Page 496

Starfield is the latest game to be boycotted by conservatives. This time because of pronouns

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Prema Arasu, Postdoctoral research fellow, The University of Western Australia

XBox

One of the most highly anticipated game releases this year is Bethesda Studio’s action role-playing game Starfield. An open world game set in the year 2330 with over 1,000 explorable planets, it’s been described by producer Todd Howard as “Like Skyrim in space” and by director Ashley Cheng as “the Han Solo simulator. Get in a ship, explore the galaxy, do fun stuff.”

New game releases are rarely without their controversies. Earlier this month, a clip of YouTuber HeelvsBabyface complaining about the inclusion of pronouns in Starfield went viral.

You take everything we love, all our immersions, all our fantasies, all our escapism, and you can’t help shovel your dogshit fucking crap ideology into everything.

Other internet gaming personalities are claiming they will boycott the game over its inclusion of pronouns in the character creation system.

All this is in a response to a window that pops up during character creation asking the player to confirm their character’s pronouns from three options: he/him, she/her, and they/them.

Larian Studios’ Dungeons & Dragons-based game Baldur’s Gate 3 was released for Playstation 5 on the same day as Starfield. The game has a similarly detailed character creation system including three “identity” options: male, female, and non-binary/other, which has similarly incited criticism from gamers.

What is character creation?

In an ever-growing age of increasing digital processing power and graphics capabilities, big-budget releases such as Starfield are judged by the level of detail in worldbuilding, graphical realism, and character customisation options.

Open world games keep getting bigger and character creation systems are becoming increasingly comprehensive.

The Sims (2000) was one of the first games to offer a highly detailed level of character customisation. Most role playing games follow The Sims’ established sequence of choosing male or female, which displays a default character on screen. Players then progress through different selection pages to further customise skin colour, body proportions, hairstyle, facial features and clothing.

Conventionally, the body initially chosen will then go on to limit options for hairstyles, facial hair, and clothing. It may also affect the character’s voice in-game, determine what pronouns with which they are referred to, and limit romance options.




Read more:
Hogwarts Legacy’s game mechanics reflect the gender essentialism at the heart of Harry Potter


Newer releases are changing their approach to the sex, gender and body options to allow the creation of characters beyond the gender binary. Some games, such as Elden Ring (2022), simply avoid gendering secondary sex characteristics by allowing players to choose between “Body A” or “Body B” in place of male or female. Splatoon 3 does something similar.

Other games go a lot further: CD Projekt’s Cyberpunk 2077 (2020) was the first game to allow genital customisation. Regardless of the gender chosen at the beginning of character creation, players may then select between two penis options (circumcised and uncircumcised) and a vagina, and can select a penis size from “small”, “default” and “big”.

Genital customisation does not affect gameplay, but according to ScreenRant, “both aligns closely with the cyberpunk subgenre and allows for greater player expression”.

What are pronouns, and why do they upset some people?

Pronouns are some of the first identifying words we learn. They form the basics of how we refer to ourselves and others, and we all have them.

Pronouns include words such as “I”, “me”, “you”, “your”, “she”, “his”, “them”, and “theirs”. When conservative internet personalities complain about pronouns, they are referring to the inclusive in-game options that allow people to create characters beyond the gender binary.

The argument that pronoun and custom genital options impedes player’s ability to have an “enjoyable experience” is a reflection of real-world transphobia.

Trans and gender diverse people have used games as a way to escape this reality, entering worlds where they can play as characters that align with their gender identity in ways their real-world body may not.

This is a common acting-out fantasy among non trans players too, who might create a character who is stronger, taller, or more conventionally attractive than they perceive their real-world selves to be. Games offer a world where almost anything is possible, and with the added features in newer games such as Starfield, trans and gender diverse people have more possibilities than ever to perform their gender.

Those calling for a boycott of these games over their inclusion of pronoun options and customisable genitals are also seeking to act out a fantasy: one where trans and gender diverse people do not exist. To wish the world, even a fantasy world, be rid of all traces of gender diversity, is to impose a political ideology onto a game.

Paradoxically, this is the very thing these conservative reviewers are mad about. Politics informs all forms of media in some way, but especially so science-fiction narratives, which speculate on the myriad future possibilities of humanity and beyond. Inclusive options in character creation are not only a draw for the increasingly diverse consumers of digital games, they are also an important part of storytelling.

The Conversation

This article was co-written with Seth Malacari.

ref. Starfield is the latest game to be boycotted by conservatives. This time because of pronouns – https://theconversation.com/starfield-is-the-latest-game-to-be-boycotted-by-conservatives-this-time-because-of-pronouns-213244

Virtual influencers: meet the AI-generated figures posing as your new online friends – as they try to sell you stuff

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mai Nguyen, Lecturer in Marketing, Griffith University

Instagram / @lilmiquela/ @shudu.gram

The future of influence is here: a digital avatar that captivates millions of adoring fans while offering unparalleled customisation and round-the-clock availability.

Virtual influencers are transforming the way content is created, consumed and marketed online. They represent an electrifying dance between cutting-edge technology and our desire for connection. But, at the same time, they are yet another product being peddled by marketers that want our money.

Upon close inspection, we can see the risks that emerge with these blurred realities.

What are virtual influencers?

While virtual influencers aren’t a particularly new concept – virtual Japanese popstar Kyoko Date has been around since 1996 – recent advances in technology have thrust them into the spotlight.

Also called digital influencers or AI influencers, these digital personalities have a social media presence and interact with the world from a first-person perspective.

They’re created by 3D artists using CGI (computer-generated imagery), motion-capture technology and AI tools. Creators can make them look and act exactly how they want, and their personas are thoughtfully developed to align with a target audience.

There are three main types of virtual influencers: non-humans, animated humans and life-like CGI humans. Each one provides an innovative way to connect with audiences.

Why do virtual influencers exist?

Advancements in AI, the rise of social media and visions of the metaverse (in which the real and virtual worlds are blended into a massive immersive digital experience) are synergistically fuelling the growth of virtual influencers.

Their popularity has prompted marketing agencies to embrace them as a cost-effective promotional strategy.

While real influencers with millions of followers may demand hundreds of thousands of dollars per post, one 2020 estimate suggested virtual influencer Lil Miquela charged a more reasonable £6,550 (currently about A$12,600).

Virtual influencers have clear benefits when it comes to online engagement and marketing. They don’t age, they’re free from (real) scandals and they can be programmed to speak any language. It’s no surprise a number of companies and celebrities have caught onto the trend.

In 2019, supermodel Bella Hadid posed with Lil Miquela in ads for Calvin Klein in what one columnist dubbed a “terrifying glimpse of the future”.

Since then, virtual influencers have become even more popular.
In 2021, Prada introduced a CGI ambassador for its perfume Candy. More recently, Lil Miquela has popped up in a number of high-profile brand campaigns and celebrity interviews. Even rapper Timbaland has said he is considering a collaboration.

The transparency issue

Virtual influencers have a unique cultural dimension. They exist in a murky space between our world and the virtual which we’ve never quite explored. How might they impact us?

One major concern is transparency. Many virtual influencers already present as human-like, and it may become increasingly difficult to distinguish between them and real people. This is particularly problematic in an advertising context.

Virtual influencers often feature alongside real celebrities.

As the market for virtual influencers grows, we’ll need clear guidelines on how this content is used and disclosed.

India has taken the lead on this. In January, its Department of Consumer Affairs made it mandatory for social media influencers, including virtual influencers, to disclose promotional content in accordance with the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Similarly, TikTok has updated its community guidelines to say:

Synthetic or manipulated media that shows realistic scenes must be clearly disclosed. This can be done through the use of a sticker or caption, such as ‘synthetic’, ‘fake’, ‘not real’, or ‘altered’.

A Messi way to make money

The emergence of virtual replicas of real people (including deepfakes) has led to new discussions about how a person’s likeness may be used, with or without their consent.

On one hand, celebrity deepfake porn is on the rise. On the other, celebrities are including “simulation rights” in their contracts so their likeness may be used in the future. Take global football star Lionel Messi, who allowed PepsiCo to use a digital version of him to promote Lay’s potato chips.

While this might introduce opportunities for talent expansion, it also raises exploitation risks. People may unwittingly or desperately sell off their digital likeness without consent or adequate compensation.

Will the virtual replace the human?

For now, the relationship between virtual and human influencers seems more poised for coexistence than a total replacement. For now, virtual influencers can’t connect with people the way a real person can (although it’s hard to say how this might change in the future).

As for human content creators, virtual influencers are both inspiration and competition. They’re transforming what it means to be creative and influential online. Whether they like it or not, human creators will need to work with them – or at least alongside them – in whatever ways they can.




Read more:
‘Virtual influencers’ are here, but should Meta really be setting the ethical ground rules?


The Conversation

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

ref. Virtual influencers: meet the AI-generated figures posing as your new online friends – as they try to sell you stuff – https://theconversation.com/virtual-influencers-meet-the-ai-generated-figures-posing-as-your-new-online-friends-as-they-try-to-sell-you-stuff-212001

Support for both the Voice and Labor drop in latest Essential poll

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

A majority of Australians have indicated they will vote “no” in the upcoming referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, according to a national Essential poll conducted Sept. 13–17 from a sample of 1,135 people.

The poll gave the “no” side a 51–41% lead over the “yes” side, compared to a 48–42% lead two weeks ago.

On voter strength, 42% said they were a hard “no” (up one percentage point), 28% were a hard “yes” (down two points), 12% were a soft “yes” (steady) and 8% were a soft “no” (up one point). The figures don’t add up to the overall “yes” and “no” totals due to rounding.

