions”.

“They feel like they really know me. And the mad thing is they kind of do,” they said.

Social media were dominated by viewers noting their distress and tears while watching Baby Reindeer.

This distress could be a form of vicarious trauma, deep empathy or relatability. Creators of these works bear some responsibility for pre-empting and managing such audience reactions: Baby Reindeer provides viewers with content warnings and links to support services.

This collision of comedy and trauma is as complex in dark comedy clubs as it is on our home televisions. While comedians and viewers are not sharing a physical space such as a comedy club – which might have an urgency and a sense of not being able to escape for the audience – comedians are instead inside viewers’ homes.

While the television format allows audiences to consume traumatic stories at their own pace, many viewers have noted it still feels hard to look away or switch off. Indeed, many struggle to leave the comedians and their story after the screen goes dark – as the internet sleuths seeking Martha have demonstrated.

Where to from here?

Comedians are, by trade, good storytellers. By highlighting the comedy industry as a volatile and transformative setting Martin and Gadd use both real and televised stages as places of interrogation, confession and redemption.

During a self-destructive period in the second season of Feel Good, the Mae character asks their audience, “Do you want to talk about my personal despair?” The audience cheer in response.

Autofictional traumadies are sites of experimentation and we – writers, audiences and researchers alike – are learning as we go.

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. Real comedy, real trauma: how Baby Reindeer and Feel Good are forging a new television genre – https://theconversation.com/real-comedy-real-trauma-how-baby-reindeer-and-feel-good-are-forging-a-new-television-genre-228413

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

A new Commonwealth Prac Payment will provide students with $319.50 a week when they are on clinical and professional placements.

The payment will be means tested and start from July 1 next year, which will be after the next election. Those eligible will include people studying teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work. No cost for the measure was immediately available – the government said that would be in next week’s budget

The money is to help students who often have to give up work to undertake their placements and so are left out of pocket. The government’s Universities Accord report recommended the issue should be addressed, as did the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce.

Education Minister Jason Clare at the weekend announced a rejig of the indexation arrangements for HELP and related student loans, which will benefit three million people, wiping out some $3 billion in debt.

As well as advancing the Accord agenda, the spending has an eye to the youth vote.

The government says the new Prac Payment will assist about 68,000 eligible higher education students and more than 5,000 VET students each year. The payment is benchmarked to the single Austudy rate.

The payment will be in addition to other income support a student might receive.

Placements are particularly a feature of feminised areas of study and work, and the government is also linking the measure to its gender equality strategy, Working for Women.

Clare said: “Placement poverty is a real thing. I have met students who told me they can afford to go to uni, but they can’t afford to do the prac.

“Some students say prac means they have to give up their part-time job, and that they don’t have the money to pay the bills.”

Minister for Skills and Training Brendan O’Connor said: “This is an additional payment to support nursing TAFE students who have extra costs such as uniforms, travel, temporary accommodation or child care, during mandatory clinical placements”.

BUDGET REVENUE UPGRADE WILL BE $25 BILLION

Tax receipt upgrades, excluding GST, in next week’s budget are set to be about $25 billion over the forward estimates. This is vastly less than the $129 billion average upgrade in the last three budgets.

These figures came from the government as Finance Minister Katy Gallagher repeatedly refused to say whether the budget would be contractionary.

She told the ABC it “will have a focus on inflation in the short term and growth in the long term over the forward estimates”.

While there will be a surplus this financial year, the government says the position for the following years is likely to be weaker compared with the budget update late last year. This is because of smaller revenue upgrades, spending pressures and government investment to drive growth.

The smaller upgrade is the result of weakness in the global economy, the slowing domestic economy, the labour market softening, and lower commodity prices.

The government plans to bank about 95% of the revenue upgrade in 2023-24, as part of its effort to contain inflation. But it indicates less will be banked in later years.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said: “While our big focus in the near term remains easing inflation and helping relieve cost-of-living strains, it’s critical to also make room for urgent and unfunded priorities and invest in the future drivers of economic growth in the years ahead.

“That’s why the May budget will be carefully calibrated to the economic circumstances, striking the right balance between getting inflation under control, easing cost-of-living pressures, supporting sustainable growth and building fiscal buffers in an uncertain global environment.”

One significant cost in later years will be the government’s controversial Future Made in Australia program.

Gallagher said finding savings was harder in Labor’s third budget.

“I think we should be looking at […] not only the aggregate spending, but the quality and composition of that spending. There’s a lot of spending that we’re having to do for terminating programs or legacy issues that haven’t been funded or, you know, unavoidable spending.

“You will see some savings, you’ll see some reprioritisation with existing expenditure.”

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. Students on social work, nursing and teaching placements to get weekly $319.50 means tested Prac Payment from July next year – https://theconversation.com/students-on-social-work-nursing-and-teaching-placements-to-get-weekly-319-50-means-tested-prac-payment-from-july-next-year-229356

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Norton, Professor in the Practice of Higher Education Policy, Australian National University

Every year on June 1, student debt in Australia is indexed to inflation. In 2023, high inflation pushed the indexation rate to 7.1%, the highest since 1990.

This year, if there is no policy change, student debt balances will be increased by 4.7%.

After sustained community pressure to change the way debts are indexed, the federal government has announced plans to help students, apprentices and trainees.

How will student debts change?

This announcement is part of the 2024 federal budget on May 14. It has two components.

First, indexation for student loans will be based on whichever is lower: the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which measures inflation, or the Wage Price Index (WPI), which measures hourly wage rates in the same job.

Second, in a surprise move, the government will backdate the new system to 2023. The government estimates about A$3 billion in indexation debt will be cancelled, helping about 3 million Australians.

The WPI was lower than the CPI in 2023, so the 2023 indexation rate would be cut retrospectively from 7.1% to 3.2%. Based on Australian Taxation Office data, a person with average debt levels in 2023 would see their debt cut by about $800.

The change will apply to higher education HELP loans, vocational education VET Student Loans and Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans. The Student Start-up Loan and a predecessor income support loan are also expected to be covered.

The changes will need to go through parliament.

Is this a good idea?

While several “lower of two indicators” indexation systems have been suggested, the idea of choosing the lower of the CPI or WPI comes from the Universities Accord final report. This was the government’s wide-ranging higher education policy review released in February.

The accord report argued a WPI cap

will ensure that the indexation of HELP debts no longer outstrips the growth in wages and the servicing capacity of debtors does not go backwards overall.

But while the government’s proposal will ease the financial pain of 2023 indexation, the WPI is not the best long-term alternative to the CPI.

It still leaves uncertainty about how high future indexation could go, including for June 1 2024.

The fine print

Student loan indexation uses a strange formula that includes CPI data from the two years prior to each March quarter. The government’s 3.2% figure for 2023 WPI indexation uses the same two-year indexation calculation as is currently used for the CPI.

The March quarter WPI data needed to calculate June 1 2024 indexation is not released until May 15. Until then, we do not have an exact WPI indexation rate for 2024. But if the WPI increases at a similar rate in the March 2024 quarter as it did in the second half of 2023, the WPI rate will be around 4.3%.

As 4.3% is lower than the CPI rate of 4.7%, the WPI rate would prevail under the government’s new policy.

A 4.3% WPI indexation would be more beneficial than the current system for those with student debt. But 4.3% would still be the highest indexation level since a GST-driven 5.3% in 2001 (after last year’s 7.1% is cut to 3.2%).

When would WPI lower indexation?

On top of these complexities, the WPI has only been lower than the CPI four times since 2000.

All four of those cases reflected unusual circumstances. Early this century, the then new 10% GST caused inflation to increase. Overseas conflicts and post-lockdown imbalances in demand and supply have triggered the current inflationary spike.

The WPI is likely to be below the CPI early in an inflationary period. Workers respond to inflation with demands for higher wages, but effects are delayed. Salaries and wages are typically revisited on set schedules, such as the annual minimum wage case, yearly employer pay reviews and multi-year enterprise agreements. These wage-setting practices create a time lag between the CPI and WPI.

But during periods of prolonged inflation, compensating wage increases plus real wage growth cause the WPI to catch up with and overtake the CPI.

This happened (by the smallest of margins) in the December 2023 quarter of this financial year. Compared with a year earlier, the WPI was up 4.2% and the CPI 4.1%.

The case for a maximum rate

As the government’s indexation policy moves through parliament, amendments could give borrowers more certainty. This includes the possibility of introducing a fixed maximum indexation rate to reduce the risk of student debt blowing out.

I have previously proposed indexation should be the lower of the CPI or 4%.

Any indexation system that uses the lower of two variable indexation rates runs the risk both will be high for significant periods of time. A maximum indexation rate does not.

People considering taking out a student loan, or estimating how long repaying their current loan will take, could be reassured indexation will never be more than 4% and will usually be less.

Welcome news but the bigger problem remains

Retrospective lowering of indexation will be welcome news for the 3 million Australians with student debt.

From a government perspective, their 2023 indexation revenue will still be above the 2.5% indexation average between 2000 and 2021. So in this way, it is a good compromise between competing considerations.

But the government’s fix for 2023 leaves students vulnerable to times when the CPI and the WPI are both high.

Replacing the WPI with a fixed maximum indexation rate would mean the goverment’s student loan indexation policy solves future problems as well as past ones.

Andrew Norton 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 good news is the government plans to cancel $3 billion in student debt. The bad news is indexation will still be high – https://theconversation.com/the-good-news-is-the-government-plans-to-cancel-3-billion-in-student-debt-the-bad-news-is-indexation-will-still-be-high-229284

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

Changes in the May 14 budget will cut the student debt of more than three million people, wiping more than $3 billion from what people owe.

The government will cap the HELP indexation rate to be the lower of either the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the Wages Price Index (WPI), backdated from June 1 last year. At present the indexation is based on the CPI.

The new indexation arrangement will be backdated to all HELP, VET Student Loan, Australian Apprenticeship Support and other student support loan accounts operating on June 1 last year.

The government’s recent Universities Accord report pointed to the need for reform of the student debt arrangements, and recommended rejigging indexation, although it did not go as far as backdating.

