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

In drawing up his plans to more effectively tax large superannuation accounts, Treasurer Jim Chalmers might have stumbled upon a really good idea.

If applied more broadly, it could at last tax rich Australians in something like the same way as the rest of us.

The wealthiest Australians are taxed differently from other Australians, because they earn much of their money in a different way.

Most of us get taxed at standard rates on the only income we have: income from working, and interest on savings in bank accounts.

High-wealth Australians make a lot of their money in other ways: from investments in shares and properties. And while the dividends from shares and the rental income from properties are taxed at standard rates, what happens to profits made by selling those shares and properties is anything but standard.

How capital gains are taxed differently

The profits made from buying and selling shares and properties are called “capital gains”. Until 1985, most of them were untaxed.

Sure, a section of the Tax Act said if you made a profit selling an asset after less than a year you would pay tax – but you could avoid that by waiting for more than a year. It also said if you sold something for the purpose of making a profit you could be taxed, but you could avoid that by saying profit wasn’t your purpose.

The capital gains tax, introduced in 1985, changed that.

Income from the profits made from buying and selling shares and properties was taxed as income – but with two important exceptions.

Read more:
Capital gains tax concession is too generous: economists poll

Rewriting one exception to the rules

One of those exceptions was that less of the income would be taxed than for other types of income. At the moment only half of each capital gain is taxed.

(During its unsuccessful 2016 and 2019 election campaigns, Labor promised to halve the discount, meaning 75% of each gain would be taxed.)

The other exception – the one Chalmers is breaking ground by winding back when it is used by super funds – is that the tax is only due when the asset is sold.

This is quite different to the way tax is charged on interest earned in bank accounts. We pay as the interest accumulates, not years or even decades later when the money is withdrawn.

The 2010 Henry Tax Review saw this special treatment as a problem.

A better deal than most Australians get

The Henry Review said collecting tax only on “realisation” (when assets were sold) rather than “accrual” (as they grew in value) encouraged investors to hold on to shares and property to delay paying tax – a response it called “lock-in”.

All the better for the investors if, when they eventually sold, they had retired and were on a much lower tax rate, meaning they would scarcely pay any tax on decades worth of gains.

During financial crises when prices fell, the rules encouraged investors to do the reverse – to sell quickly to realise tax losses, destabilising markets.

Henry would have preferred tax to be collected as the gains accrued, but said back then that wasn’t practical.

While improvements in technology might improve things, in 2010 it was hard to get a good read on changes in the value of buildings or rental properties until they were sold.

Real-time collection has become easier

Not now. Firms such as CoreLogic revalue property daily, and not just in the general sense. If you want to know what has happened to the value of a three-bedroom home with two bathrooms, on a particular size block of land, in a particular street, CoreLogic can tell you.

And real-time values are being used for all sorts of purposes. Pensioners owning rental properties get their value updated annually for the pension assets test. Services Australia doesn’t wait until they are sold to declare they are worth more.

It is the same with council rates. Property values are updated annually, rather than down the track when they change hands. There’s no longer a practical impediment to doing this, and there’s never been a practical impediment to valuing shares. They are valued daily on the stock exchange.

Finally taxing super funds in real time

That’s the simple approach Chalmers has now taken to valuing super fund income for the purpose of imposing the 15% surcharge on high balances, as announced a fortnight ago.

Rather than taxing capital gains only when assets are sold (as will still happen for the bulk of what’s in super accounts), the surcharge will be calculated by applying a 15% tax rate to the increase in the value of the relevant part of each fund. Super funds are already valued quarterly.

Chalmers isn’t talking about doing it more broadly. But what he is doing shows it would be fairly easy.

An option for Australia

Denmark is planning to do it later this year, becoming the first country in the world to introduce what it calls the “mark to market” taxation of real estate capital gains.

Adopting the same approach in Australia would create difficulties that would have to be worked through, perhaps by providing loans. Some property owners wouldn’t have enough ready cash to pay an annual capital gains tax, just as some don’t have enough ready cash to pay rates.

But mark to market taxation of real estate capital gains would have benefits.

It would make investment properties less attractive, putting downward pressure on prices and making it easier for homeowners to buy. And it would make the tax system fairer by preventing wealthy Australians from postponing tax until their tax rate was low, raising much-needed money.

Following Denmark’s lead is not going to happen in a hurry – if at all. But by moving in that direction, Chalmers has brought fairer taxation of capital gains for all Australians a little closer than before.

Peter Martin 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. Working Australians pay tax in real-time – now the richest Australians making capital gains should too – https://theconversation.com/working-australians-pay-tax-in-real-time-now-the-richest-australians-making-capital-gains-should-too-201665

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

In drawing up his plans to more effectively tax large superannuation accounts, Treasurer Jim Chalmers might have stumbled upon a really good idea.

If applied more broadly, it could at last tax rich Australians in something like the same way as the rest of us.

The wealthiest Australians are taxed differently from other Australians, because they earn much of their money in a different way.

Most of us get taxed at standard rates on the only income we have: income from working, and interest on savings in bank accounts.

High-wealth Australians make a lot of their money in other ways: from investments in shares and properties. And while the dividends from shares and the rental income from properties are taxed at standard rates, what happens to profits made by selling those shares and properties is anything but standard.

How capital gains are taxed differently

The profits made from buying and selling shares and properties are called “capital gains”. Until 1985, most of them were untaxed.

Sure, a section of the Tax Act said if you made a profit selling an asset after less than a year you would pay tax – but you could avoid that by waiting for more than a year. It also said if you sold something for the purpose of making a profit you could be taxed, but you could avoid that by saying profit wasn’t your purpose.

The capital gains tax, introduced in 1985, changed that.

Income from the profits made from buying and selling shares and properties was taxed as income – but with two important exceptions.

Read more:
Capital gains tax concession is too generous: economists poll

Rewriting one exception to the rules

One of those exceptions was that less of the income would be taxed than for other types of income. At the moment only half of each capital gain is taxed.

(During its unsuccessful 2016 and 2019 election campaigns, Labor promised to halve the discount, meaning 75% of each gain would be taxed.)

The other exception – the one Chalmers is breaking ground by winding back when it is used by super funds – is that the tax is only due when the asset is sold.

This is quite different to the way tax is charged on interest earned in bank accounts. We pay as the interest accumulates, not years or even decades later when the money is withdrawn.

The 2010 Henry Tax Review saw this special treatment as a problem.

A better deal than most Australians get

The Henry Review said collecting tax only on “realisation” (when assets were sold) rather than “accrual” (as they grew in value) encouraged investors to hold on to shares and property to delay paying tax – a response it called “lock-in”.

All the better for the investors if, when they eventually sold, they had retired and were on a much lower tax rate, meaning they would scarcely pay any tax on decades worth of gains.

During financial crises when prices fell, the rules encouraged investors to do the reverse – to sell quickly to realise tax losses, destabilising markets.

Henry would have preferred tax to be collected as the gains accrued, but said back then that wasn’t practical.

While improvements in technology might improve things, in 2010 it was hard to get a good read on changes in the value of buildings or rental properties until they were sold.

Real-time collection has become easier

Not now. Firms such as CoreLogic revalue property daily, and not just in the general sense. If you want to know what has happened to the value of a three-bedroom home with two bathrooms, on a particular size block of land, in a particular street, CoreLogic can tell you.

And real-time values are being used for all sorts of purposes. Pensioners owning rental properties get their value updated annually for the pension assets test. Services Australia doesn’t wait until they are sold to declare they are worth more.

It is the same with council rates. Property values are updated annually, rather than down the track when they change hands. There’s no longer a practical impediment to doing this, and there’s never been a practical impediment to valuing shares. They are valued daily on the stock exchange.

Finally taxing super funds in real time

That’s the simple approach Chalmers has now taken to valuing super fund income for the purpose of imposing the 15% surcharge on high balances, as announced a fortnight ago.

Rather than taxing capital gains only when assets are sold (as will still happen for the bulk of what’s in super accounts), the surcharge will be calculated by applying a 15% tax rate to the increase in the value of the relevant part of each fund. Super funds are already valued quarterly.

Chalmers isn’t talking about doing it more broadly. But what he is doing shows it would be fairly easy.

An option for Australia

Denmark is planning to do it later this year, becoming the first country in the world to introduce what it calls the “mark to market” taxation of real estate capital gains.

Adopting the same approach in Australia would create difficulties that would have to be worked through, perhaps by providing loans. Some property owners wouldn’t have enough ready cash to pay an annual capital gains tax, just as some don’t have enough ready cash to pay rates.

But mark to market taxation of real estate capital gains would have benefits.

It would make investment properties less attractive, putting downward pressure on prices and making it easier for homeowners to buy. And it would make the tax system fairer by preventing wealthy Australians from postponing tax until their tax rate was low, raising much-needed money.

Following Denmark’s lead is not going to happen in a hurry – if at all. But by moving in that direction, Chalmers has brought fairer taxation of capital gains for all Australians a little closer than before.

Peter Martin 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. Pensioners and homeowners pay capital gains tax in real-time – it’s time the richest Australians did too – https://theconversation.com/pensioners-and-homeowners-pay-capital-gains-tax-in-real-time-its-time-the-richest-australians-did-too-201665

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

The New South Wales state election will be held in 11 days, on March 25. At the March 2019 NSW election, the Coalition won 48 of the 93 lower house seats, Labor had 36 and the Greens, the Shooters and independents took three seats each. At a February 2022 byelection, Labor gained Bega from the Liberals.

Ignoring defections, the Coalition begins with 47 of the 93 seats and Labor 37. So, a single net seat loss for the Coalition would be enough for it to lose its majority, but Labor needs to gain ten seats to win its own majority.

The Coalition won the 2019 election by a 52-48% statewide margin, so the polls taken in late February that gave Labor between 52% and 53% of the statewide, two-party vote imply a 4-5% swing to Labor from 2019.

Read more:
Labor slides in a federal Newspoll; NSW polls give Labor a modest lead

On the pendulum, the Coalition holds seven seats by margins of between 5% and 7.3% against Labor, and only four seats by under 3.1%. So, for Labor to win a majority, it would probably need those four seats and six of the seven held by between 5% and 7.3%.

On current polling, Labor is unlikely to make the gains it needs to secure its own majority, so there’s a strong likelihood of a hung parliament.

Unlike other Australian jurisdictions, NSW uses optional preferential voting for its lower house elections. Voters are required only to number one candidate for a formal vote, instead of needing to sequentially number all the boxes. If they choose, though, voters can continue to number beyond a first preference.

When votes do not reach the final two candidates for a seat, they are said to “exhaust”. At the 2019 election, ABC election analyst Antony Green said, 53% of the total votes that were not for the major parties did not preference either Labor or the Coalition.

The Greens had a lower exhaust rate than for all minor parties, with 53% going to Labor, 40% exhausting and 8% to the Coalition. The exhaust rate was high for minor right-wing parties, with 67% of Shooters and 71% of One Nation preferences exhausting.

Owing to this large exhaust rate, primary votes are more important in NSW than in compulsory preferential elections, as exhausted votes make it harder for the trailing party to overtake the party in the lead.

Green said there are 562 total lower house candidates at this election, down slightly from 568 in 2019. This is an average of six candidates per seat.

The Coalition, Labor and Greens will contest all 93 seats, Sustainable Australia 82, Animal Justice 33, Legalise Cannabis 23, the Shooters 20, One Nation 17 and the Liberal Democrats 17. It will help the Coalition that One Nation is contesting only 17 seats given their high exhaust rate in 2019.

Redbridge seat polls conducted February 27 to March 2 from a combined sample of 1,250 people gave Labor a 54-46% lead in Parramatta (held by the Liberals on a 6.5% margin). The Liberals, however, retained a 51-49% lead in Penrith (held by the Liberals on 0.6% margin).

A Freshwater poll for The Financial Review of Riverstone (held by the Liberals on a 6.2% margin) gave Labor a 54-46% lead.

Seat polls can be accurate, but are often wrong. Statewide or national polls are far more reliable.

What about the upper house?

The NSW upper house has 42 members, with 21 up for election every four years, so members serve eight-year terms. The Coalition has 17 seats, Labor 14, the Greens three and One Nation, the Shooters, Animal Justice and independents hold two seats each.

One of the independents is a former Green. The other is former Christian Democrat and long-time upper house member Fred Nile. Both face re-election this year.

The upper house members who were last elected in 2015 will be the ones up for election this year. At that election, the Coalition won nine of the 21 seats up for election, Labor seven, the Greens two and the Shooters, Christian Democrats and Animal Justice one each.

Read more:
It’ll be tough for Perrottet to win the NSW election. But Labor won’t romp home either

Right-wing parties (the Coalition, One Nation, Shooters and Christian Democrats) currently have a 22-20 upper house majority over left-wing parties (Labor, the Greens and Animal Justice).

The right won the seats elected in 2015 by an 11-10 margin, so the left needs a two-seat gain, or a 12-9 margin at this election, to gain control of the upper house.

All 21 seats are elected by statewide proportional representation with preferences, so a quota for election is 1/22 of the vote, or 4.5%. As above-the-line preferences are optional, half a quota, or 2.3%, on primary votes gives a candidate a good chance of being elected.

With Labor’s current modest lead in the statewide lower house polls, the left is most likely to win 11 of the 21 seats up for election. That would give the left a one-seat gain, but the upper house would be tied at a 21-21 left-right split.

To get an above-the-line box, at least 15 candidates need to nominate for a party. At this election Green said six of the 21 groups will not get an above-the-line box as they failed to meet this requirement.

Only people who vote below the line and fill out at least 15 preferences will be able to vote for these groups. As a result, these groups have no chance of anybody being elected.

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

– ref. NSW election preview: Labor likely to fall short of a majority, which could result in hung parliament – https://theconversation.com/nsw-election-preview-labor-likely-to-fall-short-of-a-majority-which-could-result-in-hung-parliament-201289

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christian Tietz, Senior Lecturer in Industrial Design, UNSW Sydney

It’s the end of a long day and you’re finally home, ready to unwind and recharge for the next day. You head to your bedroom, hoping to find solace and relaxation in your personal refuge. But it’s not just a place for sleeping anymore, as our recently published study shows. Your bedroom has become a catch-all place for all sorts of activities – from work to entertainment to exercise – and it’s having a major impact on your sleep.

We asked 300 Australians about their sleep environments and how they use them. Half of them said they have or might have a sleep problem. And almost half said their bedroom was also their living space and they would prefer a different arrangement.

Despite this preference, with the rise of remote work and digital entertainment, many of us have transformed our bedrooms into multi-functional spaces. We use them for work calls and emails, watch movies or play video games, and even exercise before bed.

This versatility comes at a cost. It can be difficult to mentally disconnect from these activities and create a peaceful environment that promotes restful sleep.

What’s driving these changes?

Urban density, rising rents and housing costs, and changes in how we work affect how we use our bedrooms and what they mean to us. The COVID pandemic meant more people started working from home and many had a set-up in their bedrooms. Using the bed for activities other than sleeping became more common.

Like eating, sleep is fundamental for human survival. Sleep studies show a lack of sleep has significant impacts on our wellbeing, mental and physical health as well as social and work performance.

Despite its importance and the fact that we spend around a third of our lives asleep, our domestic sleep spaces and how we use them are relatively unexplored. We wanted to question if today’s bedrooms are still quiet places of refuge or privacy where one rests – and that no longer seems to be the case for many people.

The sleep environment plays a significant role in the way we sleep, and we wanted to learn more about where we sleep today when it isn’t simply a room with a bed. And not everyone sleeps in a bed. Sofa beds are the second-most-mentioned sleep space in our study, while close to 10% sleep in a spare room and 1% sleep in a car.

About 50% sometimes or always use the bed for studying, working or eating. And
59 respondents had a desk in their bedrooms, while 80 mentioned studying or working from their bedrooms, and 104 mentioned using their laptops. One in six people worked from their bed. Among the other activities in the sleep environment, watching TV or streaming shows was predictably the most common, followed by reading, studying or working, eating and then exercising.

People spent an average of about 9.5 hours a day in their sleep environment but just over seven hours sleeping. That’s two-and-a-half hours a day in their sleep area not sleeping. About 20% of respondents spend 12 or more hours in the rooms they sleep in.

Younger participants spent more time in their bedrooms than any other age groups. For children and teenagers their bedroom plays an important role in play, developing their own personality and character and becoming socialised. However, our study surveyed Australian residents 18 years and older.

One of the significant concerns to highlight is about a quarter mentioned having a sleep problem and another 26% were not sure whether they have a sleep problem or not. That suggests nearly 50% are not sleeping well. While 60% said they have a consistent sleeping routine, these figures suggest a consistent routine isn’t necessarily a good routine.

Read more:
Is there such a thing as the perfect alarm tone? We think so (and this is what it might sound like)

We still have much to learn about bedrooms

We have a relatively good understanding of the environmental factors that contribute to good sleep. These include noise levels under 40 decibels and limited or no lighting during sleep. Yet we know very little about bedroom layouts and furnishings.

Bedrooms are one of our most private spaces. A Belgian researcher resorted to forensic crime scene photographs of bedrooms from the 1930s and ’40s to gain insight into what bedrooms actually look like. Because what we can glean about bedrooms from architectual and interior magazines, home renovation TV shows or sales room displays is based on idealised and aspirational settings.

The kitchen, on the other hand, is very well researched and the outcomes are practically applied to our everyday lives. We know more about efficient kitchen layouts, counter top heights, drawer width, ideal distances between sink and working top to enhance hygiene and how many steps are taken to prepare a meal, among many other details.

It should be noted that many of us, particularly renter-occupiers, are limited in what we can do to personalise and change our bedrooms. It would be ideal if our laws allowed renters more flexibility to customise their space beyond just furnishings, especially if they intend to stay for a long time.

This study is the first part of a research project that in its next phase will survey existing bedrooms in homes. If you are interested in participating please contact the authors.

Read more:
Why do we wake around 3am and dwell on our fears and shortcomings?