Below is the updated 2023 Voice aggregated polls graph. Essential has been the best pollster for “yes”, but now even this poll is showing a 10-point national lead for “no”. In every poll conducted since June by all pollsters, support for the “yes” side has been declining steadily.

The polling indicates the Voice referendum is headed for a heavy defeat. I wrote in my article on the last Newspoll that it was a blunder to hold this referendum as a standalone vote rather than with a general election, given the long history of failed referendums in Australia.

Large crowds at weekend rallies for the “yes” side do not imply the polls are wrong, as people who attend political rallies are very unrepresentative of the overall voting-age Australian population. Analyst Kevin Bonham has more in this long article debunking “poll denial” themes.




Read more:
Albanese records first net negative Newspoll approval as Voice support slumps further


Labor at post-election low in Essential’s voting intentions

In Essential’s two-party estimate that includes undecided voters, Labor led the Coalition by 49–45%, down from a 51–43% lead a fortnight ago.

This is the lowest Labor lead in Essential’s fortnightly polls since it started asking about voting intentions in December 2022. The previous lowest Labor lead was five points in March and July.

Primary votes were 32% Coalition (steady), 31% Labor (steady), 13% Greens (down two points), 8% One Nation (up one point), 2% UAP (steady), 8% for all others (up one point) and 6% undecided (steady). The drop for the Greens means fewer preferences for Labor.

On what was causing the rising cost of living, 49% of those polled thought businesses maximising profits for shareholders contributed more than wage and salary increases for workers, while 32% blamed workers’ salaries more.

On power in the workplace, 42% thought it tilted too much in favour of employers, 12% said it was too much in favour of workers, and 46% thought the balance about right.

A majority of respondents supported the three proposed changes to workplace laws, with

  • 79% backing a new offence for employers to knowingly underpay their workers

  • 66% supporting the closure of loopholes to prevent employers from using labour hire workers to undercut full-time workers

  • and 54% supporting minimum rights and entitlements for gig workers.

In other Canberra news, there will be no double dissolution election over Labor’s housing bill after it passed parliament on Sept. 14 with Greens support after the two parties reached a deal, ending months of conflict.

Other national polls

In last week’s Morgan federal poll, conducted Sept. 4–10 from a sample of 1,382 people, Labor led the Coalition by 52.5–47.5%, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition from the previous week. Primary votes were 37% Coalition, 32% Labor, 13.5% Greens and 17.5% for all others.

I previously covered the continued tumble in Voice support and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s ratings from a national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers that was conducted September 6–9 from a sample of 1,604 people.

In other questions related to Qantas in that poll, 64% thought foreign airlines should be granted more flights to Australia to increase competition, while just 15% thought they should be limited in the national interest.

By a 69–17% margin, participants thought it unacceptable for politicians to accept free lounge memberships from Qantas.

Participants were also asked to give a positive, negative or neutral rating for each airline. More respondents had a negative view of Qantas (42%) than positive (26%), and a negative view of former Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce (54–6%).

Both Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways had higher positive ratings of 41% and 29%, respectively, than negative.

NSW Resolve poll: Labor drops but still well ahead

A New South Wales Resolve poll for The Sydney Morning Herald, conducted with the federal August and September Resolve polls from a sample of 1,019 people, gave Labor 38% of the primary vote (down three points since July), the Coalition 36% (up four points), the Greens 9% (down one point), independents 13% (up two points) and others 4% (down one point).

No two-party estimate was provided by Resolve, but The Poll Bludger estimated Labor would lead the Coalition by 54–46%, a 4.5-point gain for the Coalition since July. This is close to Labor’s 54.3–45.7% win at the March state election.

Labor incumbent Chris Minns maintained a 41–14% lead over the Liberals’ Mark Speakman as preferred premier (compared to 39–12% in July).

Respondents were also asked about a recent scandal involving Tim Crakanthorp, Labor MP and former minister for the Hunter, over revelations that his family owned several commercial properties in the Hunter region that he had not disclosed.

On the appropriate action, 48% thought Crakanthorp should be stood down and independently investigated, while 29% thought he should be disciplined by the party or parliament and 7% thought no action should be taken.

The Conversation

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. Support for both the Voice and Labor drop in latest Essential poll – https://theconversation.com/support-for-both-the-voice-and-labor-drop-in-latest-essential-poll-213350

Anti-corruption former MP Kramer appeals to PNG Supreme Court

PNG Post-Courier

Former MP for Madang Open and anti-corruption campaigner Bryan Kramer has filed a Supreme Court appeal against a National Court ruling dismissing his application for leave to review a Leadership Tribunal’s decision to dismiss him from office.

His appeal to the Supreme Court follows the refusal of a leave to review application in the National Court presided by Justice John Carey on August 18.

Kramer said in a statement that he had filed an application on the 23 May 2023 in the National Court to review the decision of the Leadership Tribunal.

He later withdrew this and refiled on June 30.

The refiled application raised nine primary grounds, including breach of natural justice, procedural unfairness, apprehension of bias in being denied a fair hearing, unreasonableness and being oppressive and harsh and not “reasonably justifiable in a democratic society”.

After waiting almost three months for a judge to hear his leave application, the matter was listed before Justice John Carey on August 18. However, straight after hearing detailed submission from counsels, Justice Carey delivered an oral judgement refusing Kramer’s application.

Justice Carey ruled that Kramer had not satisfied all the requirements, in particular an arguable case

Further nine grounds
Kramer is now appealing the judge’s ruling on a further nine grounds that include an allegation that the judge had failed to properly deliver a reasoned judicial decision.

He will submit that the judge had erred in directing Kramer’s counsel to narrow his submissions to the ground of apprehension of bias to the exclusion of the issues raised in the eight other grounds.

Further, the judge had failed to consider specific matters raised in each of nine grounds.

The judge had delivered two judgments, the first oral and the second published without indicating to parties, and that was altered and expounded on the reasons in the oral judgement.

He was dismissed in May this year by a a Leadership Tribunal comprising Justice Lawrence Kangwia and senior Magistrates Josephine Nidue and Edward Komia.

The Tribunal found him guilty on seven of thirteen allegations of misconduct in office

Five of the seven misconduct charges were in relation to decisions concerning the Madang District Development Authority (DDA) that he had failed to comply with legislative administrative requirements, and the misapplication of district funds to which they could not be lawfully applied.

Facebook publications
The remaining two misconduct charges were in relation to his Facebook publications that were found to have “scandalised the judiciary”.

The background of the two charges of him scandalising the judiciary were that in October 2019 he had published a three-part series of articles on Facebook concerning an arrest warrant against former Prime Minister Peter O’Neill.

The first charge was over part of his publication insinuating a conflict of interest by Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika in publishing the words “a relevant matter to note is that the Chief Justice was only recently appointed by O’Neill late last year”.

The second charge was over publishing the words “What was not anticipated was that O’Neill and his lawyers would solicit the assistance from the Chief Justice and desperate enough to submit fabricated documents to mislead the court that the warrant was defective as a means to obtain a stay order”.

The Tribunal had recommended by majority that Kramer pay a fine of K2000 (about NZ$922) for each for the five charges in relation to the Madang District Development Authority as they were decisions made by the DDA Board and not Kramer alone.

However, it recommended unanimously for his dismissal from office in relation to his Facebook publications in scandalising the judiciary.

Pacific Media Watch reports that in a profile by The Guardian in 2019, Bryan Kramer — BK as he is known — was described as a “rising star in PNG politics” and as an anti-corruption campaigner who was instrumental in bringing to light the UBS scandal that helped to bring down former Prime Minister Peter O’Neill’s leadership.

Republished from the PNG Post-Courier with permission.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

What are ‘planetary boundaries’ and why should we care?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Richardson, Professor in Biological Oceanography, University of Copenhagen

NASA

As far as we know, there is exactly one planet in our Solar System – and the galaxy – which hosts life. And you’re on it.

For the first 800 million years, Earth was dead. Then life began making itself at home. For over three billion years, lifeforms have helped shape their own environment. Earth’s energy balance (commonly known as the climate) and its interactions with trillions of species is the main determinant of environmental conditions.

As you know, one species – ours – is exceptionally good at changing our environment to suit us. The problem is, we’re now too good at it. We chop down forests, remove mountains to get at ore bodies, take over grassland, fish out entire seas, create and unleash novel chemicals and pump huge quantities of nutrients from fertiliser into the system. These and many more undermine the hidden life support system on which we rely.

What are planetary boundaries?

Almost 15 years ago, this article’s lead author helped create something called “planetary boundaries” to make clear what damage we had done.

We teased apart nine processes vital to the Earth system.

Three are based on what we take from the system:

  • biodiversity loss
  • fresh water
  • land use.

The remaining six come from waste we deposit back into the environment:

  • greenhouse gases (which cause climate change and ocean acidification)
  • ozone depleting chemicals
  • novel entities (plastic, concrete, synthetic chemicals and genetically modified organisms which owe their existence to us)
  • aerosols
  • nutrient overload (reactive nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilisers)

If we keep our activities to a safe level, the sheer exuberance of life and the planet’s own processes can handle it. But in six out of nine vital life support systems, we have blown well past the safe zone. And we’re now in the danger zone, where we – as well as every other species – are now at risk.

planetary boundaries update 2023
Here’s the sum total of our impact on the planet. You can see the areas we’re still within safe limits – and those where we are well past.
Azote for Stockholm Resilience Centre based on analysis in Richardson et al 2023, CC BY-ND

Our breach of boundaries is very new

In the year 1900, there were around 1.6 billion humans – nearly all of them poor. Now there are 8 billion of us, and some of them are rich. And nearly all of us use fossil fuels, plastics, chemicals and products from intensive agriculture.