The report said: “Australians should not be deterred from higher education because of the increased burden of student loans”.

People with these debts were hit hard by high inflation, with a jump in last year’s CPI indexation rate of 7.1%. The 2023 indexation rate based on the Wage Price Index would have been 3.2%

Someone with an average HELP debt of $26,5000 will have about $1,200 wiped from their outstanding HELP loans this year.

Some 525,302 Australians owe between $20,000 and $30,000.

The change will need legislation.

Education Minister Jason Clare said: “The Universities Accord recommended indexing HELP loans to whatever is lower out of CPI and WPI.

“We are doing this, and going further. We will backdate this reform to last year. This will wipe out what happened last year and make sure it never happens again.”

The Minister for Skills and Training Brendan O’Connor said: “This continues our work to ease cost of living pressures for more apprentices, trainees and students, and reduce and remove financial barriers to education and training.

“By backdating this reform to last year, we’re making sure that apprentices, trainees and students affected by last year’s jump in indexation get this important cost-of-living relief.”

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. Albanese government to wipe $3 billion in student debt, benefitting three million people – https://theconversation.com/albanese-government-to-wipe-3-billion-in-student-debt-benefitting-three-million-people-229285

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicola Henry, Professor & Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Social and Global Studies Centre, RMIT University

Following an emergency meeting of the National Cabinet this week, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced a raft of measures to tackle the problem of gender-based violence.

Among these is a program to help women leave their abusive partners, an “age assurance” trial to prevent children accessing pornography and other age-inappropriate material, and a “counter-influencer” program to tackle extreme misogynistic online content.

The latter is a relatively new measure when it comes to curbing Australia’s gender-based violence problem. According to Albanese, it will:

specifically include a counter-influencing campaign in online spaces where violent and misogynistic content thrives, to directly challenge the material in the spaces it’s being viewed.

Research shows technology-facilitated abuse is both prevalent and pernicious. But what do we know about the specific impacts of being exposed to misogynistic content online? And is an online solution the best way to address the problem?

Attitudes and behaviours

According to the latest Personal Safety Survey:

• 1 in 4 Australian women have experienced violence by an intimate partner or family member since the age of 15, compared with 1 in 8 men
• 1 in 5 women have experienced sexual violence since the age of 15, compared with 1 in 16 men
• 1 in 5 women have experienced stalking since the age of 15, compared with 1 in 15 men.

These statistics, alongside the tragic deaths of too many women by their intimate partners or ex-partners, demonstrate that addressing men’s violence against women (as well as other at-risk groups) must be a national priority – and everyone’s responsibility.

The causes of gender-based violence are complex and multifaceted and experts recognise there is no one cause. A key driver is problematic attitudes, beliefs and norms. According to Our Watch, these include attitudes that condone violence against women, support for rigid gender roles, tolerance of disrespect and aggression towards women, and limitations placed on women’s economic freedom and decision-making.

In addition to attitudes, risk factors for gender-based violence may include adverse childhood experiences, previous exposure to family violence, alcohol or drug abuse, mental health issues, poverty and unemployment.

Exposure to online content

There’s long been debate about the impacts of watching pornography, especially violent pornography. Recent Australian research found the average age of first exposure to porn is 13.2 years for boys and 14.1 years for girls.

In the United Kingdom, researchers found 1 in 8 titles on mainstream porn sites “describe acts that would fall under the most widely used policy definition of sexual violence”. But they also acknowledge the impacts of porn on sexist attitudes and behaviours remains unclear.

Some experts warn against blaming porn and suggest we should cast a wider net when examining problematic societal attitudes towards sex, gender and bodies. Discussions have turned to other parts of the internet, and in particular to the “manosphere”.

One recent study focused on Australian schools found a resurgence in boys’ sexist behaviours towards women teachers and girl peers. The authors argue “manfluencers”, especially Andrew Tate, are the key drivers of this.

The Centre for Countering Digital Hate identified more than 100 TikTok accounts that were frequently promoting Tate’s content in 2022. These accounts had some 5.7 million followers and 250 million views. Some of the content included statements along the lines of “women should take some degree of responsibility for rape” and “virgins are the only acceptable thing to marry”.

After this week’s meeting, Minister for Social Services Amanda Rishworth said platforms have a role to play in countering the spread of harmful content:

They have a fundamental responsibility to step up and do more. The content that digital platforms service through algorithms and systems, particularly to young Australians, has an impact in reinforcing harmful and outdated gender norms.

But one major concern is platforms themselves are recommending this content to users. Algorithmic recommendation systems, such as YouTube’s “up next” feature and TikTok’s “for you” page, are integral to increasing engagement and maximising advertising revenue. Influencers such as Tate can generate millions of dollars in revenue from platforms. This may result in commercial interests being prioritised over responsibility and user safety.

We all have a role to play

Details about the government’s proposed counter-influencer program are yet to be revealed. Albanese said the campaign

[…] is intended to counter the corrosive influence of online content targeted at young adults that condones violence against women. It will raise awareness about a proliferation of misogynistic influencers and content, and encourage conversations within families about the damaging impact of the material.

There’s no quick fix to addressing the problem of gender-based violence, but respectful relationships education should be the priority. Our focus should be on implementing best-practice measures to prevent both online and offline violence from occurring in the first place.

Research shows school-based and university-based respectful relationship training can create lasting attitude and behavioural changes. Such training includes teaching people, especially men, to deal with romantic rejection.

One example is Victoria’s Respectful Relationships education program. This is a form of primary prevention that aims to embed cultures of respect and gender equality across schools.

Social media isn’t the cause of men’s violence against women. The manosphere and its extreme misogyny “didn’t manifest spontaneously”. It’s not new but a product of our society. It just happens there’s more visibility to these voices, which are now being amplified by technology.

It’s also not helpful to discuss the growth of Tate and his ilk without also considering the loneliness crisis, which young people – and particularly young men – face disproportionately.

To achieve change, we need to counter problematic attitudes and address gender inequality in everyday life.

We need better resources for parents and caregivers, and more research on the perpetrators and supporters of violence against women. Important discussions can start once we understand why young men with problematic attitudes became that way.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit the eSafety Commissioner’s website for helpful online safety resources. If in immediate danger, call 000.

Nicola Henry receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), Google, and the Victorian Attorney General’s Office. She is also a member of the Australian eSafety Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group.

Alice Witt has received funding from Google.

– ref. Figures like Andrew Tate may help spread misogyny. But they’re amplifying – not causing – the problem – https://theconversation.com/figures-like-andrew-tate-may-help-spread-misogyny-but-theyre-amplifying-not-causing-the-problem-229128

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Hall, Lecturer, Media & Cultural Studies, Edith Cowan University

A longstanding feud between TikTok and Universal Music Group seems to have finally reached an end, with both parties signing a deal that will see Universal-backed music returned to the social media platform.

Universal first removed its artists’ work from TikTok about three months ago, restricting access to tunes from household names such as Billie Eilish, Adele, Harry Styles, Drake, Kendrick Lamar, Kanye West and Post Malone.

Taylor Swift was initially included this group, but reinstated her offerings ahead of the release of The Tortured Poets Department. Unlike most artists signed with Universal, Swift struck a unique deal that lets her control where her music is played.

While the dust may have finally settled, the Universal music drought left millions of TikTok users with a less than optimal experience for months – and may have put up an unnecessary barrier for Universal’s smaller artists.

The events have also shone a light on just how codependent the music and social media industries are, and how important compromise will be moving forward.

The beef (and resolution) explained

The previous agreement that granted TikTok users access to Universal’s catalogue lasted until January 31, and was worth A$170 million per year for Universal (about 1% of its yearly revenue).

Talks to enter a new agreement reportedly turned hostile, leading to Universal pulling the plug.

In an open letter published on January 30 “to the artist and songwriter community”, Universal said it was concerned about “appropriate compensation” for artists and songwriters, and protecting artists from the harmful effects of AI, among other things.

Universal claimed:

As our negotiations continued, TikTok attempted to bully us into accepting a deal worth less than the previous deal, far less than fair market value and not reflective of their exponential growth.

Universal knows its music is a key part of TikTok users’ experience. It likely wanted a deal that reflected its market dominance, such as one linked to instances of use and a cut of advertising revenue, rather than a lump sum payment.

TikTok offered its own framing on the matter:

Despite Universal’s false narrative and rhetoric, the fact is they have chosen to walk away from the powerful support of a platform with well over a billion users that serves as a free promotional and discovery vehicle for their talent.

In a recent statement, the companies said the new deal would deliver improved pay terms for Universal’s artists – but stopped short of publicly providing any financial terms or dollar amounts. TikTok also said it would commit to removing unauthorised music generated by artificial intelligence, a growing concern for the music industry.

Music from Universal’s artists is expected to return to the platform in one to two weeks, with muted videos regaining their audio.

Universal’s upper hand

It’s not surprising Universal came out of negotiations with a better deal than it previously had. TikTok is famed for its dance and music-related content, and likely couldn’t afford to go on without access to Universal’s catalogue.

In early 2023, TikTok ran a “trial” restricting some users’ access to major-label music in Australia. The result was a drop in both users and activity.

Past court rulings also suggested the deck would be weighted in Universal’s favour. For instance, one ruling in Germany found that, under European Union regulations, TikTok was liable for unlicensed content appearing on its platform.

A continued boycott from Universal could have proven a nightmare for TikTok, since Universal is the biggest of the big three music publishers (alongside Warner and Sony). It also owns a glut of relatively smaller or “independent” labels, including Capitol, Def Jam, EMI, Island, Polydor and Virgin.

A co-dependant relationship

At the same time, it’s naive to suggest the only benefit Universal gets from TikTok using its music is through the revenue TikTok pays. This would ignore the vast influence TikTok also has on the music industry.

One TikTok trend from this year was inspired by a scene from the Oscar-nominated film Saltburn, where the protagonist dances to Sophie Ellis-Bextor’s 2001 hit Murder on the Dancefloor. Because of TikTok, a song only ever heard at your mate’s wedding temporarily became the epicentre of youth culture.