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. Our bedrooms aren’t refuges anymore – working, studying and eating in them is bad for our sleep – https://theconversation.com/our-bedrooms-arent-refuges-anymore-working-studying-and-eating-in-them-is-bad-for-our-sleep-201169

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roger Bradbury, Emeritus Professor of Complex Systems Science, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Speaking at a summit in San Diego on Monday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced a decades-long strategy to deliver the most costly defence project in Australia’s history.

New details of the AUKUS defence and security pact have revealed Australia will buy three second-hand US Virginia-class submarines early next decade (and potentially two more), subject to approval by US Congress.

Australia will also build a fleet of eight nuclear-powered SSN-AUKUS boats at Adelaide’s Osborne Naval Shipyard. The first will be delivered by 2042, with five completed by the 2050s, and construction of the remaining three going into the 2060s.

It’s estimated the program will cost between A$268 billion and A$368 billion over the next three decades.

Make no mistake. Modern submarines, especially nuclear-powered ones, are one of the most potent and effective weapon systems in today’s world. That is, until they aren’t.

Our analysis shows they might soon be so easily detected they could become billion-dollar coffins.

The rise in detection technologies

Both the greatest strength and greatest weakness of subs is their stealth.
The best are fiendishly difficult to detect. They can be nearly anywhere in the vast expanse of the world’s oceans, so adversaries must protect against them everywhere.

But if subs can be detected, they become easy targets: large, slow-moving and vulnerable to attack from the surface.

Historically, submarines have provided a distinct advantage: their stealth is the result of steady improvements in counter-detection technologies throughout the Cold War. Western submarines in particular are extremely quiet. Detection technologies, which mostly focused on sound, broadly struggled to keep up.

But this tide is turning. Subs in the ocean are large, metallic anomalies that move in the upper portion of the water column. They produce more than sound. As they pass through the water, they disturb it and change its physical, chemical and biological signatures. They even disturb Earth’s magnetic field – and nuclear subs unavoidably emit radiation.

Science is learning to detect all these changes, to the point where the oceans of tomorrow may become “transparent”. The submarine era could follow the battleship era and fade into history.

Read more:
Why is southeast Asia so concerned about AUKUS and Australia’s plans for nuclear submarines?

Cast forward three decades

In 2020 we undertook a first principles assessment to try to understand when that tomorrow might come, and what it might look like.

To do this we had to choose a point in the future to forecast to. We decided on the decade of the 2050s. We examined broad areas of science and technology in which progress might affect that future in terms of detection (that is, ocean sensing) and counter-detection.

In particular, we examined the potential impact of developments in artificial intelligence, sensor technology and underwater communication.

Our analysis used a software tool called Intelfuze which is often used in the intelligence community. It provides probabilistic assessments that are rigorous, transparent, defensible and able to be updated.

It’s particularly suited for issues where data are poor, uncertain and perhaps even speculative, and where there may be strongly divergent opinions on the quality and significance of those data (as in the submarine detection debate).

Our key result was that the oceans are, in most circumstances, at least likely (probability 75%) – and from some perspectives very likely (probability 90%) – to become transparent by the 2050s. Our certainty of these estimates, which the software evaluated independently, was high (above 70%).

This suggests that, regardless of progress in stealth technologies, submarines – including nuclear-powered submarines – will be able to be detected in the world’s oceans as a result of progress in science and technology.

The results should ring alarm bells for the AUKUS program to equip Australia with nuclear-powered submarines. Our assessment suggests there will only be a brief window of time between the deployment of the first SSN-AUKUS boats and the onset of transparent oceans.

Having made the decision to build nuclear submarines, Australia needs to approach the task with a new urgency, lest we acquire these powerful deterrents just as their potency begins to fade.

Planning for obsolescence

Of course, there is a chance the predictions from our assessment are wrong; even highly probable outcomes are not certainties. Our model is a series of educated guesses based on trends in scientific and technological development. But it’s nonetheless an important consideration in light of AUKUS developments.

Australia is at a crossroads as it deals with a complex but deteriorating geostrategic environment. On one hand, we need to respond by committing to long-term investments. On the other, there’s a high degree of uncertainty about how effective these investments will be.

We argue there is evidence submarines could dramatically reduce in effectiveness in the coming decades. In other words, Australia risks investing in a nuclear ecosystem whose use-by date may be much earlier than we’d like. If we are to invest, we need to do so now.

It’s not just the science and technology workforce that needs to be built up, but also supply chains, precision manufacturing, skilled craftspeople and context-specific policies and laws.

We’ll also need a secure, sensible and environmentally appropriate way to deal with all that comes with a nuclear submarine program.

We don’t have the luxury of our AUKUS partners. Both the United Kingdom and United States have had decades to build not only nuclear submarines, but also supporting national ecosystems.

If the clock is ticking, and we think it is, time may be the only factor we have to play with.

Read more:
Does Australia need ‘interim’ submarines to tide it over until nuclear boats arrive? A defence expert explains

Roger Bradbury received funding for the initial research from Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Anne-Marie Grisogono, Elizabeth Williams, Scott Bainbridge, and Scott Vella 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. Progress in detection tech could render submarines useless by the 2050s. What does it mean for the AUKUS pact? – https://theconversation.com/progress-in-detection-tech-could-render-submarines-useless-by-the-2050s-what-does-it-mean-for-the-aukus-pact-201187

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Munt, Associate Professor, Media Arts & Production, University of Technology Sydney

In a recent interview on her portrayal of a renowned (fictional) female conductor, the autocratic maestro Lydia Tár, Cate Blanchett noted ways in which orchestral music-making is not a democratic enterprise. Neither is film-making.

Written, directed and produced by Todd Field, the film courted controversy for situating a woman as the power-play sexual predator in a post-Weinstein world. At the start of the film, or even before the start, audiences noted something else distinctive about the film: that the full screen credit list, attributing the labour of the production, came before the film proper.

More specifically, Tár obliges its audience to patiently sit through a full three minutes of opening credits. This is a big ask, in the age of streaming media where audiences embrace the “skip” function (for opening credits) and where end credits rush by at an unfathomable pace, arguably creating invisibility of the creative labour of the screen production.

A democracy of credits

Far from the trend to lavish, expensive, opening credit sequences, the screen credits for Tár are a sombre experience and materialise in small, white typography on a black screen, which gently fade in and out, set to a minimal musical score.

They are non-dynamic to the point that this slow-burning, 180-second credit sequence won’t find its way onto YouTube (unless to make a thematic point). In one sense, the style of the credits are uneventful. But they also present an opportunity for an audience to consider the history of screen credits, and the way in which this particular creative choice foreshadows the story of Lydia Tár to come.

In his Oscar-nominated screenplay, Field (unusually) spelled out his desire to return the end credits to the start of this film. His screenplay notes:

Punctuating credits filling a single black frame. One after the other, side-by-side, like players seated on a cramped stage.

To return to Blanchett’s quote above, Field appears to want to reinstate a democracy of credits, to represent the large-scale shared creative labour of screen production.

In an interview Field said “I wanted to recalibrate the viewer’s expectations about hierarchy.”

Read more:
Australian thriller The Stranger puts anxiety centre frame

The labour of film production

Field’s creative decision has a historical precedent, in the 1963 French feature film Contempt by the late Jean-Luc Godard.

In place of typographic opening credits, Godard narrates the labour of the film production, with his own voice, an exercise in Brechtian-inspired reflexivity, to make transparent the ways in which a film work arrives to an audience.

Interestingly, Godard retains the “possessory” film credit of “a film by” – something that Field rescinded, taking the more didactic (yet less dominant) “written, directed and produced by”. Field had to convince the producers that the extended end-credits-as-opening-credits would not be audience-unfriendly, in an attention-distracted world.

In Tár, the hierarchy is inverted: Field appears last, after the three-minute “communal” credits sequence. In making his decision to invert the hierarchy of the behind-the-scenes power relations, Field attempted to (from the outset) draw the viewer’s attention to the primary investigation of the film: the power relations on screen.

In consideration of the hierarchy, or signification of power within a screen production, of screen credits – this has been both culturally and historically determined. In early (silent) cinema, before the medium was highly industrialised, film roles remained shared, undefined or ambiguous.

As the motion picture industry advanced to become a highly managed creative realm, a stricter demarcation and hierarchy of roles followed.

A return to the past

The opening credit roll of Tár is not new – it represents a return to the past.

For much of the 20th century, there was only opening film credits, with the end credit being simply, and literally, marked “The End”. Relatively soon, a template for screen credits was in situ, which signalled a clear hierarchy of labour “above the line” (producers, screenwriters, director, major actors) which took the prominence of the opening credits, with the “below the line” creative crew and production support labour relegated to the end credits, in small font as a closing credit roll.

For example, a film’s cinematographer typically sits below the line even though they make a significant contribution to the visual storytelling and authorship of the film. And, invisibly to audiences, screen credits also determine the copyright provisions for a film work.

Next time you’re in the cinema, look around as the end credits roll. It’s mostly industry people, cinephiles or film students who stick around to the very end.

Even once the hierarchy of screen credits had been generally agreed for the placement and order of screen credits, it remained contested territory.

George Lucas attracted a hefty fine from the Directors Guild of America for omitting the role of the films’ directors for Star Wars (1977) and The Empire Strikes Back (1980). Lucas resigned and the rest is history – his spatialised prose sequence set to the famous John Williams score claimed its place as a core aspect of the Star Wars story-verse.

In the opening credits for Pulp Fiction (1995), the screenwriting is credited to “Stories By: Quentin Tarantino & Roger Avary”, who shared the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay on stage. But behind the scenes, Avary was paid out to enable the (then) new auteur to maintain the possessive credit of “A film by Quentin Tarantino”.

In more recent times, the rise of the episodic streaming television “showrunner” has displaced the possessive screen credit of the auteur director, to a more generic “created by”. The story of the hidden, or not so hidden, hierarchies of labour in screen production is to be continued.

Alex Munt 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 full credit list featured at the beginning of Tár is a nod to the hidden hierarchies of labour in screen production – https://theconversation.com/the-full-credit-list-featured-at-the-beginning-of-tar-is-a-nod-to-the-hidden-hierarchies-of-labour-in-screen-production-199781

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wanglin Ma, Associate Professor of Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand

An increasing number of people are using mobile devices – their smartphone, a smartwatch or tablet – to pay for goods and services. Mobile devices allow people to complete transactions without using cash or a traditional bank card, making shopping quicker and easier.

Our recent research on China’s experience with mobile payments even suggests that people who pay with mobile devices are happier than those who do not.

While China’s experience with mobile payments over the past decade highlights some of the benefits of using digital devices to pay for everyday items, it also illustrates how accessibility issues can leave sections of the community behind.

Although mobile payments have been around since the early 2000s, they did not take off until the widespread adoption of smartphones. PayPal launched its first product for mobile phones in 2006, allowing customers to pay others via text message. M-PESA was launched soon after in Kenya in 2007. Google launched its digital wallet in 2011 and Apple launched its own version of the digital wallet in 2014.

Over the past two decades, China has emerged as the front runner in mobile payment usage. More than 87% of China’s internet users were using mobile payment services in 2021. The high rate of internet usage, a supportive regulatory framework and the government’s push for a cashless society – with COVID-19 as the impetus to introduce the digital yuan to replace physical bank notes – all contributed to the success of mobile payments in China.

Leading mobile payment platforms Alipay and WeChat Pay, which boast over a billion users each, are leading the way. Alipay is a mobile payment app and digital wallet that also allows users to order a taxi, apply for a credit card and buy insurance. WeChat Pay is a payment feature integrated within the instant messaging app WeChat. Both apps allow users to leave their physical wallet at home in favour of just their smartphone or smartwatch.

But China is not alone in this digital revolution. New Zealanders are also increasingly embracing mobile payments instead of cash.

More than just convenient

On the surface, the benefits of mobile payments may seem trivial – they allow people to shop without the need for cash.

But mobile payments can help reduce costs on essentials like food bills. In earlier research, we found mobile payment users in China spent 2,347 yuan (roughly NZ$546) less on food each year. These savings stemmed from the fact that people using mobile payments for their shopping were able to take advantage of time-sensitive online promotional offers at the checkout.

Read more:
A cashless society and the five forms of mobile payment that will get us there

Mobile payments also helped increase farmers’ resilience to adverse weather events by allowing them to access money from family and friends outside the affected areas. This access to funds that could then be spent via mobile payments allowed the farmers to remain solvent in the aftermath of a natural disaster.

Mobile payments can boost rural household consumption by making shopping easier for communities that may not have access to traditional financial services such as banks. Mobile payments have also been found to create business opportunities by helping small entrepreneurs become more nimble, increasing their appetite for risk and easing credit constraints by allowing them to take advantage of micro-lending services.

And mobile payments can measurably increase a person’s happiness, particularly in rural areas.

Analysing data from the 2017 Chinese General Social Survey and measuring happiness on a five-point scale, we found that using mobile payments was associated with a 0.76 point increase in happiness in rural China. No changes in happiness were observed for city dwellers.

The increased happiness was likely due to the convenience of mobile payments, helping people seamlessly pay for a broad spectrum of goods and services.

In terms of gender, using mobile payments affected women’s happiness more than men’s, regardless of where they lived. In rural China, using mobile payments was associated with a 0.83 point increase in women’s happiness compared to a 0.69 point increase in men’s happiness.

We found education increased the likelihood of someone using mobile payments. And being socially active was also positively associated with mobile payment use. But the data showed that the older the person, the less likely they were able to use mobile payments.

Ensuring accessibility

While there are clear positives to the widespread use of mobile payments, one of the potential stumbling blocks has been the issue of accessibility. As the global pandemic spread in 2020, concerns were raised that China’s older cash-using residents were being excluded by the push towards mobile payment options.

Read more:
Cash and the coronavirus: COVID-19 is changing our relationship with money

New Zealand could face similar issues. Concerns have already been raised by the reduction of bank branches in favour of online banking and what this means for older people and those with limited access to the internet.

While 95% of New Zealanders have access to the internet – either via landlines or on their phones – 31% of those in social housing and 29% of people with disabilities report not having any access.

Considering the documented benefits of mobile payments and their growing usage, service providers should invest in easy-to-use user interfaces for people from all walks of life. If managed well, the growing popularity of mobile payments in New Zealand could positively impact society, promoting financial inclusion, convenience and wellbeing.

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. China’s experience with mobile payments highlights the pros and cons of a cashless society – https://theconversation.com/chinas-experience-with-mobile-payments-highlights-the-pros-and-cons-of-a-cashless-society-201177

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Mesaglio, PhD candidate, UNSW Sydney

For hundreds of years, botanists have collected plants to describe species and keep in herbaria across the world. But while physical plant specimens are irreplaceable, photographs of plants are also an invaluable resource for botanical research, conservation and education.

Photographs of plants capture information that can be lost from dead, dried plants, such as flower colour. They also provide ecological context and form the cornerstone of many field guides and education resources.

All plant species known to science have samples preserved in at least one herbarium. Under the scientific rules for naming species, a species is not recognised unless there is at least one specimen officially stored in a collection somewhere in the world.

Unfortunately, and perhaps surprisingly, many plants have never been photographed in the field. Just 53% of the 125,000 known plant species in the Americas have field photographs in major online databases.

Given almost 40% of the world’s plant species are threatened with extinction, there’s a strong impetus to photograph as many of these as possible before they disappear forever. Without photographs of these species in the field, many could go extinct without us even realising.

How does Australia compare?

We were interested in how the Australian flora stacks up, so in our research, published today, we surveyed 33 major online databases. Most of these were resources created and maintained by professional botanists, such as New South Wales’ state herbarium portal PlantNET, but we also included some citizen science platforms such as iNaturalist.

Out of roughly 21,000 native Australian vascular plant species, a surprisingly large 3,715 (or 18%) did not have a single field photograph we could track down across our surveyed databases.

While most species across the southeastern states are well-photographed, Western Australia is the great frontier for unphotographed plants: 52% of all unphotographed species can be found in WA. The most incomplete plant family was Poaceae, the grasses, with 343 unphotographed species.

We identified three major “hotspots” for unphotographed Australian plants:

• northern Australia, from the Kimberley to Arnhem Land

• Queensland’s Wet Tropics World Heritage Area

• the Stirling Range and Fitzgerald River National Park in southwestern WA.

All three regions are characterised by remote environments that are often difficult to access.

Just as some animals receive less research and conservation attention than others because they aren’t as charismatic, there is also a similar charisma deficit for some types of plants. Many groups of Australian shrubs or trees with spectacular floral displays have comprehensive, or even complete, photographic records. For example, all 176 of Australia’s Banksia species have been photographed.

Conversely, small herbs, plants with tiny or dull flowers, or groups such as grasses or sedges tend to miss out on being photographed – some of them for a very long time indeed. Schoenus lanatus, for example, is a small sedge that grows across a vast stretch of coastal WA, from Perth all the way to the South Australian border. It was described in 1805 yet, more than two centuries later, it is still unphotographed in the field!

Read more:
Conservation shouldn’t be a popularity contest

Although botanists and taxonomists take many photographs of plants, citizen scientists also have a crucial role to play in the documentation of our native flora, with organisations such as Desert Discovery at the forefront. During last year’s expedition to Yeo Lake Nature Reserve at the remote western edge of the Great Victoria Desert, the Desert Discovery team photographed hundreds of native plants, including five species on our unphotographed list.

One example is the daisy bush Olearia eremaea, which is only found in WA’s arid interior. First described in 1990 and illustrated with black-and-white line drawings, it was not until more than 30 years later that this species was first photographed, at Yeo Lake, a remote nature reserve roughly 200km northeast of Laverton.

Of course, some of the species on our unphotographed list have in fact been photographed, but the images are not available in any of the 33 major databases we surveyed. These photographs may be slides in someone’s desk drawer or hard drive somewhere, appear in possibly out-of-print field guides and books, be behind paywalls in the scientific literature, or are not currently identified due to a lack of other comparison photos. This lack of discoverability is a problem, because these photos are very unlikely to be found by someone in the field trying to identify the species.

We have produced a searchable list of Australian native plants lacking photographs. We hope this work stimulates both professional and citizen scientists to track down these species and add photographs to public, discoverable repositories such as iNaturalist.