It can be very easy to live our lives and only occasionally glimpse the reality. You might have flown over palm oil plantations where rainforest was. Seen blue-green algal blooms or fish kills. You might have wondered where all the animals or bugs were on a bushwalk.




Read more:
Humanity is in the existential danger zone, study confirms


But when we zoom out and look at the sum total of our impacts, the story is clear. Put bluntly, we are eating away at our own life support systems. And this has happened extraordinarily recently. If we keep going, we risk triggering a dramatic and potentially irreversible change in living conditions.

Like all other living organisms, we survive by using Earth’s resources. We once believed these resources were unlimited. But we now know there are hard limits.

Take fresh water – essential to life on land. If we pump too much water from rivers, lakes and aquifers for farming, industry or cities, we risk hitting that hard limit. This isn’t hypothetical – places like India and California are close to that limit.

india groundwater
Unsustainable use of groundwater in many countries is likely to trigger freshwater crises.
India groundwater

How are these boundaries calculated?

Remember – the entirety of human civilisation, the flowering of culture, religion, agriculture and cities – has taken place only in the last 10–12,000 years. For the roughly 190,000 years before that, we were nomadic hunter-gatherers. What changed?

The climate, for one. We entered a climate sweet spot, with relatively stable and warm conditions. Gone were the recurring ice ages. Many experts believe there’s a connection here – stable climate, rise of civilisation, though this is hard to establish with certainty.

What we do know is we can thrive under these conditions. We don’t know for certain our civilisation as we know it can thrive if they are different. We would be foolish to risk pushing our supporting envelope to breaking point.

That’s why we and many other independent scientists have worked as hard as we have to develop the framework of planetary boundaries and keep it up-to-date as new science comes in.




Read more:
It’s not just climate – we’ve already breached most of the Earth’s limits. A safer, fairer future means treading lightly


How do we know if we’ve breached the boundaries?

The Earth’s environmental conditions have changed many times in its long history. Climate is a good example here. We know the Earth looked very different when temperatures were higher or lower. Palms once grew in Antarctica. These swings from hothouse to ice age let us estimate the boundary beyond which our activities can upset the process.

palm trees snow background
Palm trees once grew in an ice-free Antarctica.
Shutterstock

These are boundaries, not thresholds. When we cross one, it doesn’t trigger immediate disaster. And it’s entirely possible to bring our activities back from unsafe to safe. We’ve done it already in the 1990s, when international cooperation quickly phased out ozone depleting chemicals and stopped the dangerous ozone hole from getting ever-bigger.

So how are we doing? Not great.

In last week’s update, the research team found we had now gone beyond the safe zone into dangerous territory in six of the nine processes. We are still in the green for ozone-depleting chemicals. Ocean-acidification is still, just, in the green, and so is aerosol pollution and dust.

But on climate change, deforestation, biodiversity loss, synthetic chemicals such as plastics, freshwater depletion, and nitrogen/phosphorus use, we’re well out of the safer zone. On these six, we’re deep in the red zone.

We’re keeping the party going as long as possible. But it can’t continue indefinitely. The bill comes due. The faster we do for the other boundaries what we did for ozone-depleting chemicals, the safer all of us will be.




Read more:
Two trillion tonnes of greenhouse gases, 25 billion nukes of heat: are we pushing Earth out of the Goldilocks zone?


The Conversation

Xuemei Bai receives funding from Australian Government, Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), The Future Earth, and the Australian National University. She is affiliated with the Earth Commission.

Katherine Richardson 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. What are ‘planetary boundaries’ and why should we care? – https://theconversation.com/what-are-planetary-boundaries-and-why-should-we-care-213762

Is humming healthy? Mmm, here’s what the evidence says

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gemma Perry, Post doctoral researcher, Bond University

Shutterstock

There are plenty of health claims about humming. They include reducing stress, helping you breathe more easily, relieving sinus congestion, lowering your blood pressure and lifting your mood.

That’s a lot of potential benefits for something that comes pretty naturally to most of us.

Can something so simple really be healthy? Here’s what we know so far.




À lire aussi :
From Marie Kondo’s tuning fork to vibrators for ‘hysteria’: a short, shaky history of curing with vibrations


Humming’s all around us

Humming is likely connected to our earliest memories of comfort and care, as caregivers soothe infants with lullabies and humming. Infants, unable to comprehend speech, take in the melodic information, making humming one of our earliest forms of bonding through sound.

As we get older, we hum when we’re happy, embarrassed, displeased or in agreement with someone. Mmm. Hmm.

We often hum tunes unconsciously, even ones we don’t like, by mirroring what we hear. Some tunes can even get stuck in our heads if they contain hooks and repetition. And let’s face it, humming’s also handy when we can’t remember the words.

Then there are songs that feature humming, such as Enya’s The Humming, the 90s smash hit Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm by the Crash Test Dummies, or James Blake’s Retrograde.

Listen to the humming in the intro of Retrograde, from James Blake.

What happens when we hum?

When we hum, we create a buzzing sound with our mouth closed. We force air through our vocal folds (the newer term for vocal cords), causing them to vibrate and produce sound. We can control the pitch by adjusting the tension of our vocal folds to hum a tune.

All this vibration likely stimulates our vagus nerve (we actually have two), part of our parasympathetic nervous system. This is the nervous system that calms and restores body functions such as our heart rate, digestion and respiration.

People often hum as a way to relax. Their heart rate can decrease and their heart rate variability can increase. Heart rate variability refers to the slight fluctuation in time between each heartbeat. A higher heart rate variability is associated with better health.




À lire aussi :
Heart rate variability – what to know about this biometric most fitness trackers measure


When we hum, oscillating sound waves may also affect the sinuses, leading to increased levels of nitric oxide in the nose. One study found a 15-fold increase of nasal nitric oxide from humming compared to exhaling quietly. Nitric oxide is involved in everything from brain and immune function to blood flow to the lungs and sexual arousal.

In another study, researchers looked at people with allergic rhinitis (such as people with pollen or dust allergies). When they hummed, they had higher levels of nasal nitric oxide and had fewer sinus problems compared to those who exhaled silently.

Humming also leads to some unexpected psychological effects. These include increased body awareness and “decentering” – the ability to separate oneself from thoughts, emotions and sensations.

How about chanting?

Humming also plays an important role in chanting. One example is in the ancient meditation technique bhramari pranayama (which can involve humming while gently closing the ears with your fingertips).

It is no coincidence one of the world’s most chanted sounds – om – involves a long, sustained hum at the end. Chanting all sorts of various sounds and prayers is believed to connect practitioners to the spiritual realm and induce feelings of peace.

Chanting has cognitive benefits, such as mindfulness, and altered states of consciousness, such as flow – a feeling of being absorbed by and deeply focused on an activity. Chanting also reduces stress.

Monks wearing orange robes, palms together, chanting
Chanting can end with an ‘om’, a sustained hum.
Shutterstock

In a nutshell

We hum for lots of different reasons, suggesting that these common vocalisations play an important role in our lives.

Is humming healthy? More research is needed. But humming feels good, improves our mood, distracts us from boring tasks, and can even be used for spiritual practice. Happy humming!

The Conversation

Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.

ref. Is humming healthy? Mmm, here’s what the evidence says – https://theconversation.com/is-humming-healthy-mmm-heres-what-the-evidence-says-209586

‘Don’t say anything about it’: why so many LGBTQIA+ Buddhists feel pressure to hide their identities

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Kerry, Lecturer in Sociology, Charles Darwin University

More than half of Australia’s LGBTQIA+ Buddhists feel reluctant to “come out” to their Buddhist communities and nearly one in six have been told directly that being LGBTQIA+ isn’t in keeping with the Buddha’s teachings.

These are some of the findings from my research looking at the experiences of LGBTQIA+ Buddhists in Australia.

I’m a genderqueer, non-binary Buddhist myself and I was curious about others’ experiences in Australia since there has been no research done on our community before. So, in 2020, I surveyed 82 LGBTQIA+ Buddhists and have since followed this up with 29 face-to-face interviews.

Some people may think Buddhism would be quite accepting of LGBTQIA+ people. There are, after all, no religious laws, commandments or punishments in Buddhism. My research indicates, however, this is not always true.

Buddhism does have five precepts, or rules for behaving in a moral or ethical way, that monastics and some lay practitioners are meant to follow to have a morally good life. The precept of “sexual misconduct” has been interpreted as referring to homosexuality.

As a result, many LGBTQIA+ Buddhists here continue to experience discrimination. For example, some trans and non-binary Buddhists have been subjected to gender segregation at meditation retreats, while others have been forced to lie about being LGBTQIA+ out of fear of being denied access to ordination.

Difficulties of coming out

In my research, I found that many LGBTQIA+ Buddhists are reluctant to come out because, as Lang* (a pansexual, non-binary man) explained:

there is a profound lack of understanding of how heteronormative and puritan many Buddhist spaces are.

Similarly, Helen (a pansexual transwoman) described the monastery she visits as “a ‘male’ institution”, adding that

judgements and phobias do not disappear because of ordination.

Traci (a lesbian woman) was told explicitly by monastics that being LGBTQIA+ is not in keeping with the Buddha’s teachings. She was not allowed to join a Tibetan sangha (community) in Australia because of her sexuality.