This is just one example of how TikTok can deliver wins for both parties. That’s not even considering how many Universal artists frequently use TikTok to engage with their fans.

Universal and TikTok win, so who lost?

Even if a deal had not been reached, it would be hard to see either Universal (which made A$17.5 billion in 2022) or TikTok (which made A$14.5 billion) as “victims” or “losers”.

It’s also fair to say Universal’s roughly three-month boycott didn’t hurt any of its headline artists. It was likely the smaller artists, who see close to nothing of the money TikTok pays Universal, would have suffered the most. Beyond that, it was TikTok users who paid the price.

One Rolling Stone article noted the case of Cody Fry, whose track Things You Said was going viral on Douyin (mainland China’s wing of TikTok). But just as he was planning to capitalise on the exposure, his music was pulled.

The same events, in different context, produce different narratives. Legacy artists such as Taylor Swift are “exploited” by TikTok, while emerging artists are “promoted”.

Both corporations have their own case (and money) to make in such squabbles, while the small fry get left behind. Yet the fact that Billboard now publishes a TikTok top 50 chart stands as evidence these two industries need each other.

If they care about listeners and budding talent, they ought to both bend a little to avoid another drought.

James Hall 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. Universal’s music is returning to TikTok, ending a spat that hurt fans more than anyone – https://theconversation.com/universals-music-is-returning-to-tiktok-ending-a-spat-that-hurt-fans-more-than-anyone-223324

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Siobhan O’Dean, Postdoctoral Research Associate, The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney

After several highly publicised alleged murders of women in Australia, the Albanese government this week pledged more than A$925 million over five years to address men’s violence towards women. This includes up to $5,000 to support those escaping violent relationships.

However, to reduce and prevent gender-based and intimate partner violence we also need to address the root causes and contributors. These include alcohol and other drugs, trauma and mental health issues.

Why is this crucial?

The World Health Organization estimates 30% of women globally have experienced intimate partner violence, gender-based violence or both. In Australia, 27% of women have experienced intimate partner violence by a co-habiting partner; almost 40% of Australian children are exposed to domestic violence.

By gender-based violence we mean violence or intentionally harmful behaviour directed at someone due to their gender. But intimate partner violence specifically refers to violence and abuse occurring between current (or former) romantic partners. Domestic violence can extend beyond intimate partners, to include other family members.

These statistics highlight the urgent need to address not just the aftermath of such violence, but also its roots, including the experiences and behaviours of perpetrators.

What’s the link with mental health, trauma and drugs?

The relationships between mental illness, drug use, traumatic experiences and violence are complex.

When we look specifically at the link between mental illness and violence, most people with mental illness will not become violent. But there is evidence people with serious mental illness can be more likely to become violent.

The use of alcohol and other drugs also increases the risk of domestic violence, including intimate partner violence.

About one in three intimate partner violence incidents involve alcohol. These are more likely to result in physical injury and hospitalisation. The risk of perpetrating violence is even higher for people with mental ill health who are also using alcohol or other drugs.

It’s also important to consider traumatic experiences. Most people who experience trauma do not commit violent acts, but there are high rates of trauma among people who become violent.

For example, experiences of childhood trauma (such as witnessing physical abuse) can increase the risk of perpetrating domestic violence as an adult.

Early traumatic experiences can affect the brain and body’s stress response, leading to heightened fear and perception of threat, and difficulty regulating emotions. This can result in aggressive responses when faced with conflict or stress.

This response to stress increases the risk of alcohol and drug problems, developing PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), and increases the risk of perpetrating intimate partner violence.

How can we address these overlapping issues?

We can reduce intimate partner violence by addressing these overlapping issues and tackling the root causes and contributors.

The early intervention and treatment of mental illness, trauma (including PTSD), and alcohol and other drug use, could help reduce violence. So extra investment for these are needed. We also need more investment to prevent mental health issues, and preventing alcohol and drug use disorders from developing in the first place.

Preventing trauma from occuring and supporting those exposed is crucial to end what can often become a vicious cycle of intergenerational trauma and violence.
Safe and supportive environments and relationships can protect children against mental health problems or further violence as they grow up and engage in their own intimate relationships.

We also need to acknowledge the widespread impact of trauma and its effects on mental health, drug use and violence. This needs to be integrated into policies and practices to reduce re-traumatising individuals.

How about programs for perpetrators?

Most existing standard intervention programs for perpetrators do not consider the links between trauma, mental health and perpetrating intimate partner violence. Such programs tend to have little or mixed effects on the behaviour of perpetrators.

But we could improve these programs with a coordinated approach including treating mental illness, drug use and trauma at the same time.

Such “multicomponent” programs show promise in meaningfully reducing violent behaviour. However, we need more rigorous and large-scale evaluations of how well they work.

What needs to happen next?

Supporting victim-survivors and improving interventions for perpetrators are both needed. However, intervening once violence has occurred is arguably too late.

We need to direct our efforts towards broader, holistic approaches to prevent and reduce intimate partner violence, including addressing the underlying contributors to violence we’ve outlined.

We also need to look more widely at preventing intimate partner violence and gendered violence.

We need developmentally appropriate education and skills-based programs for adolescents to prevent the emergence of unhealthy relationship patterns before they become established.

We also need to address the social determinants of health that contribute to violence. This includes improving access to affordable housing, employment opportunities and accessible health-care support and treatment options.

All these will be critical if we are to break the cycle of intimate partner violence and improve outcomes for victim-survivors.

The National Sexual Assault, Family and Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) – is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14. In an emergency, call 000.

Steph Kershaw receives funding from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care

Lucinda Grummitt and Siobhan O’Dean 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. To tackle gendered violence, we also need to look at drugs, trauma and mental health – https://theconversation.com/to-tackle-gendered-violence-we-also-need-to-look-at-drugs-trauma-and-mental-health-229182

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard de Grijs, Professor of Astrophysics, Macquarie University

All systems are “go” for tonight’s launch of China’s next step in a carefully planned lunar exploration program. Placed on top of a powerful Long March 5 rocket, the Chang’e 6 mission is due to lift off from the Wenchang Space Launch Site on southern Hainan Island at 7:30pm AEST.

It aims to deliver several “firsts” in the increasingly crowded and competitive arena of Moon exploration.

Chang’e 6 will be only the second mission to land on the lunar far side, after Chang’e 4 successfully touched down first in 2019.

It’s the latest mission in China’s successful and long-running lunar exploration program, aimed at proving new technological advances with each mission. And this time, it’s also an inspiring feat of international collaboration.

What’s on the far side of the Moon?

The spacecraft was originally built as a backup for the previous mission – Chang’e 5 – which successfully brought back 1.73 kilograms of lunar regolith (soil) from the Moon’s near side in 2020.

However, the Chang’e 6 mission parameters are more ambitious and scientifically more highly anticipated. It is also a complicated mission. Its four separate spacecraft must work in close coordination to successfully return up to 2kg of regolith from the Moon’s far side.

From our vantage point on Earth, the Moon’s far side is never visible. The Earth-Moon system is tidally locked: even though both rotate, we always face the same half of the Moon.

When the Soviet Union’s Luna 3 probe returned the first images of the Moon’s far side in 1959, they showed a heavily cratered surface. It’s quite different from that of the familiar near side.

This pockmarked appearance, combined with samples returned by NASA’s Apollo missions, offered some support for the popular “Late Heavy Bombardment” theory. Although this theory is not universally accepted, its proponents suggest that large numbers of meteorites and asteroids may have impacted the Solar System’s rocky planets (and their moons) at an early stage of their formation.

Chang’e 6 aims to collect samples from the oldest lunar impact crater, the South Pole-Aitken basin. Many recent missions to the Moon have targeted the lunar south polar region. This was, in part, driven by the discovery of water ice in the area’s dark craters and its potential exploitation for future lunar bases.

With this imminent sample return, we are now getting tantalisingly close to learning what the lunar far side is made of and its age. It would provide more detail than ever before. This could help us really understand the early history of the Solar System and whether the Late Heavy Bombardment theory needs a rethink.

Science without borders

Any specimens retrieved will be shared with the international community for in-depth analysis, just like the Chang’e 5 samples and data from China’s other space science missions – including its recent high-resolution Moon atlas.

In the current era of increased geopolitical tensions, the Chang’e 6 mission is a rare example of constructive international collaboration. The probe carries instruments contributed by France, Italy, Pakistan and Sweden. The Swedish payload was developed with funding from the European Space Agency (ESA).

This may seem surprising given the current state of world affairs. But ESA and the Chinese Academy of Sciences share a history of joint space missions, although relations have withered somewhat in recent years.

A refreshing development

From a scientific perspective, Chang’e 6’s international engagement is a refreshing development. Scientists are driven by universal principles underpinning the scientific approach. We place great value on collaborative efforts, irrespective of one’s national origin. Science doesn’t know borders.

With space missions being just one example, Chinese scientists are rapidly gaining ground and increasingly leading global scientific achievements. Chinese prowess in science and technology has now reached levels that can no longer be ignored by international collaborators and competitors alike.

Yet real-world constraints in an increasingly geopolitically fraught environment do affect our work as scientists, influencing what can be shared between colleagues internationally, and must be factored into our practical decision making.

It’s important to strike a careful balance between protecting national interests and the free flow of ideas that may ultimately lead to scientific breakthroughs.

Not every scientific exchange reaches a level that warrants triggering national security or foreign interference alerts. To paraphrase the Australian government’s foreign relations policy, “collaborate where we can; exercise restraint where we must”. The Change’6 mission is an excellent example of this kind of productive international partnership.

Between 2010 and 2018, Richard held a senior academic appointment at Peking University. He continues to collaborate with Chinese scientists and students on astrophysics and space science-related projects.

– ref. China’s new Moon mission is about to launch, and it’s a rare example of countries working together – https://theconversation.com/chinas-new-moon-mission-is-about-to-launch-and-its-a-rare-example-of-countries-working-together-229122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, Political Historian and Administrator Officer, Australian Historical Association, Australian National University

Australia has had its fair share of public record-keeping controversies in recent years. Some have been mere farce, as in the case of two formerly government-owned filing cabinets (containing classified documents) sold at auction in Canberra in 2018.