But be warned: these aren’t easy treasure hunts. These species are a mix of very remote and often overlooked species – they are typically not famous or eyecatching. Finding them will take determination, botanical know-how, and a sturdy off-road vehicle.

But the pay-off would be well worth it – successful pictures would make their way into identification guides, allowing both citizen and professional scientists to identify, monitor and conserve these species into the future.

Read more:
The 50 beautiful Australian plants at greatest risk of extinction — and how to save them

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. Thousands of our native plants have no public photographs available. Here’s why that matters – https://theconversation.com/thousands-of-our-native-plants-have-no-public-photographs-available-heres-why-that-matters-199100

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexandra Whittaker, Senior Lecturer, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

Mahatma Gandhi said:

The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.

Yet we often hear of animals being treated poorly in Australia, and our laws are frequently criticised as a result.

In response, many states are reforming their animal welfare laws.

The South Australian government recently called for public feedback on how animal welfare law works and how it could be improved. This follows recent similar calls in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia.

These public consultation processes allow lawmakers to get a sense of the weight of concern about key issues. So, what are the key issues for debate, and how would changing them affect animals and society?

Animal welfare laws in Australia

We don’t have a national law to deal with animal welfare. This might seem seem strange. After all, animals are often transported across state boundaries, and having a single law throughout the country would create consistent practice, making it easier for our global trading partners to identify our animal husbandry practices (a current controversial issue).

This federated system for animal welfare is a result of our Constitution. As a result, each state and territory has its own act. We’ll call these “animal welfare acts” even though the names differ between the states.

Broadly, these acts regulate human interactions with animals. They make it an offence to be cruel to an animal.

But the acts go further than this. They make animal owners responsible for promoting their animals’ wellbeing by ensuring they have access to food, water, good housing and other resources. These acts also outline any procedures that cannot be done on animals, such as tail docking of dogs.

But you won’t find the details of animal husbandry and care in the acts. For this, you’ll have to read the codes of practice or standards. These documents, sometimes referred to as “soft law”, lay out what is acceptable husbandry practice. But they are harder to enforce as they have less legal weight.

It’s a complex system. And it’s important to remember that the current state reviews are focused on the acts.

Animals included and their sentience

A hotly debated reform topic is the definition of an animal in law. All states include mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds, but fish and other aquatic animals such as crustaceans and cephalopods (octopuses and squid) might not be included.

Recently, the UK government made news when it recognised decapods (lobsters and crabs) and cephalopods as sentient.

Recognition of animal sentience in law has been a big-ticket reform item both in Australia and internationally. Sentience describes the ability of animals to experience feelings such as pain or pleasure. Ascribing sentience to animals represents a big step forward, by acknowledging that animals are more than their current legal classification as property suggests.

So what would recognition of these animals as sentient mean for our seafood lunch or fishing trip up the coast? Well, these activities likely wouldn’t change much.

Our current laws provide protection to animals such as sheep and cattle. Yet we still farm them. The same would apply for these aquatic species. But their inclusion may provide a basis for future changes in practice – for example, the outlawing of boiling crabs alive.

But there is still debate within the legal community about what practical impact this change would have. Because of the codes of practice, farming practices will remain unchanged. It is likely the biggest impact will be on how courts apply the law to animal cruelty cases.

Still, its inclusion is important messaging, and would allow states to showcase a commitment to animal welfare, with minimal actual change to the status quo.

Read more:
ACT’s new animal sentience law recognises an animal’s psychological pain and pleasure, and may lead to better protections

Community expectations around penalties

Cruelty to animals evokes strong emotions among our nation of animal lovers. There is similar outrage when perpetrators of these offences receive what is seen as lenient sentencing.

Governments have responded to these “community expectations” by increasing maximum penalties for offences in the animal welfare acts. This sends a message to the community and the courts that animal welfare is a serious issue. It also hopefully acts as a deterrent to potential offenders.

However, changes in law do not always lead to changes in sentencing by the courts. In any case, there may be better ways to reduce this kind of offending, such as education programs or penalties, like counselling, that support offenders to get help.

We may be seeing a shift in the tide of community opinion around this issue. Recent research showed Australians appear more supportive of the use of alternative penalties than previously suggested, and more willing to trust judges’ sentencing decisions. Nevertheless, support for increasing harshness of sentences is still strong.

Read more:
Penalties for animal cruelty double in SA, but is this enough to stop animal abuse?

Limitations of animal welfare law

It is easy to criticise the law when animal welfare issues arise. But the law is a blunt instrument. Law relies on effective and well-resourced enforcement for its success.

Written law also only provides a minimum benchmark. It does not (and has never been proclaimed to) represent best practice in animal care. This can be better achieved through use of assurance or accreditation schemes, which producers can sign up to.

The power of consumers should not be discounted either. By choosing to buy only products that meet high welfare standards, we can move industry direction far more quickly than legal change is able.

Alexandra Whittaker 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 the states consider animal welfare law reform, what changes would curb cruelty against animals? – https://theconversation.com/as-the-states-consider-animal-welfare-law-reform-what-changes-would-curb-cruelty-against-animals-201089

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Kendall Hawkins, Philosopher, University of New England

Most people are familiar with the deluge of artificial intelligence (AI) apps that seem designed to make us more efficient and creative. We’ve got apps that take text prompts and generate art, and the controversial ChatGPT, which raises serious questions about originality, misinformation and plagiarism.

Despite these concerns, AI is becoming ever more pervasive and intrusive. It’s the latest technology that will irreversibly change our lives.

The internet and smartphones were other examples. But unlike those technologies, many philosophers and scientists think AI could one day reach (or even go beyond) human-style “thinking”. This possibility, coupled with our increasing dependence on AI, is at the root of a concept in futurism called “technological singularity”.

This term has been around for a while, having been popularised by the US science fiction writer Vernor Vinge a few decades ago.

Today, the “singularity” refers to a hypothetical point in time at which the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) – that is, AI with human-level abilities – becomes so advanced that it will irreversibly change human civilisation.

It would mark the dawn of our inseparability from machines. From that moment on, we won’t be able to live without them without ceasing to function as human beings. But if the singularity comes, will we even notice it?

Brain implants as the first stage

To understand why this isn’t the stuff of fairy tales, we need only look as far as recent developments in brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). BCIs are a natural beginning to the singularity in the eyes of many futurists, because they meld mind and machine in a way no other technology so far can.

Elon Musk’s company Neuralink is seeking permission from the US Food and Drug Administration to begin human trials for its BCI technology. This would involve implanting neural connectors into volunteers’ brains so they can communicate instructions by thinking them.

Neuralink hopes to help paraplegic people walk and blind people see again. But beyond these goals are other ambitions.

Musk has long said he believes brain implants will allow telepathic communication, and lead to the co-evolution of humans and machines. He argues that unless we use such technology to augment our intellects, we risk being wiped out by super-intelligent AI.

Musk is understandably not everyone’s go-to for tech expertise. But he’s not alone in predicting a massive growth in AI’s capabilities. Surveys show AI researchers overwhelmingly agree AI will achieve human-level “thinking” within this century. What they don’t agree on is whether this implies consciousness or not, or whether this necessarily means AI will do us harm once it reaches this level.

Read more:
Our neurodata can reveal our most private selves. As brain implants become common, how will it be protected?

Another BCI technology company, Synchron, has created a minimally invasive implant that allowed a patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) to send emails and browse the internet using his thoughts.

Synchron chief executive Tom Oxley believes brain implants could ultimately go beyond prosthetic rehabilitation and completely transform how humans communicate. Speaking to a TED audience, he said they may one day allow users to “throw” their emotions so others can feel what they’re feeling, and “the full potential of the brain would then be unlocked”.

Early achievements in BCIs could arguably be considered the first stages of a tumbling towards the postulated singularity, in which human and machine become one. This need not imply machines will become “sentient” or control us. But the integration itself, and our ensuing dependency on it, could change us irrevocably.

It’s also worth mentioning that the start-up funding for Synchron partly came from DARPA, the research and development arm of the US Department of Defense that helped gift the world the internet. It’s probably wise to be concerned about where DARPA places its investment monies.

Read more:
Our neurodata can reveal our most private selves. As brain implants become common, how will it be protected?

Would AGI be friend or foe?

According to Ray Kurzweil, a futurist and former Google innovations engineer, humans with AI-augmented minds could be thrown onto the autobahn of evolution – hurtling forward without speed limits.

In his 2012 book How to Create a Mind, Kurzweil theorises the neocortex – the part of the brain thought to be responsible for “higher functions” such as sensory perception, emotion and cognition – is a hierarchical system of pattern recognisers which, if emulated in a machine, could lead to artificial super-intelligence.

He predicts the singularity will be with us by 2045, and thinks it might bring about a world of super-intelligent humans, perhaps even the Nietzschean “Übermensch”: someone who surpasses all worldly constraints to realise their full potential.

But not everyone sees AGI as a good thing. The late, great theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking warned super-intelligent AI could result in the apocalypse. In 2014, Hawking told the BBC

the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race. […] It would take off on its own and redesign itself at an ever-increasing rate. Humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn’t compete, and would be superseded.

Hawking was, however, an advocate for BCIs.

Connected in a hive mind

Another idea that relates to the singularity is that of the AI-enabled “hive mind”. Merriam-Webster defines a hive mind as

the collective mental activity expressed in the complex, coordinated behaviour of a colony of social insects (such as bees or ants) regarded as comparable to a single mind controlling the behaviour of an individual organism.

A theory has been developed by neuroscientist Giulio Tononi around this phenomenon, called Integrated Information Theory (IIT). It suggests we are all heading toward a merger of all minds and all data.

Philosopher Philip Goff does a good job of explaining the implications of Tononi’s concept in his book Galileo’s Error:

IIT predicts that if the growth of internet-based connectivity ever resulted in the amount of integrated information in society surpassing the amount of integrated information in a human brain, then not only would society become conscious but human brains would be ‘absorbed’ into that higher form of consciousness. Brains would cease to be conscious in their own right and would instead become mere cogs in the mega-conscious entity that is the society including its internet-based connectivity.

It’s worth noting there’s little evidence such a thing could ever come to fruition. But the theory raises important ideas about not only the rapid acceleration of technology (not to mention how quantum computing might propel this) – but about the nature of consciousness itself.

Hypothetically, if a hive mind were to emerge, one could imagine it would mark the end of individuality and the institutions that rely on it, including democracy.

The final frontier is between our ears

Recently OpenAI (the company that developed ChatGPT) released a blog post reaffirming its commitment to achieving AGI. Others will doubtless follow.

Our lives are becoming algorithmically driven in ways we often can’t discern, and therefore can’t avoid. Many features of a technological singularity promise amazing enhancements to our lives, but it’s a worry these AIs are the products of private industry.

They are virtually unregulated, and largely at the whims of impulsive “technopreneurs” with more money than than most of us combined. Regardless of whether we consider them crazy, naïve, or visionaries, we have a right to know their plans (and be able to rebut them).

If the past few decades are anything to go by, where new technologies are concerned, all of us will be affected.

Read more:
Netflix’s The Social Dilemma highlights the problem with social media, but what’s the solution?

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. Futurists predict a point where humans and machines become one. But will we see it coming? – https://theconversation.com/futurists-predict-a-point-where-humans-and-machines-become-one-but-will-we-see-it-coming-196293

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shireen Morris, Senior Lecturer and Director of the Radical Centre Reform Lab, Macquarie University Law School, Macquarie University

We asked our readers what they would like to know about the proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament. In the lead-up to the referendum, our expert authors will answer those questions. You can read the other questions and answers here.

The Australian federal parliament now includes a record 11 Indigenous parliamentarians, nearly 5% of the total number of federal politicians. Given this level of Indigenous representation in parliament, some have questioned why a referendum on a constitutionally guaranteed Indigenous Voice is needed.

Parliament should reflect the diversity of the Australian community, and it’s great there is strong Indigenous representation in parliament.

However, this does not guarantee Indigenous communities across the country a proper say in laws and policies made about them. That’s why Indigenous Australians through the Uluru Statement asked for a constitutionally guaranteed Voice in their affairs.

Indigenous politicians fulfil a different role

Indigenous parliamentarians, just like parliamentarians of Indian, Chinese, Greek or other European backgrounds, must represent all Australians in their electorates.

Indigenous politicians can’t just represent Indigenous communities, because they weren’t only voted in by Indigenous communities. And Indigenous politicians also have to represent their political parties – just like any politician.

The job of politicians is to represent Australian voters and make laws and policies. The role of the Indigenous Voice is very different.

The Voice would sit outside parliament and government and would not make laws. Rather, it would enable Indigenous communities to provide advice on, and partner in, the development of laws and policies made about them. This would enable Indigenous communities to be heard in their own affairs.

Indigenous politicians do not always agree with Indigenous communities

Indigenous communities say they need a grassroots Voice that is outside parliament and government, and independent of party politics. As the Indigenous activist Roy Ah-See said,

We don’t want a green voice, we don’t want a red voice, we don’t want a blue voice: we want a black voice.

An independent Indigenous Voice is needed because the views of Indigenous politicians – which are usually constrained and informed by electoral considerations and party affiliations – cannot be expected to align with the views of Indigenous communities across the country.

We can see this in current Voice debate. Both Country Liberal Party Senator Jacinta Price on the right and now-independent Senator Lidia Thorpe on the left have disagreed with majority Indigenous opinion on the Voice. Around 80% of Indigenous Australians support a constitutionally guaranteed Voice, however these Indigenous politicians oppose it.

This demonstrates that Indigenous politicians and Indigenous communities do not always agree.

Grassroots Indigenous voices are still going unheard

Having Indigenous politicians in parliament is also no guarantee that Indigenous communities are heard in crucial policy decisions made about them. Take the way alcohol bans were left to lapse in the Northern Territory last year, against the wishes of many Indigenous communities.

As Professor Marcia Langton explained, the pleas of Indigenous communities for a better plan might have been heeded if those communities had a constitutionally guaranteed Voice in their affairs. Much harm could have been avoided.

That such policy decisions are still made without proper Indigenous community input – despite strong Indigenous representation in parliament – demonstrates why Indigenous communities want a constitutionally guaranteed Voice in their affairs.

Read more:
A Voice to Parliament will not give ‘special treatment’ to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Here’s why

The Voice would benefit all politicians

Receiving advice from Indigenous communities would be of benefit not only to non-Indigenous policymakers, but also Indigenous policymakers.

The Voice would enable all politicians to hear from and partner with Indigenous communities across the country, to make better policies about those communities.

For example, Indigenous Senators like Patrick Dodson and Price could be involved in making laws and policies about welfare reform that have a particular impact on Indigenous communities in Cape York, Queensland, or heritage protection policies with a unique impact on Indigenous communities in Tasmania.

Being senators for Western Australia and the Northern Territory, respectively, Dodson and Price probably have less understanding of the specific challenges facing Indigenous communities in Cape York and Tasmania.

Australia is a big and diverse continent, and Indigenous communities are diverse. Indigenous politicians would benefit from hearing Indigenous advice from different local regions when making laws and policies for Indigenous affairs – just as non-Indigenous politicians would.

Read more:
Why a First Nations Voice should come before Treaty

Fixing a history of exclusion

Finally, it’s worth recalling the history of Indigenous exclusion from political processes, which underscores the need for a constitutionally guaranteed Voice in their affairs.

In the past, there were laws and policies denying Indigenous people the vote in some jurisdictions. Indigenous people didn’t get equal voting rights across the board until the 1960s. And enrolling to vote at federal elections only became compulsory for Indigenous Australians in 1984.

Indigenous representation in parliament has fluctuated, and is not guaranteed.
While there are 11 Indigenous federal parliamentarians now, there were far fewer in the past.

A constitutionally guaranteed Indigenous Voice would provide advice to help prevent a repeat of the unjust laws and policies of the past – like those that denied Indigenous people the vote.

The Voice would also help policymakers – both Indigenous and non-Indigenous – partner with Indigenous communities to improve practical outcomes in Indigenous affairs.

Shireen Morris is a constitutional lawyer and director of the Radical Centre Reform Lab at Macquarie University Law School which receives funding from Foundation Donors Henry and Marcia Pinskier. She is an adviser to Cape York Institute, a member of the ALP, a committee member of the John Curtin Research Centre, a Research Fellow at Per Capita and an Academic Fellow at Trinity Collect, the University of Melbourne.

– ref. With 11 Indigenous politicians in parliament, why does Australia need the Voice? – https://theconversation.com/with-11-indigenous-politicians-in-parliament-why-does-australia-need-the-voice-200910

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Georgia Middleton, Associate Lecturer, Flinders University

Eating together regularly as a family has long been promoted as a simple solution for improving health and wellbeing.

We have been told that to achieve these proposed benefits we must follow an idealistic, age-old formula: all family members at the table, happily sharing a home-cooked meal and chatting without distractions. But the modern reality includes time-poor families, fussy eaters, siblings at odds and stress about what meals to cook – not to mention cost-of-living pressures. This combination can make achieving family meals difficult, if not impossible, for many families.

Research tells us families who eat together frequently are more likely to have better diets, better family functioning and children with higher self-esteem. But these studies cannot tell us whether the family gathering over a meal is causing these outcomes. It might be just as likely that families who eat well are more likely to eat together.

But how can we make family meals more realistic and less stressful?

Read more:
3 reasons your teenager might skip breakfast – don’t fuss but do encourage a healthy start

We’re not sure what the link is

Our previous systematic review attempted to unpack this relationship. But we weren’t able to provide conclusive answers, largely due to limitations with study designs. Researchers didn’t look at factors like physical activity, screen time and sleep separately. And they measured “success” differently across studies, making them hard to compare.

So, we do not know with certainty the family meal is beneficial for health, only that there’s a statistical link between families that eat together and family health.

And we do not know which aspect of the family meal may be responsible. The answer might relate to food quality, screen use, mealtime atmosphere or family conversations.