And when Annie (a pansexual transwoman) came out to her teacher (a monastic), he gave her an hour and a half lecture that focused in part on the “evils of gay sex”, despite the fact she stressed she isn’t gay.




Read more:
Traditional Buddhist teachings exclude LGBTQ people from monastic life, but change is coming slowly


Barriers to meditation and ordination

Meditation is one of the key elements of Buddhism and many Buddhist groups offer meditation retreats.

Some trans and non-binary Buddhists I spoke to, however, have had difficulties attending these retreats because they always segregate participants into two groups based on a binary view of gender. Nano (a queer non-binary man) reflected on how it felt when they attended a retreat:

I remember going and sitting with the women, and all the old [local] ladies laughing at me and pushing me back into the midsection [next to the men].

Gender segregation is meant to support practitioners by removing the distraction of “the opposite sex”, but this ignores the experiences of LGBTQIA+ people. Raja (a polyamorous gay man) said:

I would have to potentially deal with my own possible lusts should they arise within the shared environment. Others who identify as heterosexuals would be in a slightly more advantageous setting.




Read more:
Friday essay: how the West discovered the Buddha


A common image associated with Buddhism is a monastic in robes. I found that some LGBTQIA+ celibate monastics who are “out” have, at times, been encouraged to keep their sexual and gender identities a secret so they would not be denied access to ordination.

When the Venerable Daiji (a queer man) lived in a monastery, he was approached by a woman who asked if he was gay and then said: “Then you can’t ordain. You can’t be a monk.” He notes that in a monastery,

there was a lot of pressure to not identify with my sexuality […] which of course, no one else seemed to have to do that work on their sexuality.

An ordained Buddhist priest, Daiden (a gay man), was told by his teacher to not say anything about his sexuality.

If somebody asks, of course, you’re not going to lie. But don’t just say anything about it.

When he is asked if he has a partner, he still says no.

That is lying I guess […] because I do have a partner.

Ways to build a more inclusive community

To build a more supportive and inclusive community, some LGBTQIA+ practitioners are forming groups to connect with others internationally, such as the Third International Queer Buddhist Conference, which brings together hundreds of LGBTQIA+ Buddhists every year.

This is happening within Australia, as well. Rainbodhi was founded in Sydney in 2019 as a “spiritual friendship group” for LGBTQIA+ Buddhists to organise and advocate for greater inclusion and acceptance within the broader Buddhist community. This has led to the formation of other Rainbodhi groups in Singapore, Spain, Poland, Canada and the US.

In 2021, Rainbodhi published “Welcoming the Rainbow”, a booklet promoting awareness and understanding of diversity for use in Buddhist temples, organisations and retreat centres. It has now been translated into Dutch, French, Polish, Spanish and Thai, with a Portuguese translation on the way.

For many of my survey participants, these efforts have gone a long way to create a greater sense of belonging and community.

Venerable Atid, another openly gay Buddhist monk, said he’s happy being part of a LGBTQIA+ Buddhist group

because people there are striving to lead authentic lives as faithful Buddhists, practicing Buddhists, and LGBTQIA+ Buddhists.

* All names in this article are pseudonyms.

The Conversation

Stephen Kerry is a member of Rainbodhi.

ref. ‘Don’t say anything about it’: why so many LGBTQIA+ Buddhists feel pressure to hide their identities – https://theconversation.com/dont-say-anything-about-it-why-so-many-lgbtqia-buddhists-feel-pressure-to-hide-their-identities-212253

Tests that diagnose diseases are less reliable than you’d expect. Here’s why

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Barnett, Professor of Statistics, Queensland University of Technology

CDC / Unsplash

You feel unwell, and visit your doctor. They ask some questions and take some blood for testing; a few days later they call to say you have been diagnosed with a disease.

What are the chances you actually have the disease? For some common diagnostic tests, the answer is surprisingly low.

Few medical tests are 100% accurate. Part of the reason is that people are inherently variable, but many tests are also built on limited or biased samples of patients – and our own work has shown researchers may deliberately exaggerate the effectiveness of new tests.

None of this means we should stop trusting diagnostic tests, but a better understanding of their strengths and weaknesses is essential if we want to use them wisely.

People are variable

An example of a widely used imperfect test is prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, which measures the level of a particular protein in the blood as an indicator of prostate cancer.

The test catches an estimated 93% of cancers – but it has a very high false positive rate, as around 80% of men with a positive result do not actually have cancer. For those in the 80%, the result creates unnecessary stress and likely further testing including painful biopsies.




Read more:
Prostate cancer testing: has the bubble burst?


Rapid antigen tests for COVID-19 are another widely used imperfect test. A review of these tests found that, of people without symptoms but with a positive test result, only 52% actually had COVID.

Among people with COVID symptoms and a positive result, the accuracy of the tests rose to 89%. This shows how a test’s performance cannot be summarised by a single number and depends on individual context.

Why aren’t diagnostic tests perfect? One key reason is that people are variable. A high temperature for you, for example, might be perfectly normal for someone else. For blood tests, many extraneous factors can influence the results, such as the time of day or how recently you have eaten.

Even the ubiquitous blood pressure test can be inaccurate. Results can vary depending on whether the cuff is a good fit for your arm, if you have your legs crossed, and if you’re talking when the test is done.

Small samples and statistical skullduggery

There’s an enormous amount of research on new diagnostic models. New models frequently make the headlines as “medical breakthroughs”, such as how your handwriting could detect Parkinson’s disease, how your pharmacy loyalty card could detect ovarian cancer earlier, or how eye movements could detect schizophrenia.

But living up to the headlines is often a different story.

Many diagnostic models are developed based on small sample sizes. A review found half of diagnostic studies used just over 100 patients. It is hard to get a true picture of the accuracy of a diagnostic test from such small samples.

For accurate results, the patients who use the test should be similar to those who were used to develop the test. For example, the widely used Framingham Risk Score for identifying people at high risk of heart disease was developed in the United States and is known to perform poorly in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Similar disparities in accuracy have been found for “polygenic risk scores”. These combine information on thousands of genes to predict disease risk, but were developed in European populations and perform poorly in non-European populations.

Recently, we identified another important problem: researchers have exaggerated the accuracy of some models to gain journal publications.

There are many ways to exaggerate the performance of a test, such as dropping hard-to-predict patients from the sample. Some tests are also not truly predictive, as they include information from the future, such as a predictive model of infection that includes whether the patient had been prescribed antibiotics.




Read more:
Elizabeth Holmes: Theranos scandal has more to it than just toxic Silicon Valley culture


Perhaps the most extreme example of exaggerating the power of a diagnostic test was the Theranos scandal, in which a finger-prick blood test supposed to diagnose multiple health conditions attracted hundreds of millions of dollars from investors. This was too good to be true – and the mastermind has now been convicted of fraud.

Big data can’t make tests perfect

In the era of precision medicine and big data, it seems appealing to combine tens or hundreds of pieces of information about a patient – perhaps using machine learning or artificial intelligence – to provide highly accurate predictions. However, the promise is so far outstripping the reality.

One study estimated 80,000 new prediction models were published between 1995 and 2020. That’s around 250 new models every month.

Are these models transforming healthcare? We see no sign of it – and if they really were having a big impact, surely we wouldn’t need such a steady stream of new models.

For many diseases there are data problems that no amount of sophisticated modelling can fix, such as measurement errors or missing data that make accurate predictions impossible.

Some diseases or illnesses are likely inherently random, and involve complex chains of events which a patient cannot describe and no model could predict. Examples might include injuries or previous illnesses that happened to a patient decades ago, which they cannot recall and are not in their medical notes.

Diagnostic tests will never be perfect. Acknowledging their imperfections will enable doctors and their patients to have an informed discussion about what a result means – and most importantly, what to do next.

The Conversation

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. Tests that diagnose diseases are less reliable than you’d expect. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/tests-that-diagnose-diseases-are-less-reliable-than-youd-expect-heres-why-213359

State and territory ballots will be counted differently at the Voice referendum – is that fair?

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

When Australians vote on the Voice to Parliament referendum on October 14, ballots from the Northern Territory and the ACT will be treated differently from those of the states. The same goes for votes cast by residents of Norfolk Island, Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.

In fact, for most of Australia’s history, territory voters haven’t had a say in referendums at all.

To many, this seems unfair and hard to justify. So, how did we arrive at this point? And should we change the rules so territory voters are treated like everybody else?

Not all referendum votes are equal

The Australian Constitution can only be changed if the people agree to it at a referendum. Section 128 says a proposal for constitutional amendment must obtain “a majority of all the electors voting” and a majority of electors “in a majority of the States”. This is sometimes called a “double majority”.

But state and territory ballots are not treated equally. Votes cast by territory residents count only towards the first half – the national majority. Territory ballots are set aside when it comes to working out whether a proposal has won enough support “in a majority of the States”.

As a result, territory voters don’t have a huge influence over referendum outcomes. Territory populations are small, so any ballots cast are subsumed into the national count. A referendum would have to be very close for territory votes to make a difference.

History helps to explain how we settled on this approach to the referendum franchise. When the Constitution came into being at federation in 1901, the regions we know as the Northern Territory and the ACT did not exist. They were part of South Australia and New South Wales, respectively, and the people living there were able to vote at referendums. The Constitution guaranteed this – it required that proposals for constitutional change be submitted to electors “in each State”.

But in 1911, when both of those regions became federal territories, the people living there lost their referendum voting rights.