The recent (and more grievous) failure of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to transfer 14 documents about Australia’s involvement in the 2003 Iraq War to the National Archives of Australia might also fit in this category.

Other cases have raised thorny questions about ownership and access to the contentious corners of our national past. Academic and author Jenny Hocking’s successful litigation to secure the release of former governor-general Sir John Kerr’s correspondence with Buckingham Palace has led to new interpretations of the 1975 dismissal of the Whitlam government. It also represents a significant victory against a transnational network of royal secrecy.

Big questions about record-keeping and ownership remain. How does Australia manage the records of its former political leaders? Who donates, collects, preserves and governs these repositories?

Our new research article examines Australia’s ad hoc, discretionary governance of politicians’ papers. These records matter, not just for researchers but also for the Australian public’s understanding of politics, past and future.

Who owns politicians’ papers?

In theory, records created by ministers in their executive capacity are Commonwealth property. This means they should be transferred to the National Archives of Australia when leaving office. In practice, political offices contain a bewildering mixture of Commonwealth and “personal records” (the latter encompassing nearly everything that is not part of their ministerial duties).

As they leave office, ministers and prime ministers have often gathered documents into boxes and departed with them. Some have used these records to furnish a tell-all memoir. In other cases, ministerial advisers have taken custody of their employer’s records in the interim, storing them until a more permanent home could be arranged.

Before the 1980s, the National Library of Australia and the fledgling Commonwealth Archives office competed for control of politicians’ papers. Relations between the institutions “were often frosty”. Wily politicians such as former prime minister Billy McMahon knew how to extract from that situation maximum personal control over their records.

In 1983, a new Archives Act provided for the Australian Archives (later National Archives of Australia) to ensure the “proper management” of and “public access to” Commonwealth records. The act, alongside the Freedom of Information Act, was intended to ensure greater transparency in public administration.

The rise of prime ministerial libraries changed the landscape again. Since the 1990s, these have been established in collaboration with Australian universities in honour of Alfred Deakin, John Curtin, Robert Menzies, Gough Whitlam, Malcolm Fraser, Bob Hawke and John Howard. (Not all contain original papers of the relevant prime minister.)

Some have welcomed these institutions and their valuable contributions to record-keeping in the “public interest”. Others have criticised what can seem an avowedly American influence on Australian political culture.

Consulting the political past

Ownership of political records is one thing, accessibility another entirely. While all of the institutions that house political records have vast record-keeping expertise, problems with acquisition and transparency remain.

Notwithstanding the legal requirement to deposit official material with the archives, politicians don’t always make for punctual depositors. In October 2018, for example, the archives advised a Senate committee that former prime ministers Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull had not yet deposited their official diaries with the archives.

Delaying deposit makes records more vulnerable to accidental destruction. Former prime minister Paul Keating reportedly lost “the Australian equivalent of a presidential library” when a fire damaged his storage container in Sydney in 2003.

The story is even more complex for personal papers. Discretionary instruments of deposit govern these personal records. Individuals can impose long closure periods or stipulate extra caveats on access.

In theory, these restrictions can’t apply to official records. However, our inquiries show personal and official papers are often inextricably mixed. This could lead to these extra restrictions being imposed on official records.

Those restrictions can sometimes be formidable. An FOI request revealed Fraser sent his personal papers to the Australian Archives in 1983 on the condition that he or his wife would determine access. After their death “access may be granted to serious students of history [who have] an established professional standing and reputation”.

Ironically, it was Fraser himself who removed those papers 20 years later. He sent them to an eponymous centre at the University of Melbourne for greater accessibility, winning something of a “coup” against the archives in the process.

Institutional priorities also matter. The “records of former governors-general and prime ministers” are the archives’ first acquisition priorities for personal papers. This inherently favours an “official” view of the political past and deprioritises the women, Indigenous, independent and minor-party MPs.

Prime ministerial libraries have been a blessing for many researchers. These are smaller and often more responsive institutions staffed by some of the best archivists, embedded in the intellectual life of their respective communities.

But problems can sometimes emerge when researchers imagine they are dealing with a complete body of records, not realising the archives, usually, still retain the official documents that complement the personal collections. Further, prime ministerial centres can feed a perception of politics in which individual leadership matters above all else, and larger systems and processes are of secondary importance.

Where to from here?

Clearly, records that are truly personal must be treated as such. But so much of the primary record of Australia’s political history has been managed in an ad hoc, discretionary way. What steps might be taken to protect the Australian public’s right to know its own past?

First, the Archives Act could be amended to strengthen Commonwealth ownership of materials created in and received by ministerial offices. This should include documents created by political staffers. Currently, advisers are restrained from destroying official documents. It is unclear, though, how many documents escape the official departmental document registration systems.

Second, we need greater transparency around the instruments of deposit and access restrictions that govern personal collections. It is one thing to protect a document, but another thing entirely to conceal its existence.

Finally, the Archives Act would benefit from amendments that would prevent unreasonable access restrictions on political records, even if they are contained in personal collections.

These institutions are tasked with preserving Australia’s collective memory. Excessive restrictions make life harder for researchers and archivists alike. They are also fundamentally undemocratic.

Dr Joshua Black holds a Palace Letters Fellowship with the Whitlam Institute at Western Sydney University.

Daniel Casey 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. Access to documents about Australia’s political history is fraught and inadequate. It needs to change – https://theconversation.com/access-to-documents-about-australias-political-history-is-fraught-and-inadequate-it-needs-to-change-228290

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Waller, Associate Professor, University of Technology Sydney

Domestic violence is a significant personal, community and social issue attracting much attention.

After several recent horrific cases, media discussion, calls for a royal commission to end the violence and public rallies, Australia is saying “enough is enough”.

Domestic violence can be fatal and repercussions can last for years. Yet domestic violence is one of the most under-reported crimes locally and internationally, and the least likely to end in conviction.

Violence against women takes a profound and long-term toll on women’s health, wellbeing and their economic security, and negatively impacts families, communities and society at large.

Using marketing campaigns to tackle the issue

Over the past 40 years, government bodies and community organisations have attempted to tackle this problem through social marketing campaigns worldwide.

These campaigns aim to raise awareness of the issue and ultimately prevent domestic violence.

Some have received coveted awards, such as the Salvation Army South Africa campaign “Why is it so hard to see black and blue”. But others have been criticised and even banned for their violent images, like the UK Women’s Aid campaign “The Cut” featuring actress Keira Knightley, which showed violent physical abuse.

‘Stop it at the Start’ – a campaign for respect

In April 2016, the Australian government launched a national campaign “Stop it at the Start”.

This prevention campaign was jointly funded by all state and territory governments to reduce violence against women and children.

It aimed to help break the cycle of violence by encouraging adults to reflect on their attitudes and have conversations about respect with young people, addressing how violence against women starts with disrespect.

One part of the campaign encouraged community members to “unmute yourself” – to stand up to disrespectful behaviours and support those who are experiencing abuse.

The campaign’s latest phase centres on the notion of “bring up respect”, which encourages parents and other influencers of young people to positively role model and create education around respectful behaviour.

How effective are these campaigns for preventing violence?

Since “Stop it at the Start” was a prevention campaign, we examined ABS data to understand its impact in preventing domestic violence.

Reports released in 2012, 2016 and 2021 showed the number of women who had experienced physical and/or sexual violence by a cohabiting partner since age 15 increased from 5% (467,300) to 23% (2.3 million) during this period.

We also examined the average word search of “domestic violence” using data obtained from Google Trends, which showed an overall increase in average search interest by 29.1% from 2012 to 2022.

This may indicate an increased awareness of domestic violence in the broader population. However, the increasing number of reported cases during the same time period suggests domestic violence campaigns, on their own, may be ineffective in reducing or preventing violence against women, although they may help increase awareness of the problem.

How effective are past campaigns?

This raises an important question of how campaigns send a message to prevent gendered violence.

To assess this, we searched various platforms such as YouTube and AdsoftheWorld and industry media, including 120 print and 25 video advertisements on YouTube. We were interested in understanding who the perceived target audience of the advertising was and its messaging.

In reviewing the advertisements, we found older examples showed a higher degree of violence by perpetrators, sometimes extremely graphic.

This type of “shock advertising” aims to get the viewer’s attention.

Shock advertising has been used in public health and safety campaigns for many years to scare people about HIV/AIDS prevention, for example.

However, research has found the use of violence in shock advertising overpowers key messages and audiences can become desensitised.

More recent campaigns appear to have moved away from shock messages to try to send the message to the broader community.

Our research team reviewed the advertising messages and created a perceptual mind map based on the (1) target of the message (perpetrator or community) and (2) the degree of violence (non-violent or graphic).

Positioning of domestic violence advertising images

We observed messaging change depending on the target audience – shocking for awareness/understanding of the issue to the perpetrator, and educating the issue/supporting the survivor to the community.

However, we identified a major gap in the messaging – the survivor.

Targeting victims and survivors

There appears to be movement from violent, shock advertisements to campaigns aimed at the community to support victim-survivors.

But few campaigns have identified the strength and empowerment needed for survivors to take action, although the NSW government’s recent campaign “it’s not love, it’s coercive control” is a start.

Domestic violence is a complex problem and more work is needed to prevent violence. In doing the same thing over and over in campaigns, there is a risk of “outsourcing” this important preventative work to future generations, as others have recently argued.

We need to also focus on more immediate actions to prevent violence in the short-term.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732. In immediate danger, call 000.

This work was undertaken as part of a UTS Social Impact Grant to assist a DV organisation.

Sonika Singh volunteers for Survivor Vision Australia.
This work was undertaken as part of a UTS Social Impact Grant to assist a DV organisation.

– ref. How effective are domestic violence advertising campaigns for preventing violence against women? – https://theconversation.com/how-effective-are-domestic-violence-advertising-campaigns-for-preventing-violence-against-women-228900

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lennon Y.C. Chang, Associate Professor of Cyber Risk and Policy, Deakin University

Taiwan stands out as a beacon of democracy, innovation and resilience in an increasingly autocratic region. But this is under growing threat.