A nightly challenge

In Australia, family meals often happen in the evening because it is one of the few times of day families are at home at the same time. Around three quarters of young children engage in family dinners with their caregiver more than five nights per week.

Although many parents consider family mealtimes important, they can also be stressful to achieve.

Family meals are more than what happens at the table. They require intent, effort and planning. This labour can become a relentless cycle, and it’s most commonly mothers who shoulder the burden. Many find it tough going.

Managing mealtimes

The work continues once the family is seated together.

Having pleasant mealtimes and meaningful conversations may not happen naturally. Again, it is often mothers who manage the relationships and emotions around the table.

And mealtimes can become more complicated when there are multiple kids in the mix. Some parents allow TV or other screens to encourage kids to eat and to avoid arguments. This strategy has been linked with less-than-optimal dietary intakes, but can make mealtimes possible, and more manageable.

Read more:
Are you living in a food desert? These maps suggest it can make a big difference to your health

5 tips to ease the pressure

So, how can we rethink what a successful and meaningful family meal looks like? Here are five ideas for starters:

1) It doesn’t have to be dinner

Opportunities to eat together come at different times of the day, and not all family members have to be present. A meaningful eating occasion can be as simple as sharing a snack with the kids after school.

2) It doesn’t need to be perfect

There is no shame in reheating a frozen meal, throwing together pasta and sauce, serving your veggies raw, eating on a picnic rug in the living room, or occasionally watching a family TV show.

3) Don’t force the conversation

Meals are a great time to communicate, but this does not always come easily after busy days at work and school. Simple word games, listening to music and quiet time can be just as enjoyable.

4) You don’t have to do it alone

Get creative in the way you share family meal tasks with kids and partners. You could design the family menu together, have a shopping list everyone can contribute to, or divide the washing up.

5) There’s no magic number

There is no number of meals that is right for every family. It’s all about opting in how and when you can.

Read more:
Should you feed child guests dinner? What #Swedengate tells us about food culture and social expectations

Rethinking family meals

When it comes to family meals, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. We need better promotion of realistic and achievable family meals, to reduce the pressure placed on already overburdened families.

We must also consider whether systemic changes are required to support parents to have the time and energy to bring their families together for a meaningful shared meal. This could include supporting workers to finish early for meal preparation or providing more affordable, healthy convenience foods. We could also look to other cultures for inspiration.

More evidence is needed to understand which components of the family meal are most beneficial, so that we can prioritise these. Innovative research methods, such as mealtime observations in households with a range of cultures and compositions, could explore how eating occasions unfold in real time.

Family meals can be a positive experience, with the potential for good health outcomes. But they could be even better if we reduce all the pressure and expectations that surround them.

Read more:
How to save $50 off your food bill and still eat tasty, nutritious meals

Georgia Middleton’s research has been supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship and the King and Amy O’Malley Trust Postgraduate Research Scholarship.

Eloise Litterbach’s research has been supported by Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship, and Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN) Seed Funds, Deakin University.

Fairley Le Moal’s research has been supported by the French National Association for Research in Technology (ANRT), a Flinders University Innovation Partnership Seed grant and Mars Food. The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not reflect those of Mars Food.

Susannah Ayre’s research is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship.

– ref. Are we overthinking family meals? 5 realistic tips to ease the pressure – https://theconversation.com/are-we-overthinking-family-meals-5-realistic-tips-to-ease-the-pressure-200731

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bianca Le, Honorary Fellow, The University of Melbourne

It didn’t get much attention when US President Joe Biden launched a biomanufacturing initiative last September.

But it should have. Biomanufacturing is about harnessing nature’s factories – cells – to make just about anything. That includes food. As Biden pointed out, biomanufacturing could boost food security at a time when prices are spiking amid geopolitical strife and unprecedented droughts, floods and fires.

How? By cultivating meat. Having a lamb roast for dinner has traditionally required rearing animals, slaughtering them, and discarding inedible parts. But technology has advanced to the point we can now grow animal muscle cells in bioreactors.

To date, Australia has no such initiative. But we should. Agriculture and biotechnology are two of our national strengths. And we are exceptionally vulnerable to climate change. Cultivated meat has come a long way, but it’s still not cost-competitive with traditional meat. The last hurdle to be overcome is scale.

Why do we need this technology?

To create a new farm, you have to remove most of what was there before – forests, grasslands, wetlands. Cows, sheep, chickens and pigs are hungry, so the demand for soybeans and other feed shoots up. And cows belch out methane from the fermenting grass in their stomachs. Animal agriculture contributes nearly 15% of the worlds emissions – and cows make up the largest share of that.

While growing and eating plants directly is still the most calorie efficient way to produce food, many people who have grown up eating meat are unlikely to switch to fully vegetarian diets. The taste and texture of animal muscle and fat tissue just can’t be fully replicated by plant proteins and oils.

Read more:
Plant-based patties, lab-grown meat and insects: how the protein industry is innovating to meet demand

The mince in your bolognese started as a cow which, in Australia, spent most of its life outdoors, grazing on grass and exposed to the sun.

Cows are much more sensitive to heat than we are, as they can’t get rid of as much heat by sweating. They prefer temperatures below 20℃. During heatwaves, they can suffer heat stress, which can lead to organ failure and death.

Australia has already warmed more than the global average, at 1.4℃. By 2100, if nothing is done, it could be more than 3℃ warmer. Our cows aren’t going to like it.

Cultivated meat is done indoors in temperature-controlled areas. It also allows us to farm vertically, creating a smaller footprint. Beef produced this way requires vastly less land (95% less) and with a fraction of the greenhouse gases (92% less) than traditional beef production, according to a life cycle analysis.

There’s also much less waste. If you want to be able to cook and eat chicken breast and thighs, why not just grow those parts rather than breeding and raising a chicken, complete with digestive tract, brain and feathers? Biopsied muscle cells from chickens can can be grown inside bioreactors, sterile stainless-steel tanks. Another bonus is you don’t need to rely on antibiotics.

Importantly, these muscle and fat cells floating in a broth of plant-based nutrients (called culture medium) promise to be much better at converting food into muscle mass. For every three calories of broth, we could get one calorie of meat in return.

Chickens convert food to meat at an 8:1 ratio. But cows need much more. For every ~30 calories of feed a cow eats, we get 1 calorie of food in return.

Their ceaseless demand for food – and ever-growing herds – are the main driver of the destruction of tropical forests. Two fifths of all tropical deforestation is to make more pastures for cows, with 18% of this deforestation done to plant oilseeds like soybeans, most of which become cattle food.

So why isn’t cultivated meat in supermarkets?

In 2013, the world saw the first ever burger made from cultivated meat. It cost A$512,000. Investment poured in and the cost plunged. By 2017, advocates were predicting cost parity with traditional meat within five years.

It’s 2023 – so where is it? While some products are getting closer, they’re still not cheaper than traditional meat. Sceptics argue the technological barriers are insurmountable.

There’s some merit to this critique. Scale is the hardest step for any new technology. Many cultivated meat companies have succeeded in the laboratory, but none have gone all the way to commercial scale. There are still issues to iron out, such as ensuring bioreactors stay sterile at large scales, and navigating food regulations. Last year’s economic turbulence has also seen private investment drop, though public investment has risen.

Small, high-tech countries like Singapore and Israel are leaders in this area. Both nations are acutely aware of their climate vulnerabilities and dependence on food imports.

Singapore imports 90% of its food, for instance. This is why they’re looking at cultivated meat as well as other alternative proteins. Two years ago, Singapore became the first place in the world where you can actually buy cultivated meat. This didn’t just happen. They invested in talent, streamlined regulations and actively set out to attract companies.

Could Australia follow suit?

Australia has been one of the world’s top three beef exporters for more than 70 years. We’re also a biotech leader. Two decades ago, Australia’s biotech sector was tiny. Now it’s amongst the top five in the world.

Growing cells in culture has been done for decades in biomedical research. What’s new is applying this biotech knowledge to food.

Is it a threat to farmers? Not necessarily. Diversifying into new protein markets – as US beef giants like Cargill are doing – could help Australian farmers and agribusinesses stay competitive. Australian startups like Vow and Magic Valley want to kickstart the local cultivated meat industry. Vow plans to launch its cultivated quail in Singapore.

We’ll need a combination of private and public investment to overcome the remaining technical and financial barriers to scale. Cellular Agriculture Australia has laid out three ways government investment could encourage this sector: develop talent, create cooperative research centres and build flexible biomanufacturing infrastructure for pilot and full-scale plants.

As we face an increasingly uncertain future, it might be a smart move to secure our food supply while protecting ourselves against climate change – and reducing environmental damage.

Read more:
Looking forward to a future without factory farming

Bianca Le works for Mission Barns and is a Board Director of Cellular Agriculture Australia.

– ref. If we perfect cultivated meat, we could hedge against food shortages as climate chaos intensifies – https://theconversation.com/if-we-perfect-cultivated-meat-we-could-hedge-against-food-shortages-as-climate-chaos-intensifies-191417

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jasvir Kaur Nachatar Singh, Senior Lecturer, La Trobe University

International students are a hugely important part of Australia’s university system and its economy. In 2019, before COVID, international education was worth about A$40.3 billion to the Australian economy.

As of 2022, international students are worth about $25.5 billion but this figure is expected to rise again. Not only has Australia reopened its borders, but it is trying to entice international students by increasing post-study working rights and working rights on student visas.

China is of huge importance to our international student intake, making up 25% of the group as of December 2022. However, students from South Asia – including India – are also important, making up more than 30% of those studying here.

We know South Asian students are extremely keen to work here. Indian graduates were granted the most post-work study visas in the two years leading up to the pandemic. But as of 2022, only 57% of undergraduate Indian students and less than 53% of postgraduates had full-time employment after they graduated.

Our new study talked to South Asian graduates about the support they got trying to find a job. It found they face two main challenges: both career fairs and careers support on Australian campuses are skewed towards domestic students.

Our research

As of December 2022, about 16% of international students in Australia come from India, with a further 9% coming from Nepal. More than 7% of students also come from a combination of Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Afghanistan and the Maldives.

We know that many of these students want to study in Australia so as to get a job here and then gain either permanent residency or citizenship. They are often referred to as “two-step” migrants.

Our study wanted to look at what kind of support this group was receiving around employability – the skills and opportunities needed to find a job. In 2020 we interviewed 20 South Asian graduates to understand their experiences at careers fairs and university career services, as these are the two major vehicles for supporting students to get into jobs.

The graduates were mainly in Melbourne and studied a range of degrees, including business, accounting, finance, engineering, education and public health.

Careers fairs are set up for domestic students

Australian universities invite companies to career fairs on campus to show students what job opportunities are out there and to connect them with prospective employers.

The South Asian graduates we interviewed were disappointed with the fairs. Most of the companies they met had internships, work placements or full-time graduate opportunities but they were largely for domestic students.

As one interviewee seeking a job in business told us:

We did have career fairs at university every semester. But most of the career fairs I attended just have jobs for PRs [permanent residents] or citizens. TR [temporary resident] jobs are very limited. Maybe just two or three companies only at the fair takes in international students or TRs.

Another interviewee, who studied telecommunications also talked of limited opportunities:

Very few companies are open for international students – probably less than ten. So, it is very hard. We don’t have much opportunities due the limited numbers of companies that take in international graduates.

Read more:
Australia wants international students to stay and work after graduation. They find it difficult for 4 reasons

Careers office don’t help enough

Most Australian universities have a career office or career advice service. Careers office offers offer general services around resume checking and tips for interview skills.

The South Asian graduates went to careers offices for help but again, found the advice and resume assistance was geared at domestic students. As another interviewee seeking work in planning told us:

Career advice provided by the university careers office is very generic. It is not going to help or be relevant, as it is supposed to be different for international students who are finding employment in Australia. So, I did not take the advice that they gave me. I got better advice from industry professionals who were also academics at this university.

An engineering graduate who had only found work in a supermarket said he went to the career office several times to try and get his resume “sorted out”.

But they just enrol me for the resume sessions every time I ask for feedback on my resume. I waste my whole day for this. They gave the same tips every time to everyone. So not much help was provided to me. I am still [searching for] jobs in my field of studies, which is engineering.

What do we need to do instead?

Australian universities need to move away from a “once-size-fits-all” approach when it comes to employability support. Some key changes could include:

• initiating partnerships with companies or industry representatives to provide specific job opportunities to international students via internships, work placements and volunteering roles

• inviting more companies to career fairs that will be open to offering opportunities for international students or graduates on temporary visas

• inviting international graduate alumni as guest speakers to career sessions, to mentor students, help modify their resumes and locate work or internship opportunities

• providing careers offices with the capacity to provide practical career planning and development guidance for international students. This is so international students are able to visualise their careers in Australia, in their home country or a third country.

Read more:
‘Are you asking us to sleep under the Harbour Bridge?’: 3 myths about international students and the housing crisis

Australia’s economy and university system rely heavily on international graduates to come and study here. They do so on the premise it will help their career prospects, and Australian universities need to do more to live up to this.

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. ‘Very few companies are open for international students’: South Asian graduates say they need specific support to find jobs – https://theconversation.com/very-few-companies-are-open-for-international-students-south-asian-graduates-say-they-need-specific-support-to-find-jobs-200739

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

The Academy Awards in 2023 were a less scandalous affair than last year – although host Jimmy Kimmel never let us forget “the slap”, with so many jokes it was verging on a dead-horse-beating situation.

In fact it was a relatively wholesome ceremony, defined by great sweeps for films All Quiet On The Western Front and Everything Everywhere All At Once. Perhaps the only “shock” was Angela Bassett losing Best Supporting Actress to Jamie Lee Curtis, and thereby being denied the chance to “do the thing”.

Here, we summarise the most important moments from the 2023 Oscars.

All the looks of the champagne carpet

Deborah Fisher, Lecturer in Design and Fashion Studies, School of Business and Creative Industries, University of the Sunshine Coast

The Oscars 2023 red-carpet fashions will spur a rush of activity as the haute couture and designer looks are rapidly reproduced for the knockoff market.

The pillars of European Haute Couture were well represented. The major players such as Louis Vuitton (Cate Blanchett, Ana de Armas), Armani Privé (Nicole Kidman), Dior Haute Couture (Michelle Yeoh), Valentino (Florence Pugh), Prada (Catherine Martin), Atelier Versace (Lady Gaga), floated across the carpet with all the feel of Paris fashion week.

There was, however, an obvious absence of emerging or avant-garde designers or even American designers. Instead, it would be fair to say there was an abundance of understated looks, with shades of soft ecru and off-white dominating (Halle Berry, Michelle Williams, Emily Blunt, Tems). Where there was colour, it was delectable- mid-toned aqua (Halle Bailey in Dolce & Gabbana), citrusy orange (Sandra Oh in Giambattista Valli), chartreuse (Winnie Harlow in Atelier Versace), palpable purple (Angela Bassett in Moschino).

Red (note the carpet was renamed champagne) got a solid look in with Melissa McCarthy, Anni Strenisko, and Cara Delavinge, who stunned in Elie Saab. The men followed the mostly conservative mood, with Austin Butler and Lenny Kravitz in Saint Laurent, Keith Urban and Ke Huy Quan in Armani Privé, and Paul Mescal in Gucci. Questlove, last year’s Best Documentary winner, adorned his Crocs with sparkles and bling so he could “shine his light,” perhaps the most personalised of the men’s sartorial stories.

And of course, there are some looks that will, although they should not, be copied – Sigourney Weaver’s somewhat matronly Givenchy dress and Eva Longoria’s art deco-inspired, but far too ambitious gown by Zuhair Murad.

Keeping the score

Gregory Camp, Senior Lecturer, University of Auckland School of Music

There was a sore lack of good music throughout this year’s ceremony.

I miss the days of the orchestra pit. The orchestra this year was invisible, other than a few short shots of them leading into commercial breaks and during the Best Original Score announcement. They appeared to be in a conference room somewhere backstage; just because one can pipe in a remote orchestra fairly easily doesn’t mean one should. And despite the fact there was a live orchestra (somewhere), most of the music sounded prerecorded, as it was mixed in a flat, lossy way.

The music clips chosen to accompany the presenters’ and winners’ walks to and from the stage were not very exciting. We heard a lot of a very dull looping motive from Everything Everywhere All at Once as members of its team went to collect their well-deserved awards.

It is possible to write music that is immediately noticeable and interesting; just ask John Williams, who can fit more melodic material into two bars than this whole ceremony had in all its incidental music. All Quiet on the Western Front’s repeating minor triad is at least memorable, although I was surprised it beat Williams’ and Justin Hurwitz’s stronger work for The Fabelmans and Babylon, respectively, to win the Best Score award.

The Best Song nominees this year were uniformly poor, aside from Naatu Naatu, which did its job well and justifiably won the award. Applause from Tell It Like a Woman was really terrible, a surprisingly ineffective song from Oscar stronghold Diane Warren. This Is a Life from Everything Everywhere was also an awful song, but it added a much-needed touch of the bizarre to this slick ceremony.

Naatu Naatu was the only musical moment that brought back something of the Oscars’ glamour of yore. This is one of the first songs from song-rich Indian cinema to break through to the Oscars, but we can hope that it will pave the way for more.

Lady Gaga had a rough start with her Top Gun song Hold My Hand, suffering through some poor vocal intonation, but she warmed into it. Considering this is a film awards show, the poor cinematography for this performance was striking: Gaga was in an overly tight shot and the camera operator had a hard time keeping this very active performer in the frame. That said, I liked the simplicity of the setting for the song, the strong backlighting isolating her and her band in the space and making the large stage seem more intimate.

Rihanna gave a good performance of another lacklustre number, Wakanda Forever’s Lift Me Up. The downbeat, repetitive song didn’t allow her to show very much of her range. This all makes one desperate for a return of the likes of Henry Mancini and Randy Newman to this category.

Brendan Fraser and Best Actor

Ari Mattes, Lecturer in Communications and Media, University of Notre Dame Australia

With his Oscar win for Best Actor for The Whale, Brendan Fraser simply proves something most of us have known all along – he’s a great performer. If anyone had any doubts, they simply needed to watch performances across his career, from Encino Man to Gods and Monsters to his comical cameo as himself in Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star.