Over the next few decades, territory residents had no say on a whole raft of constitutional reforms. The inequity of this arrangement was highlighted at the 1967 referendum, which asked Australians to give the Commonwealth power to make laws about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and include them in the population count.




Read more:
‘Right wrongs, write Yes’: what was the 1967 referendum all about?


More than 90% of electors voted “yes” in a moment of national consensus that is rightly celebrated. But that milestone is blemished by the fact that the many Indigenous people living in the NT (and the ACT) at the time were unable to cast a ballot on this measure.

It took a referendum in 1977 for residents of the territories to finally be given the right to vote at referendums. Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser asked Australians to vote “yes” to a proposal to require referendum questions to be put to electors “in each State and Territory”.

In 1977, Malcolm Fraser asked Australians to vote on whether referendum questions should be put to voters ‘in each State and Territory’.
National Archives of Australia

This reform was met with almost unanimous approval in the parliament. The only opposition came from Liberal Party senators Ian Wood and Reg Wright. They argued the Constitution was a compact between the Commonwealth and the states, and that it was inappropriate for territories to have a say on whether changes should be made to it.

On the other side, the “yes” case argued it was unfair for residents of the Northern Territory and the ACT to have no say in referendums that could affect their lives. It said a “yes” vote would ensure territory residents were “given the same basic democratic right as other Australians”.

In the end, Fraser’s proposal passed easily. It received 77.7% of the national vote and won majorities in all six states.

This amendment cleared the way for voters in the NT and the ACT to cast their first referendum ballots seven years later. But, as has been the case for every ballot since, their votes only counted for the purposes of calculating the national majority.

But is it fair?

As we prepare to vote in our first referendum in more than two decades, some are asking if it is time to change the rules so territory ballots are finally counted the same as state ballots.

There are at least two arguments for keeping the status quo.

One is that the states and territories have different constitutional status.

Under the Constitution, the states are recognised as independent entities with guaranteed powers. They are sovereign bodies with full powers of self-government.

The territories, on the other hand, have a far more limited constitutional status. They are ultimately under the control of the Commonwealth.

The NT and the ACT owe their powers of self-government to a Commonwealth law. And the federal parliament can legislate for the territories, and even override territory laws. In 1997, for example, the federal government nullified voluntary euthanasia laws that had been passed by the NT legislature.

This can be easy to forget on a day-to-day basis because the territories have their own parliaments and courts, and tend to operate a lot like states. But from a legal standpoint, there is a difference between a state and a territory, and for some that justifies giving territory voters less say over changes to the national constitution.

A second argument for keeping the status quo is that a change to the amendment procedure would give territory voters too much influence over constitutional reform.

The populations of the NT and the ACT are about 250,000 and 461,000, respectively. All up, the combined territory populations come to approximately 710,000 people – noting that, for the purposes of elections and referendums, Norfolk Islanders count towards the ACT’s total, while residents of the other external territories are tallied for the NT.

If the votes of the territories were included when calculating both parts of the double majority, this would see a relatively small fraction of the population have a very big say on whether the Constitution should be changed.

These arguments have a sound logic to them. But in 2023, when Australians are voting on recognising First Nations people through establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, not everyone will find them convincing.

The NT is home to the highest proportion of First Nations people of any jurisdiction – about 30.8%. Given the question on the ballot paper, some will ask whether it is fair they have a lesser vote than most other Australians.

And if we are worried about giving small jurisdictions an outsized say over constitutional change, the Constitution already sets a precedent for that. Ballots cast by residents of Tasmania, currently home to 572,000 people, count towards both parts of the double majority.




Read more:
Changing the Australian Constitution was always meant to be difficult – here’s why


The path to change

If Australians decide it is time to put state and territory voters on an equal footing at referendums, there are two possible pathways to take.

One is to change the amendment procedure in section 128 of the Constitution. It could be altered to require that proposals for constitutional change must win a national majority of votes, plus a majority of votes in at least five of the six states and two mainland territories. Doing this would involve holding and winning a national referendum.

A second pathway involves the Commonwealth parliament conferring statehood on the NT and the ACT. That would automatically include them in both parts of the double majority. This would be a potentially easier path because it could be achieved without a constitutional referendum.

But statehood is a complex issue in itself, not embraced by everybody. In 1998, the NT government put the question to a referendum. In a tight result, 51.9% of territorians voted against statehood.

Whatever happens with the statehood question, the Voice referendum has cast a spotlight on a peculiar and enduring inequality between the voting rights of state and territory residents. Whether it is something that needs addressing is a question not only for people who live in the territories, but all Australians.

And who knows, one day we may find ourselves voting on it at a future referendum.

The Conversation

Paul Kildea has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council.

ref. State and territory ballots will be counted differently at the Voice referendum – is that fair? – https://theconversation.com/state-and-territory-ballots-will-be-counted-differently-at-the-voice-referendum-is-that-fair-212703

The NDIS has a parent problem. Changes could involve parents more in disability support and reduce stress

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Trevor Mazzucchelli, Associate professor, Curtin University

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has seen increasing numbers of children with developmental delay or disability receive support within clinical settings. It’s also seen reduced support in other settings, including home and school.

Bruce Bonyhady, often referred to as the father of the NDIS, and who has two sons with a disability, is co-chair of the review underway into the scheme. He said recently:

The overwhelming feedback we’ve received through this review is that families want their child supported in the settings where they normally live and are educated […]

Our recent article, published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, highlights how existing NDIS guidelines are falling short for parents and carers of children with disability.

The importance of home-based and parent- or carer-integrated support for children with disability appears to have been lost. The consequence: many families and NDIS providers are unsure about how to access or provide parenting support.




Read more:
20% of children have developmental delay. What does this mean for them, their families and the NDIS?


Parenting children’s unique needs

Parenting programs provide valuable opportunities for parents to acquire the extra skills needed to develop a better understanding of their child’s unique needs.

As a result, children can improve their communication and capacity for play, and day-to-day living skills.

Parenting support does not need to be intensive, but rather delivered at critical times – during the child’s preschool years and at various important transitions. It can range from providing high-quality parenting information, to online workshops, to group and one-on-one programs that provide tailored advice and an opportunity to practice skills.

Specialist programs can support parents to understand and manage challenging behaviours (such as uncontrolled crying or hitting, that can be harmful or interfere with learning), increase quality of family life and community participation. Such support can also improve parent and carer wellbeing, and help to reduce the stress experienced by many parents of children with disability.

But since the introduction of the NDIS, parents report difficulty accessing parenting support. And services that used to provide support say they are no longer able to do so.

An NDIA spokesperson told The Conversation:

The National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) acknowledges the significant role parents and carers play in supporting loved ones living with disability.

The NDIS forms one part of the disability ecosystem, supporting Australians and their families to ensure those living with disability can lead a fulfilling life.

Despite recognition of the central role parents and carers play, there is a lack of clarity around who is responsible for providing parenting programs.

Whose responsibility is it?

The only reference to parenting programs in the NDIS Guidelines comes in the section describing what child protection and family support systems should be offering.

For families who are not involved in the child protection system, the guidelines say the NDIS is:

[…] responsible for supports that families need as a direct result of a child’s developmental delay or disability, and that help families and carers sustainably maintain their caring role.

These may include social and recreation support, therapy and behaviour supports, short breaks or respite, or assistive technology. It is not clear whether parenting programs are included.

We know the NDIS can pay for “training for carers and parents”, because it’s in their price guide. However, it is unclear whether such training covers specialist parenting programs.




Read more:
More children than ever are struggling with developmental concerns. We need to help families connect and thrive


What the NDIS Review can do

The NDIS Review – due to be handed to state and federal disability ministers at the end of October – presents an opportunity to re-prioritise the main agents for change for children with disability: their parents and carers.

A number of initiatives, if incorporated into NDIS policy, would help optimise the development of children and reduce family stress. The NDIS could:

  • explicitly state parenting programs for children with disabilities are funded under the NDIS

  • maintain a list of best-practice parenting programs for children with disability that can be used as a resource to inform the decision making of parents, carers, NDIS planners and service providers

  • track and provide aggregated data on the nature of supports funded, so the delivery of parenting programs provided through the NDIS can be monitored.

An NDIA spokesperson said:

The NDIA is looking forward to the release of the NDIS Review, and will continue to work alongside our participants, as well as their families and carers, on implementing any recommendations stemming from the Review.

Parents and carers are their child’s first and most important support. Parents should have the flexibility to seek out high-quality parenting support and programs that have been found to be effective for children with a disability. They can also advocate for the initiatives listed above.

Increasing parents’ capacity to provide enduring high-quality support will build children’s independence and social skills, and be part of the solution to ensure the equitable sustainability of the NDIS.


The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of colleague Catherine Wade to this article.

The Conversation

Trevor Mazzucchelli is a co-author of Stepping Stones Triple P – Positive Parenting Program and a consultant to Triple P International. The Parenting and Family Support Centre is partly funded by royalties stemming from published resources of the Triple P – Positive Parenting Program, which is developed and owned by The University of Queensland (UQ). Royalties are also distributed to the Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences at UQ and contributory authors of published Triple P resources. Triple P International (TPI) Pty Ltd is a private company licensed by UniQuest Pty Ltd on behalf of UQ, to publish and disseminate Triple P worldwide. He has no share or ownership of TPI, but has received and may in the future receive royalties and/or consultancy fees from TPI. TPI had no involvement in writing of this manuscript. Trevor has a child with autism and accesses support through the National Disability Insurance Scheme. He is also a member of the Parenting and Family Research Alliance (PAFRA), a multidisciplinary research collaboration of experts from leading Australian universities and research centres. The alliance is actively involved in conducting research, communication, and advocacy pertaining to parenting, families, and evidence-based parenting support. PAFRA is supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course.