In recent years, China has used a variety of “grey zone” tactics to pressure Taiwan to accept the Communist Party’s attempts at unification. This has included an onslaught of cyberattacks, which not only pose a significant threat to Taiwan’s national security but also seek to undermine its democratic processes.

These attacks range from phishing attempts to sophisticated malware intrusions. Website defacement attacks and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks are often seen during significant events, such as the August 2022 visit of Nancy Pelosi, then-speaker of the US House of Representatives. Government agencies, educational institutions, convenience stores and train stations are among the targets.

So, how is Taiwan defending itself from these attacks? And can it continue to do so as China’s tactics become more sophisticated?

Millions of cyberattacks a day

Despite Taiwan’s technological prowess and robust cybersecurity measures, it continues to be a major target for malicious actors seeking to sow chaos in the country.

According to senior government officials, Taiwan receives some five million cyberattacks a day. And Frontinet, a US-based cybersecurity firm, has found Taiwan experienced just over half of the billions of malware attacks detected in the Asia-Pacific region in the first half of 2023.

The intensity of cyberattacks reached new heights during Taiwan’s January 2024 elections – a critical juncture in its democratic journey. The Ministry of Digital Affairs reported on the widespread use of social engineering tactics to compel people to click on links or download files, which then allowed perpetrators to steal sensitive information.

One particularly alarming incident involved a “threat actor” named Earth Lusca, which targets organisations of interest to the Chinese government.

From December to January, this actor emailed a malicious zip file entitled “China’s grey-zone warfare against Taiwan” to selected targets, including government and educational institutions and news media in Taiwan. The file was designed to install malicious software to infiltrate computer systems. It also included documents written by experts in Taiwan–China relations, believed to have been stolen from the authors or agencies that own them.

The timing of these attacks, peaking just 24 hours before the elections, underscored their strategic intent to undermine Taiwan’s electoral integrity.

Disinformation and deepfakes

These efforts to destabilise Taiwan are not confined to conventional hacking techniques. Disinformation campaigns are also causing political, economic and social harm to the country.

In the lead-up to the elections, for instance, a deluge of false narratives and fabricated content circulated on social media. These targeted the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which advocates for Taiwanese sovereignty.

Among the most egregious examples was the dissemination of a 300-page e-book entitled “The Secret History of Tsai Ing-wen” (蔡英文秘史), laden with baseless allegations about the Taiwanese president aimed at eroding the public’s trust in her and her party. It claimed, for example, that Tsai’s mother was a prostitute. It also portrayed Tsai as a vile, morally corrupt dictator who is sexually promiscuous and hungry for power. Taiwanese security officials said the book bore the hallmark of the Chinese Ministry of State Security.

Using AI tools such as Capcut, developed by the Chinese technology giant ByteDance, the book’s developers also produced and disseminated fake news videos for social media. Featuring AI-generated voices and fake news anchors, these videos were produced with alarming efficiency and promptly replaced if they were taken down by platforms.

Furthermore, rumours circulated on social media about DPP presidential candidate Lai Ching-te having illegitimate sons, and other candidates having extramarital affairs. The videos used deepfake technologies to make the claims appear more real to deceive the public.

Although these campaigns were not entirely successful – Lai won the presidency – they are still a cause for concern.

Orchestrated disinformation campaigns are becoming more sophisticated and widespread, especially with the support of generative AI and deepfake software. And their potential to influence public opinion or fuel political polarisation could gradually weaken Taiwan’s democracy and create instability.

And these tactics can also be replicated elsewhere. Other countries worried about the impact of cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns on their elections and democratic institutions should be paying attention.

How Taiwan is responding

In response to these multifaceted threats, Tsai, the outgoing president, has stressed that cybersecurity is synonymous with national security.

However, the country’s existing cybersecurity regulations primarily target cybercrime. Because of the blurry line between cybercrime and cyber warfare, Taiwan needs to adopt a more holistic approach. This should encompass preventive measures, rapid response strategies and enhanced public-private and international collaborations.

For example, Taiwan is now developing its own satellite internet service – an alternative to Elon Musk’s Starlink – to reduce the potential harm from severed underwater internet cables.

Working with the American Institute In Taiwan, the government is also promoting a US Department of Defence cybersecurity framework for local businesses to make them more resilient to attacks. And in January, Taiwan’s Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau established a new research centre aimed at combating the threat of online disinformation.

Non-governmental organisations such as the Doublethink Lab, Cofacts and the Taiwan Factcheck Centre are also playing a significant role through real-time monitoring of foreign influence and disinformation campaigns and fact-checking services.

However, with advances in technology, cyberattacks and disinformation will evolve. This is why other components are essential to build a comprehensive cyberdefence strategy. This includes increased investment in cybersecurity infrastructure, fostering digital literacy and promoting responsible online behaviour.

Only through collective vigilance and concerted efforts can Taiwan safeguard its democratic values in the face of relentless cyber threats.

Lennon Y.C. Chang is Associate Professor of Cyber Risk and Policy in the Centre for Cyber Resilience and Trust at Deakin University. He is also Chairperson of Doublethink Lab (Taiwan) and President of the Australasian Taiwan Studies Association (Australia).

– ref. Taiwan is experiencing millions of cyberattacks every day. The world should be paying attention – https://theconversation.com/taiwan-is-experiencing-millions-of-cyberattacks-every-day-the-world-should-be-paying-attention-225677

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Oliver Bown, Associate Professor, UNSW Sydney

In March, we saw the launch of a “ChatGPT for music” called Suno, which uses generative AI to produce realistic songs on demand from short text prompts. A few weeks later, a similar competitor – Udio – arrived on the scene.

I’ve been working with various creative computational tools for the past 15 years, both as a researcher and a producer, and the recent pace of change has floored me. As I’ve argued elsewhere, the view that AI systems will never make “real” music like humans do should be understood more as a claim about social context than technical capability.

The argument “sure, it can make expressive, complex-structured, natural-sounding, virtuosic, original music which can stir human emotions, but AI can’t make proper music” can easily begin to sound like something from a Monty Python sketch.

After playing with Suno and Udio, I’ve been thinking about what it is exactly they change – and what they might mean not only for the way professionals and amateur artists create music, but the way all of us consume it.

Expressing emotion without feeling it

Generating audio from text prompts in itself is nothing new. However, Suno and Udio have made an obvious development: from a simple text prompt, they generate song lyrics (using a ChatGPT-like text generator), feed them into a generative voice model, and integrate the “vocals” with generated music to produce a coherent song segment.

This integration is a small but remarkable feat. The systems are very good at making up coherent songs that sound expressively “sung” (there I go anthropomorphising).

The effect can be uncanny. I know it’s AI, but the voice can still cut through with emotional impact. When the music performs a perfectly executed end-of-bar pirouette into a new section, my brain gets some of those little sparks of pattern-processing joy that I might get listening to a great band.

To me this highlights something sometimes missed about musical expression: AI doesn’t need to experience emotions and life events to successfully express them in music that resonates with people.

Music as an everyday language

Like other generative AI products, Suno and Udio were trained on vast amounts of existing work by real humans – and there is much debate about those humans’ intellectual property rights.

Nevertheless, these tools may mark the dawn of mainstream AI music culture. They offer new forms of musical engagement that people will just want to use, to explore, to play with and actually listen to for their own enjoyment.

AI capable of “end to end” music creation is arguably not technology for makers of music, but for consumers of music. For now it remains unclear whether users of Udio and Suno are creators or consumers – or whether the distinction is even useful.

A long-observed phenomenon in creative technologies is that as something becomes easier and cheaper to produce, it is used for more casual expression. As a result, the medium goes from an exclusive high art form to more of an everyday language – think what smartphones have done to photography.

So imagine you could send your father a professionally produced song all about him for his birthday, with minimal cost and effort, in a style of his preference – a modern-day birthday card. Researchers have long considered this eventuality, and now we can do it. Happy birthday, dad!

Can you create without control?

Whatever these systems have achieved and may achieve in the near future, they face a glaring limitation: the lack of control.

Text prompts are often not much good as precise instructions, especially in music. So these tools are fit for blind search – a kind of wandering through the space of possibilities – but not for accurate control. (That’s not to diminish their value. Blind search can be a powerful creative force.)

Viewing these tools as a practising music producer, things look very different. Although Udio’s about page says “anyone with a tune, some lyrics, or a funny idea can now express themselves in music”, I don’t feel I have enough control to express myself with these tools.

I can see them being useful to seed raw materials for manipulation, much like samples and field recordings. But when I’m seeking to express myself, I need control.

Using Suno, I had some fun finding the most gnarly dark techno grooves I could get out of it. The result was something I would absolutely use in a track.

But I found I could also just gladly listen. I felt no compulsion to add anything or manipulate the result to add my mark.

And many jurisdictions have declared that you won’t be awarded copyright for something just because you prompted it into existence with AI.

For a start, the output depends just as much on everything that went into the AI – including the creative work of millions of other artists. Arguably, you didn’t do the work of creation. You simply requested it.

New musical experiences in the no-man’s land between production and consumption

So Udio’s declaration that anyone can express themselves in music is an interesting provocation. The people who use tools like Suno and Udio may be considered more consumers of music AI experiences than creators of music AI works, or as with many technological impacts, we may need to come up with new concepts for what they’re doing.

A shift to generative music may draw attention away from current forms of musical culture, just as the era of recorded music saw the diminishing (but not death) of orchestral music, which was once the only way to hear complex, timbrally rich and loud music. If engagement in these new types of music culture and exchange explodes, we may see reduced engagement in the traditional music consumption of artists, bands, radio and playlists.

While it is too early to tell what the impact will be, we should be attentive. The effort to defend existing creators’ intellectual property protections, a significant moral rights issue, is part of this equation.