His performance in The Whale is fine, and good enough to win the Oscar, but again the win reflects popular sensibilities rather than being a measure of true artistic merit. It’s essentially an easy part in an easily digestible film from a director, Darren Aronofsky, who’s made a career of making genre films that seem more interesting and complex than they actually are.

He returns here, with Fraser, to similar terrain he covered with Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler – getting a performance out of a supposedly washed-up actor that, at least in part, reflects the courage of the actor in appearing warts and all – willingly vulnerable and hopeless.

I reiterate, Fraser is good (as he was in Airheads, although he wasn’t nominated for Best Actor for that performance), but so much of the pathos and energy of the film simply comes from his appearance – and our knowledge that Fraser used to be a Hollywood heartthrob.

And there’s something fundamentally lazy about that.

Michelle Yeoh and Best Actress in a Leading Role

Jindan Ni, Lecturer, Global and Language Studies, RMIT University

Everything Everywhere All at Once became the biggest winner at the 95th Academy Awards – surprising, but also not so surprising. Cast mainly by Asian actors and actresses, this strangely (sometimes even disturbingly) funny but also moving comedy won most of the major awards, including Best Leading Actress and Best Director.

Michelle Yeoh, who is now the first Asian actor to win Best Actress, addressed her acceptance speech directly to “the little boys and girls” who look like herself, and proudly claimed that her winning is “the beacon of hope and possibility” for all the Asians who pursue their dreams in Hollywood, or even more broadly, in Western societies with a long history of deeming Asians as inferior.

The sweeping wins of Everything Everywhere All At Once at the Oscars is a manifestation of reconciliation and inclusiveness that the Academy Awards are attempting to embrace and strive for.

Despite its historical winnings at the Academy Awards, it is hard to say that Everything Everywhere All At Once has successfully managed to make new representations of Asian in the big screen. Yeoh still needed to make good use of her Kung fu skills in the movie to appeal to the audience and the market.

The final thing I would like to add is although Cate Blanchett did not win Best Actress, her formidable and awe-inspiring acting in Tár is by no means inferior.

Just like the nickname “da mowang”, literally meaning “the mighty devil”, the Chinese audience has given to Cate, her powerful and almost enigmatic performance in Tár also tells of the infinite possibilities for women who refuse to be defined by age, which largely resonate with Yeoh’s words: “Ladies, don’t ever let anyone tell you you are past your prime.”

Celebrity legacy at the Oscars

Robert Boucaut, PhD Candidate and Tutor, Media Department, University of Adelaide

The choice of winners for the acting categories at the 2023 Oscars speaks to a respect for building celebrity legacy – all are actors over 50 years of age and on their first-ever nominations.

Despite the backlash copped in the year of the nepo-baby, Jamie Lee Curtis used her speech to thank her dedicated fanbase who have championed her work in action and horror movies.

Fraser and Ke Huy Quan’s outpourings of emotion for their wins signified their deeply felt triumphs over years of uncertainty in filmmaking: an Oscar’s “comeback narrative” always highlights how an industrial status quo works against individuals who fall out of favour in a celebrity marketplace.

And the collectively held breath across film Twitter upon the announcement of Halle Berry presenting the Best Actress award was finally relaxed with Michelle Yeoh’s win – the first woman of colour to win the award presented it to the second, 21 years later.

Across the awards season both Yeoh and Quan demonstrated an acute awareness of the significance their wins would hold as Asian actors, and their speeches invited the audience to dream big. The genuine emotion offered and elicited across all four categories were a refreshing rebuttal for an Oscars cynic, that the symbolic power of these awards can be put in service of expanding notions of prestige acting and celebrity.

The best picture? Or was it

Ari Mattes

The production companies behind Everything Everywhere All at Once must be frothing at the mouth – not only have they cleaned up at the box office, making (by conservative estimates) five times their budget, but their film has now won the Best Picture Oscar.

Does it deserve it? In much of the commentary around the film, moral and aesthetic categories are being confused. It is good that it has won, because it’s an independent production, and it’s nice that a film with Chinese actors in it has won. But this is a moral argument.

Although undeniably a crowd-pleaser, I found the film aesthetically drab. It was overlong, a mess of ideas derived from other (and often better) works, and the whole thing was overlaid with a kind of irritatingly cutesy schtick.

It works okay as a 1980s-style blockbuster, but as a piece of cinema it is doubtful it will have any bearing or longevity in the cultural archive.

Was it actually the best picture of 2022? No – there were six better films nominated for the award, with The Banshees of Inisherin a true cinematic masterpiece – not to mention all the excellent films that had no showing in the Oscars.

What its win does suggest (along with the success of Top Gun: Maverick), is that audiences are craving nostalgic cinema that plays well on the big screen. And this will excite the kinds of mega-corporations that produce indie cinema these days – they can simply recycle and combine material from their VHS collection.

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. Winning everything everywhere all at once: 5 experts on the big moments at the Oscars 2023 – https://theconversation.com/winning-everything-everywhere-all-at-once-5-experts-on-the-big-moments-at-the-oscars-2023-201661

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Alexander, Adjunct Associate Professor of Supply Chain Management, Curtin University

Australia Post is seeing red. A lot of it.

After posting a razor-thin profit of $23.6 million in the last six months of 2022, it anticipates a loss for the full 2022-23 financial year – only the second time since being corporatised in 1989.

The last loss was in 2014-15, following a $190 million investment in “transformational reform” of Australia Post’s letters business. At the time, it expressed confidence those efficiency improvements would allow it “to maintain a five-day-a-week delivery”. Now it is pessimistic. With the ongoing collapse in demand for letter delivery, it sees only more losses ahead.

That’s a huge problem, because Australia Post has two main obligations, enshrined in federal legislation. It is required to operate on commercial principles – that is, the federal government wants it to deliver a dividend – while also meeting strict community service obligations.

Those obligations – established in 1989 and last reviewed in 2019 – require delivering letters to 98% of all Australian addresses five days a week, and in more remote areas to 99.7% of addresses at least twice a week, generally within two days of posting.

The Morrison government temporarily relaxed those obligations between May 2020 and June 2021 so Australia Post could divert resources to its parcel delivery services as online shopping boomed during the pandemic. Now the organisation wants those community service obligations reduced permanently.

Read more:
COVID hands Australia Post opportunity to end daily delivery

Cost of service obligations

Meeting the obligations cost $348.5 million in 2021-22, says a federal government discussion paper on “postal services modernisation” published this month. It says they “are no longer financially sustainable and are not well targeted at the needs of Australians due to changes brought about by the digitisation of the economy”.

It’s hard to disagree. The numbers are incontrovertible. The hundreds of millions of dollars a year being lost on letter delivery will only get bigger. People just don’t need a daily postal service like they used to.

In the red, and dying

In the 2021-22 financial year, Australia Post made a slim profit of $55 million on revenues of $8.97 billion. That’s a 0.6% profit margin, far below the 8.5% average within the transport services sector.

The surplus was due only to its parcel-delivery business, which grew about 12% in 2021-22 after four years of growing at more than 20%. Letters now account for less than 20% of Australia Post’s revenue.

The discussion paper notes letter volumes in Australia is now less than half what they were in 2008. This is not as severe as countries such as New Zealand or Denmark, but worse than Germany, Japan, the United States and the United Kingdom.

Declines in postal organisation letter volumes

Government agencies and businesses now account for 97% of mail sent. Overall volume will decline as they move to cheaper, more efficient online methods. Even major postal events like election campaigns are likely to disappear, with postal voting replaced by digital technology.

What can be done?

The discussion paper flags a range of possible responses.

One is to charge higher prices. Britain’s Royal Mail, for example, has raised postage prices by 64% over the past five years.

Australia Post increased the rate for standard letter delivery from A$1.10 to A$1.20 in January, which the discussion paper notes is significantly less than the average of $2.08 for OECD countries.

Higher prices may boost profit for a year or two, but in the longer term will just accelerate the transition to non-postal methods.

Another option is investing in more efficient sorting technology, particularly automation. The French and German postal services are doing this. But Australia Post has already made huge investments in efficiencies, and doing more will cost the federal government money – something it won’t want to do given the budget position.

What about local post offices?

Another option is to reduce Australia Post’s network of post offices, of which there are more than 4,300. This number is tied to another community service obligation: that no one live further than 2.5km from a post office in a metropolitan area, or 7.5km in a non-metropolitan area.

The discussion paper notes Australia has more post offices than supermarkets. They cost $1.3 billion to operate in 2021-22.

These provide posting, pickup, banking, transaction and retail services. But their need is diminishing as all things are progressively digitised. An argument could be made that some, at least in metropolitan areas, could be replaced with smart lockers for parcel pick-up.

But that’s likely to be politically contentious, with less financial gain, than the most obvious choice – to scrap the community service obligation to deliver post five days a week.

New Zealand’s postal service did this in 2013, moving to delivery every other day. Sweden did so in 2020 as a trial, with the intention of making it permanent.

Some will miss the daily service. But most of us won’t. As the relaxation to deliveries every second day showed during the COVID period, it is likely most people won’t even notice.

Paul Alexander 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. Post apocalypse: the end of daily letter deliveries is in sight – https://theconversation.com/post-apocalypse-the-end-of-daily-letter-deliveries-is-in-sight-201094

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dejan Stojanovic, Postdoctoral Fellow, Australian National University

Captive breeding of threatened species for release into the wild is an important conservation tool. But where threats to wild populations remain unresolved, this tool may not guarantee population recovery in the long term.

Our new research on one of the most endangered birds in the world shows we need to tackle underlying threats to survival if we are to save species from extinction in the wild.

Captive breeding and release is sustaining the population of orange-bellied parrots, holding extinction at bay. But most of the young born into the population each year die during their migration and winter.

Our modelling shows that if captive breeding and release stopped tomorrow, orange-bellied parrots would soon become extinct. The natural birth rate is too low to compensate for the high death rates of juveniles. So we’re locked into releasing captive-bred parrots until we can solve the underlying problems afflicting the wild population. Unfortunately, it’s not clear exactly what those problems are.

Read more:
Regent honeyeaters were once kings of flowering gums. Now they’re on the edge of extinction. What happened?

No guarantees when threats remain

Globally, captive breeding has prevented the extinction of iconic species such as the California condor.

However, despite the benefits of captive breeding, success is not guaranteed. This is especially so when captive-bred animals are released into habitats where threats remain unresolved. In such cases, captive-bred animals will succumb to the same threats as their wild counterparts.

For some species, identifying and correcting threats is straightforward. For example, removing introduced predators from islands may be a way to eliminate a threat and optimise the benefit of releases from captivity.

But the exact nature of threats is often not clear-cut, especially for species that move over large areas. This can create uncertainty about what the threats are, where they occur, and how to resolve them.

Inability to mitigate threats may result in lost opportunities for released animals to learn crucial behaviours such as migration or song, and ultimately, the decline of wild populations.

Conservationists may sometimes need to “buy time” and prevent extinction in the wild by releasing animals to ensure the continuity of animal cultures in landscapes where threats persist.

Locked into a cycle of dependency

The orange-bellied parrot is one of the most endangered birds in the world. In 2016, just four females returned to Tasmania from migration, and only one of them produced a surviving descendant. (The species migrates from its summer breeding ground in southwestern Tasmania to the coasts of southeastern mainland Australia, but these movements take a toll on the population.)

Fortunately, despite ongoing uncertainty about reducing threats, intensive conservation efforts have grown the population. More than 30 females have returned from migration annually over the past two years. Despite this success, most juvenile parrots (both captive-bred and wild-born) that leave Tasmania on their northward migration die.

Overcoming the unresolved threats that drive this high mortality is crucial for making this population self-sustaining. Unfortunately due to the practical limitations of studying a small, scattered population across remote areas, it is unlikely that this knowledge gap can be addressed in the short term. In the meantime, there are several options available.

We used simulations to compare the benefits of different management scenarios on the orange-bellied parrot. We showed that of all the potential intervention options available to the recovery project, releasing captive juveniles in autumn – to learn from wild adults, and increase the size of migrating flocks – was the most beneficial.

However, none of the interventions available to managers can directly address the underlying problem of high juvenile mortality, so their benefits were temporary. When we simulated stopping captive releases, the populations rapidly went extinct. Without addressing the underlying threats faced by the species, we found the natural birth rate too low to compensate for high juvenile mortality rates.

Until a solution is found for high migration and winter mortality rates, orange-bellied parrots will remain dependent on captive breeding and release to prevent extinction and grow the population.

Lulled into a false sense of security

Orange-bellied parrots provide a stark reminder that there is no “quick fix” for most threatened species. Although captive breeding for release can effectively prevent extinction in the short term, long-term self-sustaining populations in the wild depend on finding solutions for the threats that caused their decline in the first place. Until solutions can be found, management agencies may be locked into a cycle of conservation dependency aimed at preventing extinction, but struggle to address the threats that cause the underlying problems.

Read more:
Australia’s red goshawk is disappearing. How can we save our rarest bird of prey from extinction?

Given the global popularity and visibility of captive breeding programs, it is easy to be lulled into a false sense of security that they are a quick fix for the extinction crisis. However, identifying the threats to wild populations early is crucial because re-establishing “extinct in the wild” species from captivity is extremely difficult, albeit not impossible.

In the case of the orange-bellied parrot, we hope preventing extinction of the wild population through releases of captive-bred birds may buy enough time to identify and mitigate the causes of high juvenile migration/winter mortality. But we also hope our study is a reminder to policymakers that conservation of wild populations should focus on identifying and preventing threats, negating the need for captive breeding in the first place.

Read more:
Get the basics right for National Environmental Standards to ensure truly sustainable development

Dejan Stojanovic received funding for this project from the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, via NRM South.

Carolyn Hogg receives funding from the Australian Research Council, and was a member of the Orange-bellied Parrot recovery team from 2011 to 2021.

Rob Heinsohn 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. Orange-bellied parrot shows there’s more to saving endangered species than captive breeding – https://theconversation.com/orange-bellied-parrot-shows-theres-more-to-saving-endangered-species-than-captive-breeding-201226

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Len Gillman, Professor of Biogeography, Auckland University of Technology

By the end of this month, speed limits on more than 2,000 roads across Tāmaki Makaurau/Auckland will have been reduced by between 10 and 60 kilometres per hour (km/h). Part of the Auckland Transport (AT) safe speeds programme, the aim is to reduce serious injuries and fatalities.

According to AT, areas where speeds have already been reduced have seen a 30% reduction in road deaths, compared to a 9% increase in deaths where they have not.

But there is another benefit to reducing speeds on our roads – a reduction in carbon emissions. Cars and other passenger vehicles were responsible for 27% of New Zealand’s gross carbon dioxide emissions in 2018. At lower speeds, vehicles use less fuel and emit less carbon dioxide.

Ultimately, it’s about climate change. The recent extreme weather events that have wreaked havoc across many communities in Aotearoa are only an entrée. The main course is yet to come.

But to see a significant emissions reduction from the country’s motor vehicle fleet, local and central government agencies must go beyond lowering speeds on small sections of inner-city and rural roads. Motorway speeds should targeted, too.

Less fuel, lower emissions

Driving slower on highways saves fuel. At higher speeds, engines must work harder to overcome drag, mainly from wind resistance. That drag increases exponentially the faster a vehicle goes. This is especially true for larger, less fuel-efficient vehicles.

A recent study found that reducing the maximum speed on New Zealand roads from 100 to 80 km/h reduced fuel use by approximately 15%.

The OECD has estimated that the fuel consumption of vehicles travelling at 90 km/h was 23% lower than at 110 km/h. In the Netherlands, increased enforcement of 100 km/h speed limits reduced average speeds by 7 km/h.

Read more:
We may be underestimating just how bad carbon-belching SUVs are for the climate – and for our health

This resulted in savings of 40 million litres of petrol, 40 million litres of diesel, and 15 million litres of LPG. Conversely, an aggressive driving style involving rapid acceleration and hard braking can increase fuel consumption by up to 30%.

It’s difficult to see how New Zealand will meet CO₂ emission reduction targets by 2050. Government policies encouraging people to buy fuel-efficient cars are a start, but they fail to provide real incentives to change the behaviour of those with the most polluting vehicles.

People who can afford to drive large, luxury vehicles with poor carbon-emission ratings (such as a new Audi Q7 or Range Rover) are unlikely to be troubled by the cost of the carbon fuel tax or the high emissions fee on new vehicles. Also, these measures won’t make any difference to the emissions from existing vehicles on New Zealand roads.

Read more:
To get New Zealanders out of their cars we’ll need to start charging the true cost of driving

Fairer than a fuel tax

Imposing a lower maximum speed limit on high-emission vehicles would have an impact, however. New Zealand currently has a different maximum speed limit of 90 km/h for cars towing trailers, and for heavy vehicles. Why not extend this to include targeted climate-polluting vehicles?

This would achieve two things: it would make people less keen to buy high-emission vehicles, and it would cut the emissions of high-polluting vehicles already on the road. Large fossil-fuel engines produce more emissions, and therefore have the most to offer by reducing their speed.

A 10 km/h maximum speed reduction will only add two to four minutes to a 100 kilometre trip. Those who need to drive large vehicles for commercial use will have marginally increased costs due to longer drive times, but they will save on fuel bills.

This policy option is also more equitable than fuel taxes. Emission reductions will be achieved without any added cost to low-income families with older, less-efficient vehicles (unless, of course, they choose to speed.) And it is feasible because number plate recognition technology allows vehicle type to be instantly identified by police or through camera images.

Read more:
Lower speed limits don’t just save lives – they make NZ towns and cities better places to live

Speed up on policy

Some may wonder, when so few people seem to obey speed limits anyway, how this change might make any difference.

But those who exceed the speed limit by, say, 10 km/h usually do so regardless of the limit. So, if they drive 110 in 100 km/h zones, they will likely drive at 100 in 90 km/h zones: still a reduction of 10 km/h.

Of course, high-performance electric vehicles don’t produce higher emissions at higher speeds. If wealthy people and businesses want the higher speed limit to apply, they can buy electric vehicles.