Bruce Tonge is a co-author of the evidence-based parenting programme Pre-schoolers with autism (Jessica Kingsley Press UK) for which any royalties are returned to research. He is also a chief investigator on NHMRC MRFF Research Grant. APP119968 Evaluation of a New Brief Intervention for Childhood Autism Spectrum Disorders (2020–2023). He is also a member of the Parenting and Family Research Alliance.

Kirsten Baird-Bate has an autistic child and accesses support through the NDIS. She is also a member of the Parenting and Family Research Alliance.

Sharon Dawe is co-developer of the Parents under Pressure program (www.pupprogram.net.au). The PuP program is owned and disseminated by Griffith University. Proceeds from dissemination are distributed in accordance with Griffith University policy. Sharon is also a member of the Parenting and Family Research Alliance.

ref. The NDIS has a parent problem. Changes could involve parents more in disability support and reduce stress – https://theconversation.com/the-ndis-has-a-parent-problem-changes-could-involve-parents-more-in-disability-support-and-reduce-stress-212099

What helps students cope with academic setbacks? Our research shows a sense of belonging at school is key

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Keiko CP Bostwick, Postdoctoral research fellow, UNSW Sydney

RDNE Stock Project/Pexels

Academic challenges and difficulties are inevitable parts of school – this is how students learn. So researchers have long been interested in the ways students navigate these challenges and how to help them cope better.

Recent research has focused on the concept of “academic buoyancy” or everyday resilience at school. This is about students’ capacity to handle everyday setbacks and challenges. This could include negative feedback on an assessment or facing competing study deadlines and schoolwork demands.

Research has found resilient students tend to have more positive academic outcomes. These include making greater effort with their work, having better study skills and enjoying school more than students who are less resilient.

Research has also shown resilience is underpinned by personal attributes such as confidence. But we need more understanding about what school-related factors are involved in students’ resilience and what schools can do to build their students’ resilience.

Our study surveyed high school students in schools around New South Wales to look at what other factors impact students’ resilience.




Read more:
To help students overcome setbacks, they need to develop ‘academic buoyancy’


Our research

The study was based on responses from 71,861 high school students in 292 NSW government schools who completed the annual “Tell Them From Me” student survey organised by the state’s Department of Education.

Students’ responses were collected at two points one year apart: once at the beginning of the 2018 school year when students were in Years 7 to 11 and then a year later in 2019 when they were in Years 8 to 12. Schools were in metropolitan, rural and regional areas.

One of our main aims was to find out if students’ perceptions of different types of support in their school would influence their resilience one year later.

This included academic and emotional support from teachers, students’ sense of school belonging and behavioural expectations in the classroom.

We looked at the role of support factors in two ways. First, we looked at how support for individual students was associated with students’ resilience. For example, does a student who perceives greater academic support from their teacher, regardless of the school they are in, report greater resilience one year later?

Second, we investigated the relationship between support at the whole-school level and whole-school resilience.

Two teenagers lie of the floor, looking at a laptop.
Our research looked at what helps students bounce back from academic setbacks, such as a poor mark or competing deadlines.
Karolina Grabowska/Pexels

Our findings

In our study, students’ sense of school belonging stood out as the most notable factor of resilience. In fact, the role of school belonging was important at the individual student level and also at the whole-school level.

That is, when individual students felt a greater sense of belonging to their school, they tended to also report greater resilience one year later.

When a school had a higher proportion of students reporting a sense of belonging, it demonstrated higher school-average resilience one year later.

There was also evidence of a reciprocal relationship between students’ sense of belonging and their resilience — that is, increases in school belonging were associated with greater resilience one year later and vice versa.

Notably, these findings were largely similar across contexts, including schools of different sizes, in different locations, with different gender compositions, with varying levels of academic selectivity, with a range of socioeconomic status and with varying levels of students’ academic ability.

The similarity in the findings across contexts suggests targeting these areas of support could benefit students’ resilience in a wide range of academic settings.




Read more:
Research suggests one way to prevent depression and anxiety is a strong sense of connection at high school


Why is this so?

Students sit at a desk with calculators and books.
If students feel like they belong at their school, they will feel less isolated if there is a problem.
Karolina Grabowska/Pexels

When faced with everyday academic setbacks and challenge, having a strong sense of school belonging helps to protect students from stress and negativity.

This is because students feel less isolated at times of adversity and have options and opportunities for support from their peers and teachers.

Evidence of the reciprocal relationship among these factors also suggests facilitating a greater sense of belonging could have long-lasting effects on students’ resilience as they positively feed into each other over time.

How can we boost belonging?

Helping students to feel safe and included in their school is one way to promote a greater sense of belonging for students. This could include:

  • offering a range of extracurricular activities that help students to get involved and feel part of their school community

  • anti-bullying or wellbeing programs to help students to feel safer and more comfortable in their schools

  • helping students build and feel confident in their personal identities at school.




Read more:
Our new study provides a potential breakthrough on school bullying


Teaching students to be aware of their emotions

There are also strategies for targeting students’ resilience directly. For example, providing students with specific reasoning behind a poor assessment mark and then time (in class or one-on-one) to help them understand and constructively respond to the challenging feedback.

Students might also be taught to be aware of the thoughts, behaviours and emotions they have when they receive a disappointing result and how they can respond constructively. For example, re-framing the event as a learning opportunity or a time to seek out further information from a teacher is one way to focus on self-improvement rather than the disappointing result.

Amid ongoing concerns about young people’s mental health and wellbeing, academic resilience is an important attribute that helps students to navigate their school careers.

More resources for teachers can be found in this guide to everyday resilience published by the NSW Department of Education. The authors also wish to thank Nicole Hare, Samuel Cox, Anaid Flesken and Ian McCarthy at the Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, NSW Department of Education, for their assistance with the conduct of this research and co-authorship of the original journal article.

The Conversation

Andrew J. Martin receives funding from the NSW Department of Education, including for the conduct of this research

Rebecca J. Collie receives funding from the NSW Department of Education.

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

ref. What helps students cope with academic setbacks? Our research shows a sense of belonging at school is key – https://theconversation.com/what-helps-students-cope-with-academic-setbacks-our-research-shows-a-sense-of-belonging-at-school-is-key-213362

In China, Albanese might find an economy as uncertain as Japan’s 30 years ago

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Harcourt, Industry Professor and Chief Economist, University of Technology Sydney

Shutterstock

When Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visits China later this year he will encounter a nation whose future is about as uncertain as it was 50 years ago when Gough Whitlam became the first Australian prime minister to visit in late 1973.

Then China was poor, in the process of reengaging the rest of the world after the death of Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong. Today it is, on one measure, the second-biggest economy in the world, one of the top five along with the United States, Japan, Germany and the United Kingdom.

Along the way, it has become by far the biggest customer for Australian exports, accounting for 30% of everything Australia sells, and Australia’s biggest source of imports, providing 27% of all the goods and services that come into the country.

But like Japan before it (which was Australia’s biggest customer before the rise of China) its economy is at a crossroads.

The similarities between China today and Japan in late 1991 are eerie.

Japan’s phenomenal economic growth had been fuelled by a blend of government investment, cheap labour and export-led growth, alongside something else not given enough credit at the time – continually climbing real estate prices.

When those prices collapsed amid mountains of debt, Japan was thrown into what became known as its lost decade. This was a decade in which the economy barely grew, notwithstanding ultra-low interest rates, rolling into a second lost decade in which the economy barely grew, even though interest rates had turned negative.

Eerie similarities

Some of the similarities between China today and Japan in the early 1990s are too uncanny to ignore.

Corporate debt: China’s rapid growth was accompanied by a surge in debt, both in the corporate sector and among local governments.

Just as Japan struggled with unproductive “zombie companies” during its crisis, China faces a similar challenge with state-owned enterprises that for the moment continue to operate despite heavy debt burdens, relying on government support.

Unstable financial institutions: China’s banking sector, like Japan’s in the 1990s, is heavily exposed to non-performing loans. Some of Japan’s banks survived only because of taxpayer funded bailouts.

Decelerating economic growth: from the 1990s to 2010 Chinese annual economic growth was rarely below 10%. It has spent much of the time since COVID below 5%, raising the prospect of falls toward zero – as experienced by Japan from time to time throughout its lost decades.

Ageing, shrinking populations: both China’s and Japan’s populations are turning down, in China’s case because of limited immigration and the aftermath of the one-child policy, and in Japan’s case because of limited immigration and a decline in the birthrate to well below replacement level.

In Japan, the proportion of the population aged 65 and above has climbed from 8% to 30% since 1980. In China, the proportion has climbed from 4% to 14%.

In both cases the increasing proportion of aged citizens means a greater stock of savings to be invested, but in both cases much is invested aboard where the returns are often better.

Different this time? Maybe

China can learn a lot from Japan’s painful experiences, but putting the lessons into practice won’t be easy.

Just as cross-shareholdings ensured Japan’s bad loans permeated the economy for much longer than they should have, China’s system of enmeshed government and private entities threatens to do the same thing.

The world is watching as China navigates these challenges. It has seen what happened elsewhere.


Richard Gruppetta, a former diplomat and trade commissioner to Tokyo, assisted with the preparation of this piece.