But even if it succeeds I believe it won’t fundamentally address this potentially explosive shift in culture, and claims that such music might be inferior also have had little effect in halting cultural change historically, as with techno or even jazz, long ago. Government AI policies may need to look beyond these issues to understand how music works socially and to ensure that our musical cultures are vibrant, sustainable, enriching and meaningful for both individuals and communities.

Oliver Bown receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the European Research Council to support his research into creative AI. He has ongoing collaborations with music AI companies including Uncanny Valley (Sydney) and DAACI (London).

– ref. AI can now generate entire songs on demand. What does this mean for music as we know it? – https://theconversation.com/ai-can-now-generate-entire-songs-on-demand-what-does-this-mean-for-music-as-we-know-it-228937

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Professor of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Monash University, Monash University

In the wake of numerous killings of women allegedly by men’s violence in 2024, thousands of Australians have joined rallies across the country to demand action and better responses to all forms of domestic, family and sexual violence.

Some have called for a perpetrator register or a domestic violence disclosure scheme – a resource people can check to find out if a particular person has a documented history of domestic violence. This history could include things like prior convictions, intervention order histories and other non-domestic violence related offending such as property offences.

In Australia, only South Australia has a domestic violence disclosure scheme. New South Wales piloted a scheme in 2016 but it was discontinued in 2018. No other state or territory has introduced a scheme, but several have considered the idea.

So, how well do these schemes work to improve safety for women? To find out, we interviewed scheme users, specialist service providers, legal practitioners, academics and policy makers in Australia and New Zealand.

Our new research, funded by the Australian Research Council and published today by Monash University and the University of Liverpool, found they may not improve safety for victim-survivors.

What is a domestic violence disclosure scheme

In Australia, domestic violence disclosure schemes (such as the one operating now in South Australia and the one piloted then discontinued in NSW) have broadly had three objectives:

1. to strengthen the ability of the police and specialist service providers to provide appropriate protection and support to victims at risk of domestic violence

2. to reduce incidents of domestic violence through prevention of future harm

3. to empower people to make informed choices about their safety in their relationships.

Each of the schemes are administered differently. In some cases, applicants can lodge an application online. In others, an applicant must lodge their application directly with the police.

Confirming existing suspicions

We interviewed 11 people who had used a domestic violence disclosure scheme. With the exception of two, each had already separated from the person they were seeking information about.

Each person had experienced some form of abuse before separating and before accessing the scheme. Several also held suspicions about their partner’s abusive behaviours in prior relationships.

All applicants interviewed, except one, got information about their partner’s history from the domestic violence disclosure scheme. In one case, the applicant’s request was denied. She was not told why.

Many applicants said the information they received didn’t come as a surprise, but rather confirmed suspicions they already held about their partner’s history of abuse.

In other words, most applicants interviewed in this project used the scheme after they had already left the relationship and had experienced abuse.

This signals the scheme is working different to intended. Not as a scheme to prevent violence from occurring in the first place but rather as a scheme that confirms decisions made to separate from an abuser after violence has already occurred.

Timely information is key

For information sharing to be effective it must be timely. But our interviewees reported wildly different experiences in this regard; the time between making the application and receiving the disclosure ranged between one week and three months.

An evaluation of the since-disbanded NSW pilot scheme reported similar “clunky” and time-consuming data sharing issues.

Do we have the reliable data needed to support this scheme?

Domestic violence disclosure schemes rely on the collection and sharing of reliable data about perpetrators’ histories.

But a vast amount of domestic, family and sexual violence in Australia goes under-reported. Histories of violence documented by police may fail to capture a full picture of the risk an individual poses to their intimate partner.

If a woman contacts a domestic disclosure scheme about her partner or ex and learns they have no record of them having a violent past, this could create a false sense of security for her, potentially raising the risk level.

Effective information sharing means national information sharing. But under the NSW pilot scheme, for example, offences occurring in other states and territories were not shared with the person contacting the domestic violence disclosure scheme. A state-based scheme risks lulling applicants into a false sense of security when their partner’s history of violence in another state is not visible in the state they currently reside in.

Enhancing access to supports

Advocates of domestic violence disclosure schemes often position it as an additional pathway to services and safety planning for victim-survivors. It is framed as an early intervention scheme which connects victim-survivors with support services, including safety planning, risk assessment and management, and counselling.

Numerous applicants in our study did not receive follow-up support of this kind. Sharing information with no follow up supports and safety planning may put the applicant at greater risk of harm.

Failing to provide follow-up support represents a missed opportunity to enhance the safety of victim-survivors and offer crucial supports to an individual who has sought help.

We need to fund what actually works

Australian states and territories – in partnership with the federal government – are moving ahead with the delivery of the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032. There is a critical need to scrutinise not only what works, but what doesn’t work well.

Domestic violence disclosure schemes are expensive, thanks to the cost of the administrative workload, data sharing, training and provision of follow-up support services.

Our research suggests domestic violence disclosure schemes may not improve safety for victim-survivors of intimate partner violence. Given the scale of the crisis we face, our research suggests the resources required to run them may be better spent elsewhere.

This research was funded by the Australian Research Council Discovery Project scheme. Kate has also received funding for family violence related research from the Australian Institute of Criminology, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Victorian government and the Department of Social Services. This piece is written by Kate Fitz-Gibbon in her role at Monash University and is wholly independent of Kate Fitz-Gibbon’s role as Chair of Respect Victoria.

Ellen Reeves receives funding from receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery project scheme in support of this research.

Sandra Walklate receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery project scheme in support of this research.

– ref. Domestic violence disclosure schemes may not improve safety for victim-survivors of intimate partner violence – https://theconversation.com/domestic-violence-disclosure-schemes-may-not-improve-safety-for-victim-survivors-of-intimate-partner-violence-228994

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Henry Cutler, Professor and Director, Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie University

Waiting times for public hospital elective surgery have been in the news ahead of this year’s federal budget. That’s the type of non-emergency surgery that covers everything from removing cysts to hip replacements.

The Australian Medical Association (AMA), a powerful doctors’ lobby group, has called on the federal government to allocate more than A$2 billion over two years to reduce elective surgery waiting times.

While the Albanese government pledged this week to spend more on public hospitals, a substantial reduction in elective surgery waiting times won’t happen anytime soon.

Why waiting lists matter

Australians are waiting longer for elective surgery in public hospitals than ever before. Nearly one in ten wait for more than a year.

An ageing population and more chronic disease are among factors putting more stress on the health-care system generally. But public hospitals have not kept pace with our increasing health-care needs.

Long waiting times may not concern many Australians with private health insurance; waiting times are much shorter when getting care in a private hospital. For instance, you might wait over a year for cataract surgery in a public hospital. But you’re likely to wait less than a month for it in a private hospital.

For the more than half of Australians without private hospital cover, waiting times for elective surgery in public hospitals matter.

Longer waits mean more suffering for patients and potentially worse surgical outcomes. A UK study found longer waits were associated with worse health outcomes after surgery for hip and knee replacements, but not for varicose vein surgery and hernia surgery.

More worrisome, longer waits reflect a public hospital system under strain, a potential forerunner for worse health-care quality.

What’s caused the most recent backlog?

COVID is mostly responsible for waiting time increases since 2020. Lockdowns and the suspension of elective surgery created a backlog that public hospitals have struggled to clear. Once restrictions eased, hospitals were not geared for a spike in demand.

It would be wrong to blame COVID for all our waiting time woes. They were unacceptably long before COVID, and had increased in nearly all states and territories five years before the pandemic. Blaming an ageing population and chronic disease would also be wrong. Both are predictable and should not have caught governments off guard.

Public hospital waiting times are long because governments and health-care managers have struggled to reorganise their resources. This is likely due to workforce gaps for nurses, specialists and surgeons, but also due to complexity. Reforming health care is hard, and improvements to care quality have frozen in time.

The best way to reduce waiting times

A detailed international review paints a bleak picture for ready-made solutions. Changing the way patients are managed on a waiting list showed mixed success. No interventions to reduce the demand for elective surgery or increase supply were found.

In Australia, elective surgery waiting lists are managed by public hospitals using guidelines and three urgency categories (urgent, semi-urgent and non-urgent) defined by the federal government.

Making the care pathway more efficient by redesigning the way patients are allocated to urgency categories and stopping low-value care may reduce waiting times. Allocating waiting patients to public hospitals with shorter waits, rather that to their local hospital, could also help.

One standout approach that may provide lessons for Australia comes from England nearly two decades ago. Maximum waiting times for elective surgery dropped from 18 months to 18 weeks between 2004 and 2008.

Success came from first creating a mandated national target, backed by the prime minister who made shorter waiting times a personal priority.

The UK government invested more in infrastructure, expanded the health-care workforce, changed clinical practice by shifting some surgeries from inpatient to outpatient care, and monitored waiting times closely. Publicly reporting hospital performance and allowing patients to choose their public hospital for elective surgery helped match demand with supply.

Importantly, public hospital managers were held accountable for achieving their waiting time targets. Public hospitals received more autonomy if targets were achieved, and chief executives faced being fired if targets were missed.

Unfortunately, waiting times for elective surgery in England have since ballooned. The 18 week standard was last achieved in 2015. This reflects historically low growth in health-care funding after the global financial crisis, a stubborn COVID backlog and, more recently, strikes by consultants and junior doctors.

Are we going to cut waiting times anytime soon?

Substantially reducing waiting times in Australia anytime soon is highly unlikely. Reorganising health-care resources, building infrastructure (such as new operating theatres), developing new care processes and filling workforce gaps will take time.

State, territory and federal governments must first make reducing waiting times a national priority within the next National Health Reform Agreement (an agreement between the Australian government and all state and territory governments on health-care roles and responsibilities).

Meanwhile, activities to reduce waiting times should begin. The midterm review of the National Health Reform Agreement recommended upfront funding to reduce elective surgery backlogs after COVID.

More funding to further reduce waiting times will be required. Just throwing money at state and territory governments would be reckless. This is a structural problem, not something one budget can fix.