Lower speeds on our roads and motorways would mean a reduction in both crashes and greenhouse gas emissions. The government should speed up and act.

Len Gillman 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 NZ should lower motorway speed limits for SUVs and other high-emission vehicles – https://theconversation.com/why-nz-should-lower-motorway-speed-limits-for-suvs-and-other-high-emission-vehicles-201466

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

As Anthony Albanese readies for the imminent unveiling of details of the nuclear-powered submarine acquisition program under AUKUS, one important question looms.

Can the prime minister juggle this closer Australian-American military embrace with a continuation of the improving Australian-Chinese relationship?

Albanese has been on the international stage for the best part of a year now, and he has been sure-footed.

The most notable development in that time has been China taking Australia out of the freezer, following the low of the Scott Morrison years.

The Australian government has been careful not to over-hype the progress, talking about “stabilising” the relationship, rather than using stronger language.

Nevertheless, the government is ambitious in terms of China. One hope is for an invitation for Albanese to visit Beijing as early as this year.

Will the hoopla in San Diego, where Albanese will be alongside US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, slow things down?

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s government is vocally critical of AUKUS, which the US, UK and Australia conceived, at its core, as part of a long-term policy of containment of China.

On the other hand, China sees the continuation of its recent, more outward-looking diplomacy, which in part has driven the improved relationship with Australia, to be in its national interest. And China will also note that the major delivery points in the submarine program (reportedly involving both US and British boats) are well into the future.

The Australian government will hope China lets this particular AUKUS moment pass with a few sharp words but without fallout for the bilateral progress.

If and when Albanese sets foot in Beijing in the relatively near term, it will probably be the greatest diplomatic challenge he’s faced up to that point.

Striking the right note when your host is the country you are overtly boosting your military capability against is an exacting test.

Read more:
The long-awaited AUKUS submarine announcement is imminent. What should we expect?

On another front, when you think of Labor history, it’s been remarkable how easily Albanese has been able to don Morrison’s AUKUS clothes.

The early fitting for these garments came when Morrison, with Biden and then-British PM Boris Johnson, announced the historic security agreement, which gives Australia access to key technology, in September 2021.

It had been a tightly-held secret, so there was little time for Albanese to prepare. But given his small target strategy, he knew there had to be a near-instant response and that it must be positive.

Labor signed up. There was no sign of revolt from the left in caucus, no agonised party debate.

Compare, for example, when then-Prime Minister Bob Hawke had to retreat under caucus pressure after agreeing American planes could use Australian facilities as part of monitoring MX missile tests in the Pacific.

Labor has strongly supported the US alliance over the decades. But within, Labor there have often been arguments over particulars. In 1963, during the Cold War, the stance Labor should adopt on the planned North West Cape Naval Communication Station caused a massive internal upheaval.

At that time, Labor’s extra-parliamentary organisation was a powerful and fierce beast, and then-opposition leader Arthur Calwell and his deputy Gough Whitlam had to wait outside a Canberra hotel while the party’s federal conference debated the issue (it gave approval in a knife-edge vote).

The power of the extra-parliamentary party has long been quashed. In the parliamentary caucus, the left (in which Albanese was once an outspoken member) has become the tamest of creatures. The factions these days are primarily groups for dividing up spoils rather than hotbeds for policy argument.

Read more:
As Australia’s military ties with the US deepen, the Top End becomes even more vital to our security

These days, the Greens are the party of choice for many hard-line left wingers.

On AUKUS, we’re not seeing a crack of light between Albanese and Peter Dutton, with the opposition leader last week affirming, ahead of the announcement, support for all the decisions to be taken under the pact.

Although its strategic implications and reach are enormous and the government will stress the jobs and other economic benefits involved, the submarine announcement won’t seem to have great immediate relevance for many voters.

But when we think about the services we want from government, there’s another story.

In the October budget, defence funding for 2022-23 was 1.96% of GDP. Albanese has flagged that it will rise in the May budget. Over the coming years, given a threatening strategic outlook and the huge cost of the submarines and other purchases, it is expected to increase substantially.

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Adam Bandt is wedged by Greens’ overreach on emissions legislation

While the imposts will be tilted to future years (and future governments), the trajectory will nevertheless be clear.

This comes as other pressures on the budget – from the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the health system, interest on debt – are great. And that’s besides the pressure to boost the amount those on unemployment benefits receive, and other welfare demands.

The implications for the May budget are just the start. By the time it faces the people again, by May 2025, Labor will need to have a lot more to say about how it is going to raise enough money to pay for the calls on the budget – calls from programs it wants to fund and from others, like the submarines, that it knows it must.

In 2025, the Albanese government won’t be able to be a small target.

Michelle Grattan 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. View from The Hill: Anthony Albanese finds Scott Morrison’s AUKUS clothes a good fit – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-anthony-albanese-finds-scott-morrisons-aukus-clothes-a-good-fit-201640

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Patterson, Senior Lecturer, School of Nursing, University of Wollongong

The idea of the 15-minute city, according to its originator Carlos Moreno, is that people are no more than a 15-minute walk or bike ride away from all the services they need to live, learn and thrive.

The idea is appealing in its simplicity: it puts people and the environment at the centre of urban planning. It involves building new urban centres and restructuring existing ones to ensure the services people need for work, food, health, education, culture and leisure are all close by – a walk or bike ride from home. Key elements are: the proximity of necessities; local participation and decision-making; community solidarity and connection; and green and sustainable urban living.

This re-imagining of local living is quickly going global. Its proponents are many and growing, and the idea is being applied on big city stages. Most notably, the 15-minute city was a feature of Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo’s successful re-election campaign in 2020.

The United Nations has hailed the 15-minute city as a means by which cities can emerge from COVID, as well as reduce the damaging dependence on cars. The potential to promote mental health and wellbeing is significant.

Read more:
We’re at a fork in the road: do we choose neighbourhoods to live, work and play in?

Enter the conspiracists

In 2023, though, conspiracy theories and protests have threatened to drown out the discussion of such positives.

How did that happen? By finding itself sitting at the centre of debates about COVID living, climate change and car-centric societies, the 15-minute city has become a focal point of attention for those who imagine more sinister motives are at work. Conspiracists have spouted misdirected fears of the forced loss of cars, the creation of locked urban zones people cannot leave, and government surveillance and control.

These notions were even raised recently in the UK parliament. Conservative MP Nick Fletcher called the 15-minute city an “international socialist concept” that “will cost us our personal freedom”.

Read more:
15-minute cities: how to separate the reality from the conspiracy theory

A chance to improve mental health and wellbeing

In fact, personal and community freedom, by way of giving people back meaningful time currently lost to commuting and other travel, is exactly what Moreno and proponents of 15-minute cities are focused on. In their drive to grow, cities tend to push people, the environment and their health to the periphery. Through their sprawl, Moreno argues, cities take away freedom by taking time and disconnecting their inhabitants from services and each other.

Importantly, these effects increase the risks to people’s mental health. Moreno wants us to move away from fracturing our living into “inhuman bigness”, and towards planning that focuses on what access to services, local connection and community means for the wellbeing of people and communities.

Read more:
People love the idea of 20-minute neighbourhoods. So why isn’t it top of the agenda?

This is why the 15-minute city presents a great opportunity for better mental health. Long commuting times and the stressors of traffic congestion, road conditions and punctuality are linked to declines in subjective measures of mental health and wellbeing for workers. The benefits of reducing these stressors could be immediate.

Physical activities like walking and cycling are also widely understood to benefit mental health, as does exposure to natural, green spaces. Creating local spaces for leisure and play is vital for children and parents alike.

But, deeper than that, we need cities and urban spaces purposefully designed to promote mental health in ways that are globally recognised as impactful and essential. This process involves improving a range of social and environmental factors for individuals and community.

Read more:
1 in 4 Australians is lonely. Quality green spaces in our cities offer a solution

COVID sharpened the focus on wellbeing

Lessons learned from COVID lockdowns have sharpened global understanding of the mental health crises and harm done to people’s wellbeing by loneliness, social isolation and disconnectedness. These conditions damage the wellbeing of communities too, by fostering stigma and promoting exclusion.

We need to move quickly towards ways of living that promote connection, inclusion and healthy communities and environments. We can achieve these goals through participation, local decision-making and sustainable ecologies.

Imagine cities with accessible housing, work and education. Imagine cities with mental health service where the focus is on inclusion, participation, connection and equitable access. Where health workers and essential services are local and available, with minimal obstacles. Imagine mental health service that is threaded through the community in meaningful, impactful ways – where every square metre is considered for its potential to improve health and wellbeing.

Mental health, wellbeing and recovery require social connection, inclusion and accessible health services. These are, without doubt, key factors in achieving better mental health. And the 15-minute city could be the template for its delivery.

Read more:
Greening the greyfields: how to renew our suburbs for more liveable, net-zero cities

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

– ref. Forget the conspiracies, 15-minute cities will free us to improve our mental health and wellbeing – https://theconversation.com/forget-the-conspiracies-15-minute-cities-will-free-us-to-improve-our-mental-health-and-wellbeing-200823

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Zunica, Lecturer in Secondary Maths Education, University of Sydney

From March 15, more than one million young Australians will sit the NAPLAN numeracy test. For most students, this will just be a routine part of the school day (albeit less fun than running around at recess or lunch).

But for others, the prospect of doing a maths test will be downright terrifying. These students may be suffering from maths anxiety.

We are academics in mathematics education. Here’s how to help your child if they are experiencing maths anxiety.

Read more:
What do the NAPLAN test changes mean for schools and students?

What is maths anxiety?

Maths anxiety is the feeling of tension and worry that interferes with a person’s ability to solve mathematical problems. Researchers consider maths anxiety to be distinct from general anxiety, or test anxiety, though there is some crossover.

Maths anxiety usually develops as a result of poor experiences with maths, which leads to negative thought patterns about your maths potential. These thoughts can manifest in an avoidance of maths and feelings of helplessness when confronted with tests.

Maths anxiety is a common issue for many young people and adults and can be seen in children as young as five.

According to Stanford University mathematics education professor Jo Boaler, as of 2012, up to 50% of adults had maths anxiety. The Victorian Department of Education suggests rates are lower, at between six and 17%. However, the average rate in academic studies tends to be approximately 20%.

That means there are thousands of children who will be dreading the upcoming NAPLAN numeracy test.

So, what can a parent do to help their anxious child achieve their best in the NAPLAN numeracy test and other maths exams? Here are three practical things you can do right away and into the future:

1. Focus on successes to build confidence

Most children want to be good at maths. If they are younger, they will likely understand this is something their teachers and parents think is important. If they are older, they will know it is important for future jobs and careers.

One of the key sources of maths anxiety is despite wanting to be good at maths, students have received consistently negative feedback about their ability. This may just be by comparing themselves to others or more formally through poor results.

To reduce anxiety, it is important to focus on the positive, showing your child times where they have had success in maths. Experiences of success are vital in paving the way to further success in maths.

A practical way to demonstrate success is by getting the child to do an old worksheet, even as far back as two years ago. Students in years 5 and above could do a previous NAPLAN test at a lower level. This shows them how they have progressed.

After completing the sheet, focus on areas of strength – such as “you got all the long divisions correct!” – to help build confidence. This experience of success can be used as a base to then tackle more complicated tasks.

2. Avoid ‘NAPLAN overload’

Anxiety about NAPLAN and any other assessments can be exacerbated by over-emphasising its importance in the build up. A more constructive approach is to reassure your child there is no judgement in how they perform.

Currently, most schools are working hard to prepare students for NAPLAN and discussions about the test are regularly taking place. Because of this, it can be easy for children with maths anxiety to get “NAPLAN overload”. At home, it is useful to limit your discussion of the upcoming tests to times where the child is doing work to prepare for it.

We recommend trying to make the day an exciting one, rather than a terrifying one. For example, you might have a special NAPLAN breakfast on the day of the test.

Read more:
What parents should and shouldn’t say when talking to their child about NAPLAN results

3. Work alongside your child

During COVID many families felt the strain taking a hands-on role with their children’s education (who did not take kindly to mum or dad suddenly becoming their “teacher”). So parents may be tempted to leave their children alone to study or do homework. But this won’t help relieve maths anxiety.

A more beneficial approach is for for parents to study alongside younger children, and show interest in the work older children are completing. Teenagers may not be open to help when you offer the first time but make it clear that you’re there if they need you and you aren’t seeking to judge them.

This approach shows the child their parent is engaged with their work and positive about their ability to learn.

It cannot be underestimated how much a parents’ approach to learning maths influences their child’s approach. Try and have positive conversations with your child about maths and how we use it everyday. This can be help dispel negative attitudes, such as children thinking, “this is too hard and is just something I need to do at school”. You might want to use maths to work through a “best buy” at the supermarket or use length and area to determine how to arrange the furniture in a room.

As the test day nears, families should not have to stress out about NAPLAN. Preparation focused on celebrating successes and positive experiences can encourage students to simply do their best.

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

– ref. ‘Maths anxiety’ is a real thing. Here are 3 ways to help your child cope – https://theconversation.com/maths-anxiety-is-a-real-thing-here-are-3-ways-to-help-your-child-cope-200822

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonti Horner, Professor (Astrophysics), University of Southern Queensland

Hot on the heels of the disappointing Green Comet, astronomers have just discovered a new comet with the potential to be next year’s big story – C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan-ATLAS).

Although it is still more than 18 months from its closest approach to Earth and the Sun, comet Tsuchinshan-ATLAS already has social media buzzing, with optimistic articles being written about how it could be a spectacular sight. What’s the full story on this new icy wanderer?

Introducing comet C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan-ATLAS)

Every year, a few dozen new comets are discovered – dirty snowballs moving on highly elongated paths around the Sun. The vast majority are far too faint to see with the unaided eye. Perhaps one comet per year will approach the edge of naked-eye visibility.

Occasionally, however, a much brighter comet will come along. Because comets are things of ephemeral and transient beauty, the discovery of a comet with potential always leads to excitement.

Comet C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan-ATLAS) certainly fits the bill. Discovered independently by astronomers at Purple Mountain Observatory in China and the Asteroid Terrestrical-impact Last Alert System, ATLAS, the comet is currently between the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn, a billion kilometres from Earth. It is falling inwards, moving on an orbit that will bring it to within 59 million kilometres of the Sun in September 2024.

The fact the comet was found while it’s so far away is part of the reason for astronomers’ excitement. Although currently some 60,000 times too faint to see with the naked eye, the comet is bright for something so far from the Sun. And observations suggest it’s following an orbit that could allow it to become truly spectacular.

A recipe for comet greatness

It’s all down to a combination of the comet’s path through the Solar System, and the potential size of its nucleus – the solid centre.

As comets swing closer to the Sun, they heat up, and their surface ices sublime (turn from a solid to a gas). Erupting from the comet’s surface, this gas carries along dust, shrouding the nucleus in what’s called a coma – a giant cloud of gas and dust. The coma is then pushed away from the Sun by solar wind, resulting in a tail (or tails) pointing directly away from the Sun.

The closer a comet gets to the Sun, the hotter its surface becomes, and the more active it will get. Historically, the vast majority of the brightest, most spectacular comets have followed orbits that brought them closer to the Sun than Earth’s orbit. The closer, the better, and Tsuchinshan-ATLAS certainly ticks that box.

In fact, this new comet seems to tick all the boxes. It appears to have a sizeable nucleus, making it brighter (bright enough to be discovered so far from the Sun). It is destined to have a very close encounter with our star. And, the kicker, it will then pass almost directly between Earth and the Sun, approaching within 70 million kilometres of us just two weeks after perihelion (the closest approach to the Sun). The closer a comet comes to Earth, the brighter it will appear to us.

Put that together, and you have a recipe for a comet that could shine as brightly as the brightest stars. Some forecasts are even more bullish, suggesting it could be up to a hundred times brighter still!

Read more:
Meteors seem to be raining down on New Zealand, but why are some bright green?

The curse of prediction

Comets are like cats: they have tails, and they do precisely what they want
– astronomer David H. Levy.

Predicting how newly discovered comets will behave is a dangerous game. Some may be spectacular, while others fizzle.

Take, for example, comet Kohoutek, in 1973. Like Tsuchinshan-ATLAS, Kohoutek was discovered unusually far from the Sun, moving on an orbit that swung close to our star. Cue the hype. Astronomers promised the public “the comet of the century”, predicting Kohoutek could become bright enough to see in broad daylight.

But comets are like cats. Kohoutek brightened as it swung in towards the Sun, but more slowly than expected. Rather than being visible in broad daylight, it was only as bright as the brightest stars, and faded quickly after perihelion. It was still a good show, but far from the comet of the century. Because of the hype, many dubbed Kohoutek a spectacular disappointment.

It turns out Kohoutek was passing through the inner Solar System for the very first time. It had never come so close to the Sun, so its surface was rich in highly volatile ice which began to sublime when the comet was still far away. At that great distance, the comet was much brighter than other, more experienced comets – and that brightness suggested the comet would be truly spectacular.

As it came closer to the Sun, those volatiles were exhausted, and the comet’s final activity was less than initially predicted, making it fainter.

There is a very real chance Tsuchinshan-ATLAS might, like comet Kohoutek, be approaching the inner Solar System for the first time. We’re not yet sure – but if it is, it might also wind up being less spectacular than predicted.

Where it all falls apart

But it could be even worse. Comets are prone to disaster. They fragment, fall apart, and disintegrate surprisingly often. Those coming into the inner Solar System for the first time are particularly fragile.

A recent example of such a fragmentation was comet C/2020 F8 (SWAN). When SWAN was discovered, it looked promising – likely to become a naked-eye object in May 2020. But as it approached the Sun, it suddenly brightened, then became fuzzy, and began to fade away. By the time it should have been brightest, it had all but disappeared, having fallen apart before our very eyes.

On the flip side, fragmentation events can sometimes turn a good comet into a great one. Three years after Kohoutek came comet C/1975 V1 (West), and it was truly spectacular.