The Conversation

Tim Harcourt 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. In China, Albanese might find an economy as uncertain as Japan’s 30 years ago – https://theconversation.com/in-china-albanese-might-find-an-economy-as-uncertain-as-japans-30-years-ago-213539

How a 16th century Italian anatomist came up with the word ‘placenta’: it reminded him of a cake

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paige Donaghy, Early career researcher, The University of Queensland

The placenta and umbilical cord. Watercolour image, unknown artist, 19th century. Wellcome Collection, CC BY-SA

Ever wondered where the placenta got its name?

In Italy in the 1500s, the anatomist Matteo Realdo Colombo coined this term to describe the large fleshy organ of pregnancy. Colombo chose placenta because it resembled another big, round object seen in daily life: a cake.

In the premodern world, there existed a variety of words and concepts used to understand the placenta.

In my research, I try to uncover the cultural significance of the placenta and afterbirth in premodern Europe (1500–1800) to help us better understand the social and medical history of this important organ.




Read more:
Explainer: what is placenta?


Afterbirths and secundines

Before the anatomical term placenta appeared, men and women in medieval Europe used the terms “afterbirth” (nachgeburt in German, arrière-faix in French) and “the second” (secundina in Italian, secondine in English).

These terms captured the fact that placental expulsion was the “second” part of a childbirth, necessary to end the birth.

A woodcut depicts a woman who has just recently finished giving birth being attended by various midwives
Illustrations from this 1850 obstetrical book by Jacobus Rueff show scenes of childbirth in 16th century Europe.
Wellcome Library

From the medieval to late early modern period, childbirth was very much the preserve of women midwives, family members and neighbours. Much of their knowledge about the placenta was transmitted orally (women were generally not literate, unless elite) yet some of this knowledge survives in texts.

Male physicians recorded women’s knowledge about childbirth to demonstrate they could access “secret” knowledge about women’s bodies. This boosted their reputation among other male physicians, and gave credibility to their expertise over women’s health and childbirth.

One example of this is the 12th century medical compendium, The Trotula, one of the most influential works on women’s medicine in Europe from its publication until well into the 1500s.

A figure of a woman is painted in a manuscript on women's medicine
Trotula of Salerno.
Wikimedia Commons

The text, a compilation of different medical treatises, was supposedly authored by the first female physician and professor, Trota, in Salerno, Italy.

Although modern scholars suggest that some of the text’s authors were certainly male, historian Monica Green argues that part of the work was likely shaped by a female midwife or healer, possibly called Trota.

At this time, there were many female healers in Salerno, and it was typically only women who had access to women’s births and bodies.

Examining The Trotula allows us to see earlier cultural and medical ideas about the placenta. The author describes how, during birth:

The foetus is expelled from its bed, that is to say the afterbirth, by the force of Nature.

The afterbirth and foetus were understood as having a close, companion-like relationship; the placenta was a “bed” for the foetus during pregnancy, providing support and comfort.

We can also see how the afterbirth might be used following pregnancy and birth. Trota writes:

If [the mother] has been badly torn in birth and afterward for fear of death does not wish to conceive any more, let her put into the afterbirth as many grains of caper spurge or barley as the number of years she wishes to remain barren.

The post-birth use of the placenta in remedies was common in Europe. The afterbirth was perceived as having “sympathetic” healing qualities relating to future fertility and the health of the infant.

Anatomy and the afterbirth: new terms

Women’s ideas about placental remedies were often ridiculed by university-educated male anatomists, who labelled these practices “superstitious”. Yet, many did respect women’s knowledge as experts in childbirth.

The image depicts an anatomical theatre in which many men surround an anatomical table. In the centre above the table colombo is dissecting a man's corpse and showing organs to the students.
De Re Anatomica (1559), frontispiece.
Wikimedia Commons

When Italian anatomist Matteo Realdo Colombo coined the term “placenta” in the 16th century, he used a term directly related to women’s worlds: cooking. Colombo was professor of anatomy at the University of Padua, a hub for anatomical learning in Europe at the time.

Colombo described the shape and function of the human placenta in his anatomical treatise, De Re Anatomica (On Things Anatomical, 1559).

In this book, Colombo introduced the term “placenta” to distinguish it from other anatomical terms, as well as midwifery terms like “secundina”.

“Placenta” referred to a wide, flat cake, cooked in a pan with layers of cheese and honey, dating as far back as Ancient Rome.

Colombo chose this term to describe the large, flat organ, “circular” like a placenta cake, and of a similar size.

In choosing the term placenta, he also associated the organ with ideas about women’s worlds, of cooking and childbirth; the placenta, like the Italian cake, provided nourishment and comfort. This idea connected with earlier ones like the Trotula, which suggested the afterbirth was the foetus’ bed.

The placenta today

Exploring the history of ideas about the placenta and afterbirth offer us insights into how people have valued this important organ.

This can tell us about the development of scientific knowledge, such as the emergence of the word placenta, providing context for urgent placental science being undertaken today. History can help us determine how and why in different times and cultures, science has or has not prioritised placental research.

Histories of the placenta also help provide context for current cultural attitudes to and practices around the afterbirth, such as eating the placenta and turning the placenta into memorabilia, jewellery or art.

By studying past knowledge about the placenta, we can see the echoes of attitudes to this organ in our modern science and culture.

Our bodies are not static. They are deeply shaped by the prevailing medical and cultural perceptions of our times.




Read more:
No, you shouldn’t eat your placenta, here’s why


The Conversation

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

ref. How a 16th century Italian anatomist came up with the word ‘placenta’: it reminded him of a cake – https://theconversation.com/how-a-16th-century-italian-anatomist-came-up-with-the-word-placenta-it-reminded-him-of-a-cake-207323

Well behind at halftime: here’s how to get the UN Sustainable Development Goals back on track

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Allen, Research Fellow, Monash University

United Nations

This week world leaders are gathering at the United Nations (UN) headquarters in New York to review progress against the Sustainable Development Goals. We’re halfway between when the goals were set in 2015 and when they need to be met in 2030.

As authors of a global UN report on the goals, we have a message to share. Currently, the world is not on track to achieve any of the 17 goals.

There is much at stake. Failing to achieve the goals would mean by the end of the decade, 600 million people will be living in extreme poverty. More than 80 million children and young people will not be in school. Humanity will overshoot the Paris climate agreement’s 1.5℃ “safe” guardrail on average global temperature rise. And, at the current rate, it will take 300 years to attain gender equality.

But there is hope. With decisive action, we can shift the dial towards a fairer, more sustainable and prosperous world by 2030.




Read more:
We modelled 4 scenarios for Australia’s future. Economic growth alone can’t deliver the goods


What does the research say?

The set of 17 universal goals agreed in 2015 aim to end poverty, improve health and education, and reduce inequality – while tackling climate change and preserving our oceans and forests. Each of the goals are broken down into targets.

Every four years, the UN Secretary-General appoints an independent group of 15 international scientists to assess progress against these goals and recommend how to move forwards. We were among the authors of the latest Global Sustainable Development Report published late last week.

To provide a snapshot of progress, we reviewed 36 targets. We found only two were on track (on access to mobile networks and internet usage) and 14 showed fair progress. Twelve showed limited or no progress – including around poverty, safe drinking water and ecosystem conservation.

Worryingly, eight targets were assessed as still going backwards. These included reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and fossil fuel subsidies, preventing species extinction and ensuring sustainable fish stocks.

Hear from some of the scientists behind the Global Sustainable Development Report 2023.

What is holding us back?

Recent studies have identified feasible and cost-effective global and national pathways to accelerate progress on the goals.

Unfortunately, in many developing countries, insufficient financial resources and weak governance hinder progress. In other cases, existing investments in fossil fuels have generated strong resistance from powerful vested interests. Achieving some goals, such as responsible consumption and production, will also require big, unpopular changes in habits and lifestyles, which are very ingrained.

To accelerate progress on the goals, targets must be fully integrated by government and business at all levels into core decision making, budgeting and planning processes. We need to identify and prioritise those areas that lag furthest behind. To be effective, we also need to uncover and address the root causes of inadequate outcomes, which lie in our institutions and governance systems.

Accountability also remains weak. The goals are not legally binding and even though countries have expressed their support, this has often failed to translate into policy and investments. In practice, the targets are often “painted on” to existing strategies without redesigning norms and structures to deliver improved outcomes.

If the world is to accelerate progress on the goals, governments need to play a more active part, by setting targets, stimulating innovation, shaping markets, and regulating business.

We call on policymakers to develop tailored action plans to accelerate progress on the goals in the remaining years to 2030, including measures to improve accountability.

Scientists have a major role to play too. As we argued in Nature, scientists can help us redesign institutions, systems and practices. By studying ways to strengthen governance and build momentum for tough but transformative reforms, research can overcome resistance to change, and manage negative side-effects.

What does it mean for Australia?

Australia tends to perform poorly on the goals when compared to our peers in the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), ranking 40th in the world in 2023. Our best-performing goals include health and education, while progress lags on environmental goals, economic inequality and cost-of-living pressures.

While some environment agencies, businesses and local groups have embraced the goals, Australia’s poor performance is symptomatic of limited traction and commitment at the centre of government.

Here, the goals are often seen as an international development issue rather than central to domestic policy efforts. We lack a high-level statement or any strategy or action plan for the goals. There is no lead unit or coordination mechanism in place and no reference to the goals in the federal budget. One promising development, a national Sustainable Development Goal monitoring portal, hasn’t been updated in five years.