Henry Cutler 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. Clearing the elective surgery backlog will take more than one budget. It’ll need major reform – https://theconversation.com/clearing-the-elective-surgery-backlog-will-take-more-than-one-budget-itll-need-major-reform-228611

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

One of the earliest descriptions of someone with cancer comes from the fourth century BC. Satyrus, tyrant of the city of Heracleia on the Black Sea, developed a cancer between his groin and scrotum. As the cancer spread, Satyrus had ever greater pains. He was unable to sleep and had convulsions.

Advanced cancers in that part of the body were regarded as inoperable, and there were no drugs strong enough to alleviate the agony. So doctors could do nothing. Eventually, the cancer took Satyrus’ life at the age of 65.

Cancer was already well known in this period. A text written in the late fifth or early fourth century BC, called Diseases of Women, described how breast cancer develops:

hard growths form […] out of them hidden cancers develop […] pains shoot up from the patients’ breasts to their throats, and around their shoulder blades […] such patients become thin through their whole body […] breathing decreases, the sense of smell is lost […]

Other medical works of this period describe different sorts of cancers. A woman from the Greek city of Abdera died from a cancer of the chest; a man with throat cancer survived after his doctor burned away the tumour.

Where does the word ‘cancer’ come from?

The word cancer comes from the same era. In the late fifth and early fourth century BC, doctors were using the word karkinos – the ancient Greek word for crab – to describe malignant tumours. Later, when Latin-speaking doctors described the same disease, they used the Latin word for crab: cancer. So, the name stuck.

Even in ancient times, people wondered why doctors named the disease after an animal. One explanation was the crab is an aggressive animal, just as cancer can be an aggressive disease; another explanation was the crab can grip one part of a person’s body with its claws and be difficult to remove, just as cancer can be difficult to remove once it has developed. Others thought it was because of the appearance of the tumour.

The physician Galen (129-216 AD) described breast cancer in his work A Method of Medicine to Glaucon, and compared the form of the tumour to the form of a crab:

We have often seen in the breasts a tumour exactly like a crab. Just as that animal has feet on either side of its body, so too in this disease the veins of the unnatural swelling are stretched out on either side, creating a form similar to a crab.

Not everyone agreed what caused cancer

In the Greco-Roman period, there were different opinions about the cause of cancer.

According to a widespread ancient medical theory, the body has four humours: blood, yellow bile, phlegm and black bile. These four humours need to be kept in a state of balance, otherwise a person becomes sick. If a person suffered from an excess of black bile, it was thought this would eventually lead to cancer.

The physician Erasistratus, who lived from around 315 to 240 BC, disagreed. However, so far as we know, he did not offer an alternative explanation.

How was cancer treated?

Cancer was treated in a range of different ways. It was thought that cancers in their early stages could be cured using medications.

These included drugs derived from plants (such as cucumber, narcissus bulb, castor bean, bitter vetch, cabbage); animals (such as the ash of a crab); and metals (such as arsenic).

Galen claimed that by using this sort of medication, and repeatedly purging his patients with emetics or enemas, he was sometimes successful at making emerging cancers disappear. He said the same treatment sometimes prevented more advanced cancers from continuing to grow. However, he also said surgery is necessary if these medications do not work.

Surgery was usually avoided as patients tended to die from blood loss. The most successful operations were on cancers of the tip of the breast. Leonidas, a physician who lived in the second and third century AD, described his method, which involved cauterising (burning):

I usually operate in cases where the tumours do not extend into the chest […] When the patient has been placed on her back, I incise the healthy area of the breast above the tumour and then cauterize the incision until scabs form and the bleeding is stanched. Then I incise again, marking out the area as I cut deeply into the breast, and again I cauterize. I do this [incising and cauterizing] quite often […] This way the bleeding is not dangerous. After the excision is complete I again cauterize the entire area until it is dessicated.

Cancer was generally regarded as an incurable disease, and so it was feared. Some people with cancer, such as the poet Silius Italicus (26-102 AD), died by suicide to end the torment.

Patients would also pray to the gods for hope of a cure. An example of this is Innocentia, an aristocratic lady who lived in Carthage (in modern-day Tunisia) in the fifth century AD. She told her doctor divine intervention had cured her breast cancer, though her doctor did not believe her.

From the past into the future

We began with Satyrus, a tyrant in the fourth century BC. In the 2,400 years or so since then, much has changed in our knowledge of what causes cancer, how to prevent it and how to treat it. We also know there are more than 200 different types of cancer. Some people’s cancers are so successfully managed, they go on to live long lives.

But there is still no general “cure for cancer”, a disease that about one in five people develop in their lifetime. In 2022 alone, there were about 20 million new cancer cases and 9.7 million cancer deaths globally. We clearly have a long way to go.

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

– ref. Why is cancer called cancer? We need to go back to Greco-Roman times for the answer – https://theconversation.com/why-is-cancer-called-cancer-we-need-to-go-back-to-greco-roman-times-for-the-answer-228288

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Rose, Professor of Sustainable Future Transport, University of Sydney

Electric vehicles are often seen as the panacea to cutting emissions – and air pollution – from transport.

Is this view correct? Yes – but only once uptake accelerates. Despite the recent boom in EV purchases, they’re still a tiny minority of the cars on the road.

We would get more immediate benefit by focusing on electrifying buses, which are a surprisingly large source of air pollution, and finding ways to cut rapidly growing emissions from diesel trucks.

While the electricity sector still produces the largest share of emissions in Australia (32.3%), emissions are falling. But emissions from transport (21.1%) are already the third-largest contributor – and are rising faster and faster.

Critics say EVs just shift the emissions and pollution from tailpipe to power plant smokestack. This is only partly true. A grid powered by brown coal could indeed mean EVs are dirtier than we think. But as more and more clean energy pours into the grid (or behind the grid, in the form of solar on our rooftops), this becomes less and less of a concern. Charging your EV from rooftop solar is emissions-free, and charging from a high-renewable grid means very low emissions. But even when powered by a coal grid, EVs are still much cleaner than petrol or diesel cars.

Can EVs really improve air quality?

Combustion engines expel smog-causing chemicals that are dangerous to our health, such as carbon monoxide, soot and nitrogen oxides.

Countries such as Norway and China have embraced EVs faster than others. As Chinese researchers have found, air quality in polluted cities begins to improve as EVs arrive in numbers. American researchers have found even small increases in the proportion of EVs improves air quality and reduces the number of people attending hospital with asthma attacks.

What most people think of as EVs are battery electric vehicles made by companies such as Tesla or BYD. While hybrid cars have small batteries, they still have combustion engines. By contrast, battery-electric cars do away with it entirely in favour of much larger lithium-ion battery packs.

If you look at the entire lifecycle of a vehicle, emissions associated with an average EV – including production, shipping, maintenance, recycling, and of course use – are estimated to be just 12% those of a traditional combustion engine vehicle.

Cutting emissions and cleaning air means actually using EVs

The main challenge in cutting transport emissions is no longer technological – it’s uptake.

Last year, more than 8% of new vehicles sold in Australia were EVs. That’s a big jump up from the previous year’s figure of 3.6%.

But the real figure we should focus on is smaller – 1.2%. That’s the proportion of EVs across Australia’s entire passenger vehicle fleet. That is, of the 15.3 million passenger cars, utes and vans on our roads, just 181,000 are EVs as of the beginning of 2023.

So yes, uptake is accelerating. But based on current market trends, it will be at least 15 years before EVs outnumber internal combustion vehicles in Australia, and at least a decade after before these polluting vehicles disappear from our roads. (It’s likely they won’t disappear entirely, due to hobbyists and collectors.)

This is why government initiatives such as the New Vehicle Energy Standards are important – they speed up this transition. Even with this, it will be decades before we actually see falls in transport emissions.

What if the grid is dirty?

Critics of EVs claim these vehicles are a form of greenwashing. If the power grid runs on dirty coal, the vehicles run on dirty coal.

Is this correct? Yes and no. First, battery electric vehicles have the benefit of zero tailpipe emissions, meaning city air quality will slowly improve.

But do they just push emissions out of the cities and into the hinterland, where the power plants are?

The answer is, it depends. Take the popular Tesla Model 3 as an example. These battery electric sedans are manufactured in both China and the United States. The Teslas we buy here in Australia are typically made in China.

While China is building out its renewable sector at tremendous speed, for now it is is still heavily reliant on black coal. The US, meanwhile, relies much more on gas, which produces fewer emissions when burned. That means a Tesla made in China is estimated to create 154% more emissions than the same vehicle made in the US.

As such, an Australian Tesla driver is (inadvertently) more polluting than their US counterpart – but still much less so than a driver of an equivalent petrol vehicle.

Where the EV is driven also matters. For example, a Tesla Model 3 driven in New South Wales and charged at public chargers will produce nearly 15,500kg of carbon dioxide equivalent over a 16-year timeframe. That’s because the state still has several coal-fired power stations, though this is changing. By contrast, drive and charge it in hydroelectricity-powered Tasmania and you’ll generate less than 500kg.

Read more:
How climate-friendly is an electric car? It all comes down to where you live

Transport emissions are more than just our cars

When we look at how to clean up transport, we have to look at trucks and buses.

Surprisingly, total petrol use has been falling in Australia for almost 20 years. The average car is driven 2,000km less per year than it was ten years ago – a trend that was happening even before COVID.

But demand for diesel has soared, almost doubling over the same period. That’s due to the growth in articulated trucks. While diesel engines produce fewer emissions than petrol, the boom in trucking means emissions keep climbing.

Electric trucks are beginning to appear. These will likely substitute for smaller trucks operating within a city at first, as the weight of batteries makes long-distance trucks less viable.

Electric buses are popping up on the streets of cities such as Melbourne and Perth. But it’s a similar story to cars – while the bus industry is enthusiastic, only around 0.2% of Australia’s buses are electric.

Put this all together, and you have a simple conclusion. Electric cars, trucks and buses can indeed cut transport emissions and clean up air in Australia. But slow adoption rates mean it will be decades before we really see the impact – and we’ll need a much greener grid to charge cleanly.