It passed even closer to the Sun than Tsuchinshan-ATLAS will – and was already dazzling when, at perihelion, its nucleus broke into four pieces. That fragmentation event released a huge amount of gas and dust, and the comet brightened markedly, even becoming visible in broad daylight.

Will Tsuchinshan-ATLAS be worth the anticipation?

We won’t know for certain whether comet Tsuchinshan-ATLAS will be a spectacle until it arrives. It could fall apart and become less bright, or it could surprise us.

It could brighten more than expected – which would make for an amazing sight in the morning sky in late September and early October 2024, and an even better one in the evening sky in mid-October 2024

We just don’t know. But we’ll get our first hints in the months to come. By tracking how the comet brightens as it glides sunwards, we will get our first indications as to its true fate – so keep your fingers crossed.

Read more:
Comet families similar to our own are found around another star

Jonti Horner 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. Astronomers just discovered a comet that could be brighter than most stars when we see it next year. Or will it? – https://theconversation.com/astronomers-just-discovered-a-comet-that-could-be-brighter-than-most-stars-when-we-see-it-next-year-or-will-it-201377

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Fuller, Charles Perkins Centre Research Program Leader, University of Sydney

It’s a question people ask often: does menopause cause weight gain?

Women commonly put on weight as they enter menopause. Research shows women aged 46-57 gain an average of 2.1kg over five years.

But like many things related to weight, all is not what it seems, and the relationship between menopause and weight gain is not straightforward.

Here’s everything you need to know about menopausal weight gain and what you can do about it.

What typically happens to women’s bodies during menopause?

Menopause marks the natural end of the reproductive stage of a woman’s life. It officially starts when a woman has not menstruated for 12 months, and most women reach menopause between the ages of 45 and 55, but it can happen much earlier or later.

The transition to menopause, however, typically starts four years prior, with perimenopause marking the time when a woman’s ovaries start slowing down, producing less oestrogen and progesterone. Eventually, these hormone levels fall to a point at which the ovaries stop releasing eggs and menstruation stops.

The symptoms associated with the menopausal transition are many and varied, and can include irregular periods, breast pain, vaginal dryness, hot flashes, night sweats, fatigue, difficulty sleeping, and changes in mood and libido.

Read more:
How long does menopause last? 5 tips for navigating uncertain times

So does menopause cause weight gain?

The short answer is no. But it’s complicated.

When it comes to menopause and weight, it’s weight redistribution – not weight gain – that is actually a symptom. Research has confirmed menopause is linked to an increase in belly fat but not an increase in overall weight.

This is because the hormonal changes experienced during menopause only prompt a change in where the body stores fat, making women’s stomachs and waists more prone to weight gain. Research shows visceral fat (deep belly fat) increases by nearly 50% in postmenopausal women, compared with premenopausal women.

It’s also important to recognise some menopause symptoms may indirectly contribute to weight gain:

• sleep issues can lead to sleep deprivation, disturbing the body’s appetite hormones, increasing feelings of hunger and triggering food cravings

• some mood changes can activate the body’s stress responses, increasing the production of the hormone cortisol, promoting fat storage and triggering unhealthy food cravings. Mood can also impact the motivation to exercise

• fatigue, breast pain and hot flushes can make physical activity challenging or uncomfortable, also impacting the ability to exercise.

The truth? Ageing is the real cause of menopausal weight gain

You read that right – the weight gain often associated with menopause is a byproduct of ageing.

As the body ages, it stops working as efficiently. It experiences an involuntary loss of muscle mass – referred to as sarcopenia – and fat levels begin to increase.

Because muscle mass helps determine the body’s metabolic rate (how much energy the body burns at rest), when we lose muscle, the body starts to burn fewer calories at rest.

Ageing also means dealing with other health issues that can make weight management more complex. For example, medications can impact how the body functions, and arthritis and general aches and pains can impact mobility and the ability to exercise.

In short – the body’s ageing process and changing physicality is the real reason women experience menopause weight gain.

Read more:
‘Brain fog’ during menopause is real – it can disrupt women’s work and spark dementia fears

It’s not just weight gain

While menopause doesn’t make you put on weight, it can increase a woman’s risk of other serious health conditions.

The redistributed weight that leads to more fat being carried in the belly can have long-term effects. Belly fat that lies deep within the abdominal cavity (visceral fat) is an especially unhealthy fat because it’s stored close to the organs. People with a high amount of visceral fat have a higher risk of stroke, type 2 diabetes and heart disease than people who hold body fat around their hips.

The reduction in the amount of oestrogen produced by the ovaries during menopause also increases a woman’s risk of heart disease and stroke. This is because oestrogen helps keep blood vessels dilated – relaxed and open – to help keep cholesterol down. Without it, bad cholesterol can start to build up in the arteries.

Lower oestrogen can also result in a loss of bone mass, putting women at greater risk of osteoporosis and more prone to bone fractures and breaks.

The bottom line: can we prevent weight gain during menopause?

Menopause itself does not cause weight gain; it unfortunately just occurs during a stage of life when other factors are likely to. The good news is weight gain associated with ageing is not inevitable, and there are many things women can do to avoid weight gain and health risks as they age and experience menopause.

Start with these six steps:

1. incorporate daily exercise into your routine, with a mixture of intensities and variety of exercises, including body-strengthening exercises twice a week

2. stop dieting. Dieting drives up the weight your body will strive to return to (your “set point”), so you’ll end up heavier than before you began. You’ll also slow down your metabolism with each diet you follow

3. curb your sugar cravings naturally. Every time you feel an urge to eat something sugary or fatty, reach for nature first – fruits, honey, nuts, seeds and avocado are a few suitable examples. These foods release the same feelgood chemicals in the brain as processed and fast food do, and leave us feeling full

4. create positive habits to minimise comfort-eating. Instead of unwinding in the afternoon or evening on the couch, go for a walk, work on a hobby or try something new

5. eat slowly and away from distractions to reduce the quantity of food consumed mindlessly. Use an oyster fork, a child’s fork or chopsticks to slow down your eating

6. switch off your technology for a minimum of one hour before bed to improve sleep quality.

Read more:
‘It changed who I felt I was.’ Women tell of devastation at early menopause diagnosis

Nick Fuller works for the University of Sydney and has received external funding for projects relating to the treatment of overweight and obesity. He is the author and founder of the Interval Weight Loss program.

– ref. Is menopause making me put on weight? No, but it’s complicated – https://theconversation.com/is-menopause-making-me-put-on-weight-no-but-its-complicated-198308

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Bradshaw, Research Assistant, Monash University

In 1974, Woroni, the student magazine of the Australian National University, published an article looking at the lives of lesbians at the university.

One contributor, “Jody”, told of her experience with a doctor who pressured her for details on how she has sex, and who didn’t believe her reports of pain, suggesting it may be “in her head”.

Jody recounted asking the doctor:

‘Are you telling me that I didn’t get endometriosis from a rotten abortion six years ago, that it’s all in my head?’ He quickly retreated and admitted that he knew I had endometriosis and that wasn’t psychological.

It’s important to state categorically you cannot get endometriosis from an abortion, despite what Jody believes caused her endometriosis.

But beliefs like this weren’t alone in the Australian press in the 1970s. It appears from both Jody’s story, and from another article published in the 1960s, it may have been public opinion abortions could result in endometriosis.

As an academic and sufferer of endometriosis, I wanted to know what the history was behind my own disease. How long ago did we start talking about endometriosis?

I went looking in the Trove archive to see how long endometriosis has been talked about in Australian newspapers and magazines, and how it was being written about. The earliest article I found was from 1949, but the 1970s was the first decade we saw endometriosis really being discussed by name in newspapers and magazines.

Read more:
You no longer need surgery to be diagnosed with endometriosis. Here’s what’s changed

What is endometriosis?

Endometriosis is a condition in which tissue similar to the lining of the uterus grows outside the uterus, around other parts of the body.

It affects more than 830,000 Australians and costs Australia $9.7 billion annually in direct medical costs and in lost productivity.

Despite these numbers, many people still don’t know about endometriosis.

Historical texts suggest endometriosis has been around for a very long time. Its most common symptoms of pelvic pain, adhesions and infertility were written about as far back as 1855 BCE.

Doctors were able to identify the disease microscopically in 1860, and it was named endometriosis in 1927 by gynaecologist John Sampson.

A ‘frequently occurring’ disease

I was able to find 12 articles mentioning endometriosis in the Australian popular press of the 1970s. Compared with earlier decades, the disease was now being talked about in personal stories alongside comments from experts.

Endometriosis was often talked about as a comorbidity to infertility, with other symptoms such as pain taking a backseat. Medical experts were the most common people quoted in articles.

Leading up to the 1970s, medical research into endometriosis had established it could grow on the lungs, lymph nodes and the bowels, among other organs. Treatment for the disease during this time was often hormonal therapies, excisions or hysterectomies.

During the 1970s in Australia, news was circulating about Danocrine (also known as Danazol) – a hormonal treatment to combat menstruation pain. Both The Canberra Times and the Australian Women’s Weekly wrote about this “capsule that could end menstrual pain”.

A 1975 feature story in Australian Women’s Weekly presented a couple who sought to have a baby under difficult medical circumstances, including endometriosis. The narrative used in the story is one of fertility “miracles” and impossible odds to clear to become a mother:

When a Sydney girl was told that, because of her medical history, it was unlikely she could ever have a child, she and her husband began talking of adopting – until the unbelievable happened. She became pregnant.

The relationship between pregnancy and endometriosis has a long history, and frequently appeared together in the articles I found. Pregnancy as a cure or symptom suppressor has been around since the Ancient Greeks. Indeed, the first mention I found of endometriosis in the Australian press, an article in Catholic Weekly in 1949, touted pregnancy as the only nonsurgical and “conservative” option for treatment.

(Despite medical research saying pregnancy is not a cure for endometriosis, patients are reporting GPs are still “prescribing” pregnancy in the incorrect belief it relieves symptoms or even cures the disease outright.)

The Australian Women’s Weekly appeared often in my data collection. The magazine did not shy away from talking about topics like the contraceptive pill, infertility and hysterectomies. The magazine published three separate articles on hysterectomies during the 1970s, reassuring readers they’d still be “all woman”.

Read more:
Pregnancy doesn’t ‘cure’ endometriosis, so where does this advice come from?

Learning from our past

What can we learn from historical news articles? In my opinion, a great deal.

Press coverage of diseases plays a huge role in the public’s understanding of a disease. By better understanding how endometriosis was perceived in previous decades, we can identify useful patterns of reporting and make sure the information presented on the disease today is accurate and helpful.

Today, media coverage about endometriosis is more likely to look at endometriosis through new lenses such as its chronic pain, the cost of treatments and loss of productivity.

And unlike in the 1970s, where medical voices were the primary source, now the patient’s voice is front and centre in these stories.

Read more:
Endometriosis costs women and society $30,000 a year for every sufferer

Erin Bradshaw is a part of a research team that receives ARC funding. Bradshaw spent a month with the Conversation on an editorial internship in 2012

– ref. ‘Are you telling me it’s all in my head?’ Endometriosis in the Australian press in the 1970s – https://theconversation.com/are-you-telling-me-its-all-in-my-head-endometriosis-in-the-australian-press-in-the-1970s-198514

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Quentin Hanich, Professor, University of Wollongong

Global squid fishing increased by 68% between 2017 and 2020, according to our international analysis, prompting concerns that much of the international fishing fleet is sidestepping necessary conservation and management.

Our study, carried out with colleagues in Australia, Japan, the United States, Chile and Canada, and published today in Science Advances, reveals that almost all of the increase in squid fishing has occurred in unregulated areas, with 86% of squid fishing now occurring in places with little or no scrutiny of catch sizes.

Unregulated fishing poses a significant challenge to fishery sustainability and raises substantial equity concerns. While attention has tended to focus on illegal fishing, the growth in legal but unregulated fishing may pose an even bigger threat, particularly to species such as squid, whose fisheries can cover entire oceans.

To estimate the scale of global squid fishing, we analysed satellite imagery and vessel tracking data to see how many vessels are fishing for squid, and where and how often they operate.

Read more:
We now have a treaty governing the high seas. Can it protect the Wild West of the oceans?

Squid fishing vessels are typically outfitted with powerful lamps to attract squid to the surface. These lamps are so powerful that they are visible from space. This means we can use satellite data to spot these lights at night, along with data from the ships’ Automatic Identification System (AIS), which allows authorities to monitor the location and course of registered vessels.

Using this data, we estimate that the amount of light-luring vessel effort increased from an estimated 149,000 vessel days in 2017, to 251,000 vessel days in 2020. Of these, 61-63% were by vessels not broadcasting their AIS, and thus only visible by the loom from their lamps. This light-luring vessel effort represents an estimated total of 801,000 vessel days over the period 2017–20.

Finally, we correlated these data with national and regional management bodies, and determine how much of this activity is unregulated.

A complex problem

Regulation and management of globalised squid fisheries is complex, because this fishing takes place both in waters that are under national jurisdiction and on the high seas. Consequently, cooperation is fundamental to ensure fisheries are regulated at sustainable levels and avoid gaps or loopholes.

Regional fisheries management organisations have been established through international treaties to provide the framework for such cooperation, and to regulate so-called “transboundary” fisheries. However, out of 17 such organisations in existence, only two – the North Pacific Fisheries Commission and the South Pacific Fisheries Management Organisation – have dealt with squid fisheries. This means there are still large gaps in the Indian and Atlantic oceans.

Furthermore, it is not enough to create a regional fisheries management organisations; parties must also ensure the organisation actually adopts regulations. The United Nations’ International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing defines unregulated fishing (among other things) as that which occurs “in areas or for fish stocks in relation to which there are no applicable conservation or management measures”. Regional fisheries management organisations must do more than simply exist or adopt general measures if their fisheries are to be considered regulated.

What we found

Our analysis defines “regulated” fisheries as those within the exclusive economic zones of coastal countries, or within regional fisheries management organisations that have implemented specific conservation and management measures for squid stocks. In contrast, we define “unregulated” fisheries as those on the high seas where there is no such organisation in place, or where the relevant organisation has failed to adopt regulations pertaining specifically to squid stocks.

Using satellite imagery, vessel tracking, and data monitoring, our study found that globalised light-luring squid fishing fleets are truly global in scope, fishing across multiple oceans within a given year, moving freely between regulated and unregulated spaces, and catching vast amounts of squid with little or no oversight. Often, there is no requirement to report their catches to anyone other than their flag nation, with little or no independent verification.

Unregulated spaces are often directly adjacent to regulated ones, and different fleets often target the same fisheries. This creates equity concerns for coastal communities that rely on species targeted by large industrial fleets, and for the governments of developing nations that depend on revenue from stocks that move between regulated and unregulated areas.

Furthermore, many of the fishing vessels carrying out unregulated fishing stay at sea for exceptionally long periods (months to years), often refuelling and offloading their catches to other vessels while still at sea, and thus avoiding the oversight that accompanies port calls.

Like all activities that draw on global resources, fishing on transboundary stocks should be fully regulated. Yet the regional bodies with the competence to adopt management measures are often restrained by distant water fishing nations that stall or oppose conservation and management measures.

Read more:
Chinese fishing boats took half a billion dollars of illegal squid from North Korea. Scientists used satellites to catch them out

The global squid fishery shows how important it is to strengthen regional management of high seas resources and to continue international calls for states and regional bodies to take this challenge seriously. These fisheries are ultimately shared by us all, yet few receive any benefit, and nearby countries’ own fish stocks are sometimes unfairly depleted.

Furthermore, the trans-oceanic nature of these fisheries highlights the crucial importance of comprehensive data-sharing agreements between regional fisheries management organisations for improving understanding of the movements of these vessels, and quantifying their impacts on squid stocks.

Quentin Hanich’s participation in this study was funded by Global Fishing Watch and Oceans 5.

Katherine Seto is a Global Fishing Watch research partner and an Honorary Fellow of the Australia National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security (ANCORS).

Adviser for the Chilean Government prior to 2022. Consultant for international and inter-governmental organisations.

– ref. Squid fishing grew by 68% in just three years, raising fears the industry is out of control – https://theconversation.com/squid-fishing-grew-by-68-in-just-three-years-raising-fears-the-industry-is-out-of-control-200943

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olga C. Pandos, PhD Candidate in Technology, Medical Law and Ethics, University of Adelaide

Hundreds of experts from around the world gathered at the Francis Crick Institute in London this week for the Third International Summit on Human Genome Editing.

As at the first and second summits, held in Washington DC in 2015 and Hong Kong in 2018, leading experts in research shared their discoveries and discussed how they should be used.

The prospect of curing certain diseases by changing the parts of our DNA that cause them is becoming a reality. A somatic genome editing treatment for sickle cell disease is set to obtain regulatory approval in the US later this year.

“Delivery” was a recurring issue: the delivery of equitable access to genome editing therapies, ongoing research to optimise delivery systems for genome editing apparatus and delivery of measures to foster discussions regarding regulation, governance, public and patient engagement.

American Nobel laureate David Baltimore aptly noted in his opening remarks, “new technologies continue to challenge our society”. The advent of CRISPR gene-editing technology, short for “Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats”, has reaffirmed this proposition, igniting a global dialogue on its accompanying ethical and regulatory issues.

Five years after the last summit, CRISPR technology has continued to mature. It is an insurmountable task to capture all of the developments in both the science and ethics of CRISPR technology. These will be addressed with reference to the key themes raised during the summit – scientific developments, accessibility and the importance of public and patient engagement.

Scientific developments

Many new advances in genome editing techniques were presented.

American chemist and biologist David Liu reported on findings to use “prime editing” to treat genetic conditions such as Huntington’s disease and Friedreich’s ataxia. Unlike CRISPR, which makes a double stranded cut in the DNA, prime editing induces a single stranded cut. This makes it more versatile and precise for targeted deletion and insertion of genetic sequences.

Read more:
What is gene editing and how could it shape our future?

The summit heard about Vertex Pharmaceutical’s CRISPR-based treatment for sickle cell disease. The treatment is expected to become the first approved CRISPR genome editing therapy later this year.