Read more:
Why electric trucks are our best bet to cut road transport emissions

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. Electric vehicles will start to cut emissions and improve air quality in our cities – but only once they’re common – https://theconversation.com/electric-vehicles-will-start-to-cut-emissions-and-improve-air-quality-in-our-cities-but-only-once-theyre-common-227364

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giselle Natassia Woodley, Researcher and Phd Candidate, Edith Cowan University

There is widespread agreement Australia needs to do better when it comes to gender-based violence. Anger and frustration at the numbers of women being killed saw national rallies over the weekend and a special National Cabinet meeting on Wednesday.

This is a complex issue that still needs input from police, experts, parliaments and broader society. As part of this, it also involves our school system.

In recent years there has been a push to teach consent as part of sexuality and relationships education from the first year of school to Year 10.

This is a welcome start. But there remain large gaps in the curriculum and schools’ approaches to these issues. Here are four things schools, teachers and education authorities should implement now to make our communities safer.

1. Make ‘pornography literacy’ a mandatory part of the curriculum

We know some young people are first seeing porn online before they are ten and the eSafety Commissioner has heard anecdotal reports it is happening as young as six or seven.

Research also shows a lot of freely available pornography has high levels of aggression and dominance towards women and rarely displays safe sexual practices or consent negotiations. This inevitably shapes young people’s understanding and expectations of sex.

While exposure to porn will not necessarily have only negative impacts, and pornography is not to solely blame, studies indicate it can contribute to sexual violence.

On Wednesday, as part of a range of measures to address gender-based violence, the federal government announced A$6.5 million for an “age assurance technologies” pilot. This is technology to try and prevent young people from being able to access pornography online.

But we cannot rely on measures like this alone. Last August, the federal Infrastructure Department described current age assurance technologies as “immature” and carrying privacy and security risks. This echoes similar concerns from researchers.

As a 2020 UK study also showed, prohibiting young people from watching pornography is unrealistic and impractical. Young people also tend to find workarounds for such measures.

A more effective approach is teaching young people “porn literacy”. This means they learn to critically analyse and deconstruct messages commonly found in pornography. In doing so, they can counter the potentially harmful messages or images they might see.

But porn literacy is not currently part of the mandatory curriculum. It is only mentioned as a suggested option as part of the health and physical education learning area in Year 9 and Year 10.

Mandatory age-appropriate discussions about porn should be starting in the primary years, to match when young people may first encounter this material, and continue to develop into the high school years.

2. Keep teaching about sex and relationships in Year 11 and 12

At the moment, sexuality education in the national curriculum stops in Year 10, with students selecting specific subjects in the final two years of schooling.

This is a problem because students are increasingly likely to be dating or sexually active in their senior years. On average, Australians become sexually active at 15 (which is in Year 9 and 10).

While Year 11 and 12 students are busy with their academic studies, they can still have regular relationship and sexuality lessons. This could include sessions led by experts or teachers, or smaller group discussions with peers, which can involve anonymous question boxes.

3. Teach all young people to be ‘upstanders’

Research shows education about gender-based violence works better when it encourages boys and men to be part of the solution, rather than portraying them as “wrongdoers”.

This means education needs to focus on showing young people how to be “upstanders” when they witness harmful behaviours.

Schools and teachers can do this by offering information that helps them identify what behaviours they need to stand up to and how to stand up to them effectively.

Schools can also teach their students how to manage their emotions and communicate to resolve conflicts without resorting to violence or aggression.

All genders can experience sexual violence, although, boys and men often encounter less support and face greater stigma when disclosing their experiences. It is important for school environments to acknowledge all young people so they feel safe to get support if they need it.

4. Train teachers to teach sensitive content

Delivering such sensitive content can be difficult and therefore, requires specific training.

But at the moment, there is not enough training in sexuality education for teachers before they start teaching and once they are in classrooms. Teachers from other areas – such as maths or history – often find themselves delivering sex and relationships content.

This leaves teachers underprepared and undersupported to deliver this content.

So we need to make sure specific units on sexuality and relationships are part of all teaching degrees and there is professional development for existing teachers. This training should be mandated and funded by governments.

Giselle Natassia Woodley is a PhD scholarship recipient as part of the Australian Research Council (ARC) Discovery Project Adolescents’ perceptions of harm from accessing online sexual content (DP 190102435). Giselle is also part of a not-for-profit Relationships and Sexuality education advocacy group, Bloom-Ed whose views are not expressed here.

Sarah Vrankovich receives funding via a PhD RTP Stipend scholarship. Sarah is also part of a not-for-profit Relationships and Sexuality Education advocacy group, Bloom-Ed and is a board director of The STOP Campaign. These groups’ views are not expressed here.

Sharyn Burns is Professor of Health Promotion at Curtin University. Her research focuses on sexual and mental health promotion with an emphasis on school-based programs and families. Sharyn Burns currently receives funding from WA Department of Health to implement the Relationships and Sexuality Education project to provide training to in-service and preservice teachers. Sharyn has been involved as an external evaluator for the evaluation of the pilot of the Respectful Relationships Teacher Support Project.

– ref. 4 things our schools should do now to help prevent gender-based violence – https://theconversation.com/4-things-our-schools-should-do-now-to-help-prevent-gender-based-violence-228993

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Graham, Lecturer in Economics, University of Sydney

As home ownership moves further out of reach for many Australians, “rentvesting” is being touted as a lifesaver.

Rentvesting is the practice of renting one property to live in yourself, while simultaneously purchasing an investment property somewhere cheaper and leasing it out.

Ideally, “rentvestors” get to enjoy the capital gains on an investment property while living where they actually want to live, allowing them to cash in and upsize to their dream home later.

It might seem like a savvy way to game the property market. But what are the risks of such an investment strategy? And how might broad adoption of this behaviour affect housing affordability in Australia?

A rising tide lifts all boats differently

The aim of the rentvesting game is to buy cheap property now, ride the expected capital gains, and move into a more desirable home down the track. The hope is that by climbing the first rung of the property ladder early, the whole thing won’t be pulled up out of reach.

The first problem with this strategy, however, is that capital gains on housing are not always and everywhere equal.

Generally, the cheapest properties available to rentvestors will be houses in the regions or apartments in the city. But both regional housing and apartment properties tend to appreciate more slowly than the inner-city houses rentvestors might hope to live in one day. They might get a foot on the property ladder, but the rungs themselves are slowly drifting apart.

Would-be rentvestors should also be aware that investments by “out-of-town” buyers tend to generate much lower returns – both capital gains and rental yields – than investments by locals. Out-of-towners don’t know the local market trends, don’t know which neighbourhoods to avoid, and aren’t able to monitor their investments as effectively from afar.

Avoiding the regions by investing in city apartments presents its own difficulties. Large, unexpected maintenance bills and poor strata management are common complaints.

Different costs lead to different returns

Perhaps the potential rentvestor should invest in something more straightforward instead, like stocks. After all, the return on equities in Australia has outperformed housing in recent decades.

However, it is much easier to borrow to invest in property than it is to borrow to invest in the stock market. And leverage is the investor’s secret weapon. For example, if house prices were to appreciate at 10% per year, then using a mortgage and a A$100,000 deposit on a $1 million property would earn you a 100% return on equity before costs.

But while both investors and homeowners would earn that same basic return, their costs could be very different. For starters, property investors face capital gains tax on the proceeds of property sales, unlike those selling their primary residence. Banks also typically charge higher interest rates on mortgages to investors than to homeowners.

At times, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has also imposed caps on bank lending against investment properties, making it more difficult to find mortgage financing in the first place.

Highly leveraged properties require mortgage insurance, too. Investors may need to take out larger insurance policies against the properties themselves, reflecting the higher risks associated with investment properties. Then, you also have to throw in property management fees, council rates, strata management fees and regular and unexpected maintenance costs.

Negative gearing offers little benefit

What about negative gearing? Property investors that generate losses on their property can deduct these costs against the tax bill on their other income.

But negative gearing disproportionately benefits high-income earners with large tax bills. The median Australian individual income is around $55,00, which generates a tax bill of about $8,000 – not a lot from which investment property losses can be deducted.

The bigger picture is that while negative gearing helps defray the regular costs of managing a property, it doesn’t do anything to change expected capital gains.

At the end of the spreadsheet tally, an investment property could end up earning rentvestors significantly less than they could have gained by simply buying their first home.

Read more:
What is negative gearing and what is it doing to housing affordability?

Effects on housing affordability

Rentvesting is new enough that its prevalence and influence awaits formal academic study. But economists might speculate about its implications for the housing market more broadly.

The simplest analysis suggests that a rentvestor occupies one rental property while supplying an additional rental property to the market. If, instead, they had bought a home, they would vacate a rental property while removing another property from the market. In this case, even rentvesting en masse would have zero net effect on the housing market.

But a more nuanced perspective might consider where rentvestors are renting and where they are investing. Perhaps they are most likely to rent properties in the already-crowded inner city, but purchase investment properties in regional areas where other first home buyers would like to live.

This would increase demand for rentals in the city and reduce the supply of owner-occupier properties in the regions, worsening the affordability of both.

Of course, if these rentvestors all eventually move up the property ladder – selling in the region and purchasing in the city – this effect would be reversed. From that longer-term perspective, rentvestors would ultimately have little effect.

We still need more houses

Rentvesting is not a panacea for Australia’s housing market woes. Potential investors should weigh the benefits of property investment against its substantial costs and risks. Additionally, they need to carefully consider the obvious alternative: simply buying their first home up-front.

We have good reason to be wary of yet another get-rich-quick scheme involving the housing market. But initial considerations suggest that for the market overall, rentvestor behaviour is no worse than someone simply buying their first home, which we would otherwise encourage.

Rather than criticising those seeking a way though our housing market morass, we might instead redouble our efforts to increase the supply of housing.

James Graham has received research grant funding from the Australian Housing Research Institute. He is currently the Editor-in-Chief of the academic journal New Zealand Economic Papers.

– ref. Becoming a landlord while still renting? ‘Rentvesting’ promises a foot on the property ladder, but watch your step – https://theconversation.com/becoming-a-landlord-while-still-renting-rentvesting-promises-a-foot-on-the-property-ladder-but-watch-your-step-229116