There were also reports of research using CRISPR technology to treat diseases including Duchenne muscular dystrophy, cancer, HIV/AIDS, heart and muscle disease and inborn errors of immunity. American molecular biologist Eric Olson reported success in using base editing to target CaMKIIδ, a central regulator of cardiac signalling, in restoring cardiac function, as a treatment for myocardial infarction.

Equitable access

As research proceeds and treatments become available, questions about equitable access to the technology arise.

Equity extends beyond considerations of cost, access and ownership, to research engagement and output. This refers to capacity for knowledge production, data sovereignty and collection, access to latest knowledge, opportunities for collaboration and infrastructure to facilitate recruitment and trialling of new therapies.

Access issues are particularly relevant to lower- and middle-income countries, which may be compromised by systemic and structural inequities. Policy and political landscapes, economic constraints and scientific racism further perpetuate this inequity.

Gautam Dongre, representing the National Alliance of Sickle Cell Organisations India, described the reality of those living with sickle cell disease in India, where access to treatment is dire:

“Our priority is to be alive, to receive gene therapy in the future.”

Patient perspectives and public engagement

The summit also gave a platform to the experiences and concerns of people with lived experience of genetic disease. This included insights into the role and utility of public engagement, such as patient advocacy groups, do-it-yourself community groups and citizens’ juries.

A memorable presentation from Victoria Gray – the first recipient of Vertex Pharmaceutical’s CRISPR therapy for sickle cell disease – highlighted its life-changing impact. Gray says her CRISPR-modified “super cells” have cured her, enabling her to lead a disease-free life. The great potential of CRISPR technology can be realised, but importantly, it must be accessible to all.

Concluding remarks

How should CRISPR technology be regulated? This is a critical question.

As the summit’s organisers noted, somatic genome editing has made “remarkable progress”, demonstrating its capability to “cure once-incurable diseases”. Further research is needed to target more diseases and enhance our understanding of risks and unintended consequences.

“Somatic” genome editing (which makes changes that are not heritable) is different to germline and heritable genome editing (which makes heritable changes).

Basic research for germline genome editing, which is not for reproduction purposes, is underway, for example, in gametes and embryos to explore aspects of early development. However, the organising committee concluded that heritable human genome editing for reproduction purposes “remains unacceptable at this time”. This is in light of the absence of preclinical evidence for safety and efficacy, legal authorisation and rigorous oversight and governance.

The concept of “safe enough” was interrogated – whose ethics should be applied to make this value judgment? Does the notion of safety traverse into areas beyond medically defined risks of physical harm?

It is notable that risk tolerance and perception of safety is dictated by an individual’s position in their country, culture, socio-economic status and lived experience.

In 2021, the World Health Organization published a framework for governing human genome editing. This retains its authority as an exemplar for a pathway toward an appropriate regulatory framework. While not overly prescriptive, it was designed to be adaptable for implementation in any jurisdiction. This year, Uganda plans to implement the framework as a pilot project.

The organising committee called for global action to explore measures for equitable and affordable pathways to access genome editing therapies. Ongoing global discussions are far from complete, and perhaps may never be complete, reinforcing the need for collective dialogue to proceed this summit. And on with research, innovation and collaboration.

Olga C. Pandos is a recipient of the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

– ref. Somatic genome editing therapies are becoming a reality – but debate over ethics, equitable access and governance continue – https://theconversation.com/somatic-genome-editing-therapies-are-becoming-a-reality-but-debate-over-ethics-equitable-access-and-governance-continue-201234

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darren O’Donovan, Senior Lecturer in Administrative Law, La Trobe University

The robodebt royal commission hearings came to an end on Friday. Over the past four months, they have delivered a telling portrait of unaccountable government power.

As they look back on a mass of limited recollections, missing paper and inaction, what are key things Australians should take away?

‘I’m appalled’

The first phase of the inquiry was marked by bombshell revelations. Two iron curtains that protect government – legal professional privilege and cabinet confidentiality – were pulled back.

In the opening week, we learned:

• In 2014, Department of Social Services’ legal advice on robodebt was a flat “no”. New legislation was needed to raise debts by averaging annual income. Robodebt went ahead without it.

• In 2017, after enormous public outcry, external legal advice was not sought. Instead, a government lawyer reported feeling “pressure” to produce heavily qualified legal advice. This unpersuasive advice was then used to justify the scheme.

• In 2018, the Department of Social Services, received advice dubbed “catastrophic” for the scheme. It stayed in draft, something lawyers admitted was a common practice.

Confronted by this, Commissioner Catherine Holmes had only two words: “I’m appalled”.

Without the commission, the standard rules on transparency would have applied. Australians would never have known any of it.

Ethically indefensible

Robodebt is about so much more than just the absence of law. After years of semantics and political rhetoric, the hearings confirmed robodebt as baseless, ethically indefensible policy.

Holmes rebuked the program as “amateurish, rushed and disastrous”.

The core concept at the heart of robodebt was the tactical imposition of administrative burden on vulnerable people. Instead of the previous system, where evidence would be gathered direct from employers, the onus of proof was reversed.

The hearings revealed the department’s own budget assumed most people would give up. Hundreds of thousands would effectively cop an averaged and inaccurate debt.

Robodebt should never again be framed as a technological glitch or a legal oversight. It was the active and direct exploitation of people’s vulnerability. The department’s own research into the letters sent confirmed they generated terror and confusion. We learnt it even held modelling that debts raised under the programme were inflated.

We have built a dense, highly conditional welfare system, which concentrates enormous, life-changing powers in the hands of government decision-makers. The hearings delivered a portrait of a system warped by imbalances of power and a lack of access to justice.

Read more:
Robodebt was a fiasco with a cost we have yet to fully appreciate

Welfare cop

So what of the politicians? Their appearances had one clear theme: they positioned themselves as the victims of the Australian Public Service.

Scott Morrison indicated he was entitled to rely on a checklist that read “no legislation needed”. Christian Porter relied on the verbal assurance of a public servant that the system was above board.

For hours, we cycled through the same phrases: “I did not know”. “I was not told”. “I was entitled to rely on public servants”.

In our Westminster system, a minister is responsible for the actions of their department. The hearings have revealed that to be abstract fiction rather than functional reality. While a storm of suffering and advocacy raged, politicians and their offices didn’t ask even the simplest questions about the core issue.

What they focused on was seeking political benefit – right from the earliest press releases, trumpeting the arrival of a “strong welfare cop on the beat”. In the pursuit of this political brand, we saw egregious actions ranging from deliberately evading questions to approving the release of the personal information to “correct the record”.

Moving past individuals, our focus needs to be on tackling the broader ecosystem that produced “welfare cop”. The phrase speaks powerfully to how we have fallen into a social security system driven by shortcut cultural images, rather than on supporting work, families and care.

Taken advantage of

Most people will not have had time to follow the commission. Media coverage, predictably, surged for “politician days”. They missed the most powerful and important contributions.

Victims of the scheme spoke up for what should matter, what a social security system needs to protect and deliver. Sandra Bevan, a single mother of four boys, who works in disability support, told us about the experience of correctly reporting income and not being listened to.

It was so traumatic that she swore she would “never access Centrelink benefits ever again”. Bevan is a powerful reminder of where courage, strength and leadership are found in our society.

In the final block, another victim, Matthew Thompson, summed up what he felt drove robodebt:

It seems to me that the powerful people are always able to take advantage of vulnerable people, as the gap between rich and poorer increases still. And no matter how many royal commissions we have, that always seems to be the case. And I hope this royal commission can change that.

Holmes could only give a simple human response. Somehow, all at once, it spoke to her commitment, the limits on her role, the history of royal commissions and the reality of the system as it currently is:

I’m afraid I can’t promise you that. But we’ll do what we can.

In a room in Brisbane, we have learnt of the scale of problems in front of us. Only a broader societal change, not just a royal commission, will ever deliver the change we need.

Darren O’Donovan 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. ‘Amateurish, rushed and disastrous’: royal commission exposes robodebt as ethically indefensible policy targeting vulnerable people – https://theconversation.com/amateurish-rushed-and-disastrous-royal-commission-exposes-robodebt-as-ethically-indefensible-policy-targeting-vulnerable-people-201165

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Priya Chacko, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, University of Adelaide

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has made a landmark visit to India this week in the hopes of boosting ties in trade, education and security.

Australia’s relationship with India has been marked by short bursts of enthusiasm, interspersed with long periods of disinterest.

For a long time, Australia and India shared only superficial similarities captured by the belaboured phrase “cricket, curry, Commonwealth”.

Though cricket remains a mainstay, in the past few years the relationship has deepened. In large part this is due to the flare-up of India’s border dispute with China, and the general deterioration of Australia’s relationship with China.

Australia is now looking to India as both a geopolitical and economic partner as it seeks to diversify its markets and shape regional order in the Indo-Pacific.

Meanwhile, India looks to Australia for resources, investments and support in its ongoing disputes with China.

So what are the two sides seeking from Albanese’s visit, and what does it mean for Australia-India relations?

What we know so far

Albanese’s first official visit to India comes with a packed itinerary and a diverse agenda. There are as many as 25 business leaders accompanying him in the hope of securing lucrative agreements on economic cooperation and making some headway in negotiations for a full free-trade agreement, building on the interim agreement signed last year.

A key area is education. India has been hoping to improve its performance on higher education by encouraging foreign universities to build campuses in India.

The two countries signed agreements this week for the mutual recognition of qualifications, and to establish a Deakin University campus in India. This would be the first foreign university with a campus in India.

The two sides are also keen to increase cooperation and investment in critical minerals such as lithium, which is used in batteries, as India seeks to lower emissions. This comes despite Albanese saying in February he wanted to keep more critical minerals onshore in response to questions about China seeking approval to invest in new mines in Australia.

Albanese this week also declared India a “top-tier security partner”. This comes ahead of Australia hosting the Malabar naval exercise in August, traditionally a joint exercise between India, Japan and the US, from which it had been excluded until a few years ago.

In turn, India will step up its participation in joint military exercises with Australia.

Differences endure

However, challenges and contradictions remain, most notably the two countries’ differences over Ukraine.

Australia has strongly condemned the Russian invasion, committing hundreds of millions of dollars in military support to Ukraine, and joining Western countries in sanctioning Russia.

But India maintains its traditionally strong military and economic links with Russia. India relies on Russia for advanced military equipment and has recently increased its oil imports from the latter.

While Australia has never been outwardly excessively critical of India’s position on the Ukraine war, it will remain a thorn in the side of long-term cooperation.

A full free-trade agreement would involve reconciling different interests in key areas. Australia is focused on improving market access for agricultural and dairy products, while India’s focus is services and labour mobility. Both are sensitive political issues that will be difficult to overcome even with the large contingent of business leaders accompanying Albanese.

Shared values?

As he landed in India, Albanese declared that Australia and India had a rich friendship underpinned by “shared democratic values”. His trip began with a visit to Sabarmati Ashram, where Mahatma Gandhi once lived.

Yet, India is much further away from Gandhi today than it has ever been. In the past ten years, India has displayed increasing intolerance for dissent and has curtailed media freedom.

Minorities have been marginalised, discriminated against, and attacked, as the government and its affiliates assert Hindu nationalist politics.

Australian universities hoping to build campuses in India could face curbs on academic freedom. India’s draft guidelines for foreign universities prohibits activities that are “contrary to the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency, or morality”.

While Australia has expressed concerns about digital authoritarianism, India has used technology to curb dissent. It has also allegedly used technology to surveil opposition leaders, minorities and critics.

The frequently acrimonious responses of India’s leadership to any criticism of itself in the Western world is probably why Australia, which is anxious to cultivate India as a bulwark against China, has been loath to publicly criticise India.

The government may also be hoping that emphasising democratic values will put some pressure on India’s leadership to halt its further slide toward authoritarianism. But recent events suggests this is wishful thinking. Evidence for this includes government raids on BBC India offices after it aired a documentary critical of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Rather, Australia risks being seen as turning a blind eye to India’s model of electoral autocracy. This includes the persecution of academics, students, journalists, activists who languish in jail on dubious charges of sedition and terrorism.

It’s important Australia bases its relationship with India on a realistic estimation of the latter’s political and economic credentials, rather than being driven almost entirely by the strategic urgency to create a regional counterweight to China.

Priya Chacko receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Janhavi Rajiv Pande 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 visit hopes to strengthen ties with India amid China’s rise. But differences remain – https://theconversation.com/albanese-visit-hopes-to-strengthen-ties-with-india-amid-chinas-rise-but-differences-remain-201369

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catriona Macleod, Associate professor, University of Tasmania

Seaweed is increasingly seen as a solution to many of the world’s most pressing problems. Interest in farming seaweed has exploded.

There’s such a wide range of applications, from fertilisers to foods, bioplastics, textiles, supplements and carbon sinks. It’s hard to think of another substance with so much potential.

Can seaweed save the world? It’s a question being posed this weekend at the WOMADelaide world music festival Planet Talks. I’m on the panel and the answer, I think, is a definite maybe!

I’ve studied seaweeds as ecosystem health indicators for years. I became interested in using seaweed to clean up nutrients in our coastal systems. Now at the Marine Bioproducts Cooperative Research Centre, my eyes have opened to the huge diversity of Australian seaweeds and their many amazing applications.

Read more:
Ever heard of ocean forests? They’re larger than the Amazon and more productive than we thought

A marvelous multitool

Seaweed is a catch-all term for marine plants. These are the primary producers in our marine and aquatic systems.

In many ways, they’re as diverse as the plants you see on land. Many are foundational species that act like forests underwater, but they come in many different types and forms. We group them into reds, greens and browns. And they have very different properties, just like terrestrial plants, depending on the species and where they live.

It’s true that seaweed has huge potential to address some of the most wicked problems facing the planet. If we were to think of seaweed as one of the tools in the toolbox, they’d be the multitool or Swiss army knife with a wide range of potential applications, including:

• reducing methane production in cows and other ruminants such as goats and sheep

• capturing and storing carbon dioxide

• boosting protein and nutrients in food products

• providing extra health benefits in new therapeutics

• soaking up excess nutrients in wastewater

• creating new materials such as bioplastics, packaging and textiles.

Another thing that blows me away with seaweed is that one plant can actually tap into several of these market opportunities. So you could be growing it as a nutraceutical supplement, a fibre for textiles and as a fertiliser, all at once. That’s really exciting because it’s not something many of our traditional farming approaches have been able to do.

Not without its challenges

Early studies suggested that scaling up seaweed aquaculture could make a big difference to climate change by capturing carbon dioxide emissions. But it turns out it’s not as simple as that.

Verifying whether the carbon dioxide fixed by seaweeds through photosynthesis can be locked up long-term is extremely complex. There are differences between species and ecosystems. And research has to factor in the interactions of the various organisms that live on and around seaweed communities, as well as the prevailing environmental conditions.

In some situations, seaweed ecosystems produce more carbon than they can capture.

Read more:
Kelp won’t help: why seaweed may not be a silver bullet for carbon storage after all

However, seaweeds may still have a contribution in this space through carbon offsets. As they can be used to make new products to replace other materials that have larger carbon footprints. This includes new foods, new materials such as fabrics, and new building supplies designed to store carbon in the long term.

Cutting methane emissions and other benefits

The native Australian red seaweed Asparagopsis has been shown to markedly reduce methane production in cattle, when added to their diet.

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. It accounts for 20-30% of all greenhouse gas emissions, much of it associated with livestock production.

Any significant reduction in methane production “would have a rapid and significant effect on atmospheric warming potential”, according to a report from the US Environmental Protection Agency.

At the most recent global climate meeting, COP26, it was clearly noted that current national climate commitments will not be enough to avoid exceeding 1.5℃ of warming. So we need new and radical solutions. If Asparagopsis farming lives up to its potential, it could make a truly meaningful difference.

Seaweed can improve intensive agriculture too. As highly effective biostimulants, they provide viable alternatives to synthetic fertilisers.

Seaweed can also be used to recover and recycle excess nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphates from wastewater. So when you have large human populations, intensive land-based farming or aquaculture facilities releasing nutrients into our coastal systems, can be a very effective way to respond to that. Seaweed farms can do better when grown in areas with higher nutrient levels, such as alongside fed finfish production facilities.

Human health and medical benefits extend beyond commercially viable and tasty alternative protein sources. Some seaweeds can contain 10-30% protein, which is comparable with soy protein levels. But they also have the added natural advantage of relatively high levels of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (brain food), which are not naturally found in terrestrial food sources.

Increasingly we are finding seaweeds with anticoagulant, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, anticarcinogenic and antiviral properties. Several types of kelp have been shown to promote a beneficial immune response.

Seaweed supplements in animal feeds have also been shown to offer advantages such as improved gut health and digestive efficiency. This has the potential to markedly improve yield and other outcomes on farms.

Let’s get on with it

There are still challenges to overcome, and there may be more issues to contend with down the track. But if we support coordinated and appropriate research and development, focused on fast-tracking the benefits that seaweed has to offer, Australian seaweed really can play a big part in saving the world.

It’s worth mentioning here, several initiatives and funding bodies that are currently supporting seaweed research and development in Australia. Most notably the Marine Bioproducts Co-operative Research Centre (MBCRC), the Blue Economy CRC, AgriFutures Australia, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) and the Australian Sustainable Seaweed Alliance (ASSA).

And it’s really encouraging to see broader community engagement in this conversation including the panel discussion at the WOMADelaide Festival Planet Talks series. It’s great to have a chance to talk openly about the challenges while showcasing the opportunities. It’s complicated, but it’s exciting. Let’s get on with it.

Catriona Macleod is a program leader in the Marine Bioproducts CRC (MBCRC) which actively supports research and development projects in the seaweed industry and is on the board of the Australian Sustainable Seaweed Alliance (ASSA). She has previously received funding from the Australian Co-operative Research Centres (CRC), Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) and Agrifutures to support seaweed related research. She is affiliated with The Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania.

– ref. Can seaweed save the world? Well it can certainly help in many ways – https://theconversation.com/can-seaweed-save-the-world-well-it-can-certainly-help-in-many-ways-201459