The best performing countries have taken concrete steps to mainstream the targets and ensure accountability:

  • Denmark requires new government bills to be screened and assessed for their impacts on the goals

  • Finland has taken steps to place sustainable development and people’s wellbeing at the heart of policy and decision making. A sustainable development commission, annual citizens’ panel on sustainable development and national audits provide increased accountability

  • Wales requires public bodies to use sustainable development as a guiding principle reflecting the values and aspirations of the Welsh people.

Australia’s first wellbeing framework is an important step forward. The framework of 50 indicators has considerable overlap with the goals, despite notable exceptions such as the lack of a poverty indicator or any specific targets or benchmarks.




Read more:
Australia’s first wellbeing framework is about to measure what matters – but it’s harder than counting GDP


Start lifting our game

As we’ve learned through our own research, little will change if such promising initiatives remain box-ticking exercises that fail to reorient our societies and economies towards sustainable development.

To achieve real change, indicator frameworks need to be translated into timebound targets that clearly set the agreed direction and level of ambition. These targets must be embedded in the core decision-making processes of government and business.

Remember the goals are not a set of technical targets and indicators. They are the outcomes each of us want for our society and the world we live in.

While we are behind at halftime, the game is not over. It is up to us to lift our performance and turn the score around.




Read more:
Climate change threatens the rights of children. The UN just outlined the obligations states have to protect them


The Conversation

Cameron Allen receives funding from the Australian Government.

Shirin Malekpour receives funding from the Australian Government.

ref. Well behind at halftime: here’s how to get the UN Sustainable Development Goals back on track – https://theconversation.com/well-behind-at-halftime-heres-how-to-get-the-un-sustainable-development-goals-back-on-track-206677

TVNZ tightens its belt with ‘tough calls’ citing ad revenue slump

MEDIAWATCH: By Colin Peacock, RNZ Mediawatch presenter

Aotearoa New Zealand’s public television broadcaster TVNZ is planning significant cuts to content production, programmes and operational spending in response to commercial clients’ reduced spending on advertising.

Future projects are under review and pay rises for executives and top-earning staff have also been scrapped at the state-owned broadcaster.

Staff were informed of the changes in a memo and video address today from acting chief executive Brent McAnulty.

The memo says senior executives have identified “all the possible cost savings opportunities we have” in recent weeks.

“Content budgets have been reduced, both for local production and international content. Remuneration reviews have been cancelled for our exec team and our other highest-earning employees,” it said.

“There have been some really tough calls to make here, but we need to live within our means,” McAnulty told staff.

“All projects are being reviewed to decide whether they should continue, be paused, or be cancelled for this financial year,” the memo said.

Digital technology overhaul
TVNZ currently has a tender out for a major overhaul of its digital technology and internet infrastructure.

“We’re also putting tighter controls on capital expenditure and we’re looking at how we can reduce casual and contractor labour costs,” the memo said.

“The TV advertising market is tough right now, and as the biggest player we are being impacted,” McAnulty told staff in today’s memo.

“Local businesses have been reducing their advertising spend because of the economic conditions, and uncertainty in the lead up to the election,” it said.

The memo urges staff to use up their leave this year.

Recruitment for vacant roles is “paused until 2024” and TVNZ is “choosing not to fill some other vacant roles” and will defer the starting dates for some roles.

TVNZ has more than 750 staff. More than 300 of them earn more than $100,000 a year.

Annual allowance dropped
An annual allowance of $350 paid to all staff — which was effectively a covid-19 relief initiative — will not be paid this year.

TVNZ has “paused” all travel for 2024 except “business-critical travel related to newsgathering, commercial clients and content negotiations”.

TVNZ will also spend less on social media and online marketing and promotion and market research, according to the memo.

“We’re pausing all internal events — though we’re still hopeful that we’ll have Christmas celebrations in our three main offices,” the memo said.

TVNZ reported revenue of $180.3 million in the six months to December 2022, but forecast a loss of $15.6m in the 2023/24 financial year.

The broadcaster has previously signalled that it may need to respond to financial difficulties in the near future.

TVNZ’s most recent Statement of Intent (pdf) says alignment of revenues and costs was under “increasing pressure”.

A ‘dynamic approach’
“We’ll adopt a dynamic approach to the allocation of business resources between investing to sustain our core TV business and accelerating the growth of our future online business. The stronger the commercial performance of our core business, the more actively we’ll be able to invest in shaping our future,” the document says.

Brent McAnulty assured TVNZ staff in today’s memo that TVNZ still had a strong share of television audience and revenue and its online platform TVNZ+ had an “impressive growth trajectory.”

Previous CEO Kevin Kenrick persuaded the government in 2019 to allow TVNZ to effectively forgo dividends to the Crown to allow it to invest in programmes and digital services.

This angered rival commercial media rivals who could expect no such backstop, while also competing with offshore-owned streaming services as well other broadcasters for audience and revenue.

TVNZ has invested heavily in TVNZ+ and recently launched live sport on the platform after securing rights held by Spark Sport until it ceased in July.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

‘Quit lip service’ and reshuffle PNG cabinet for national benefit, says Nomane

PNG Post-Courier

Vice-Minister of Planning James Nomane has called on Prime Minister James Marape to put Papua New Guinea first and reshuffle cabinet to bring together the best of both government and opposition MPs.

In his 48th Independence message at the weekend, Nomane said that this Independence Day must trigger change in the way Marape’s administration had been running the government.

“In the last 12 months, the country’s socio-economic indicators have regressed,” he said.

“We just need to look at the lack of jobs, no medicine in hospitals, and the unprecedented crime wave.”

This was a reality check and an indictment on the government’s ability to manage the nation’s affairs as its elected leaders.

“All Members of Parliament must be honest and stop the lip service, stop promulgating cliché, and stop the ill-conceived half-measures that have worsened the situation for our people,” Nomane said.

“On this Independence Day, I call on the Prime Minister to put the country first and do a complete cabinet reshuffle that brings the best of both government and opposition MPs together.

Plea for ‘suffering masses’
“The task is simple: in 3 months turn the situation around.

“This is an unprecedented plea on behalf of the suffering masses, the silent majority, and our progeny.

“The country is bigger than me and every other Member of Parliament. I am sick of the paradox that PNG is so rich, yet so poor.

“I am sick of the paralysis caused by the inimical political culture that promotes conformity and punishes those that disagree on policy.

“MPs vehemently debating on policy in public and sharing a meal afterwards has become a distant memory.

“This is synonymous with autocratic leadership, not a thriving democracy as envisioned by our forefathers and captured in our Constitution.

“The Prime Minister must change cabinet and get MPs who know how things work and can lead without fear or favour to drive the country’s development aspirations 48 years and beyond.

“The time has come for this 11th Parliament to live out the words of our national anthem: “O arise all ye sons of this land…”

Republished from the PNG Post-Courier with permission.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

RWC2023: Simi Kuruvoli’s boot helps ‘best ever’ Flying Fijians beat Wallabies

By Iliesa Tora, RNZ Pacific sports reporter in Saint Etienne, France

The Flying Fijians won its Rugby World Cup Pool C match against Australia 22-15 in Saint Etienne with the team’s fourth choice kicker, Simione Kuruvoli, leading them.

And the win came after 69 long years since Fiji last defeated the Wallabies in 1954.

Kuruvoli, who is ranked behind the injured Caleb Muntz, Teti Tela and Frank Lomani as a kicker, started the game at halfback and was given the goal-kicking duties.

RUGBY WORLD CUP FRANCE 2023

He did not disappoint and his personal tally of 14 points ensured the Fijians managed to outpoint the Wallabies in the end, in a match that kept the 41,294 fans at the Stade Geoffroy-Guichard on their toes.

Head coach Simon Raiwalui called Kuruvoli into the starting line-up ahead of Lomani and the 24-year-old stamped his mark.

“I am grateful for the opportunity to start and the trust that was given to me by the coach and team management,” he said.

“It was a tense game and I just focused on my kicks to make sure that we were able to get the points needed.”

Fiji dominated
Fiji dominated the game — and in all facets of the game.

It was something similar to what they did against Wales in Bordeaux two Sundays ago.

The only difference is this time they were able to convert the statistical advantage into winning points in the end.

Fiji flyhalf Simione Kuruvoli
Fiji flyhalf Simione Kuruvoli . . . kickable options saw him stepping up to the mark, claiming crucial points. Image: WRC2023/RNZ Pacific

Kickable options saw Kuruvoli stepping up to the mark, claiming crucial points.

Coach Raiwalui said it was a great win and thanked the boys for sticking to the job at hand.

“We focused on Australia this week and the boys executed the game plan very well,” he said.

“Great to have the win but we are still building and will need to focus on the next one after this.

“Mostly proud of the boys. It’s not just for today, it’s a combination of work over time.

Two hard games next
“Two very hard games coming up. Let’s enjoy this win, will review tonight. I think a lot of the boys will be sore but super proud.”

Captain Waisea Nayacalevu thanked the players and fans for their support.

“Great team effort and the fans were fantastic,” he said. “Proud of the boys for the effort.”

The win means Fiji and Australia are tied in pool C with six points each.

Fiji will need to win both their remaining matches against Georgia and Portugal and hope that the Wallabies fall against Wales in their crunch match.

But that aside, the win over the Australians was celebrated by those who turned up, including Fijians who had flown in from Fiji, New Zealand, Australia and across Europe.

French fans who turned up to watch the game backed Fiji as they could be heard cheering for Fiji on the grandstand and they booed the Australians every time they were penalised in the match.

Australian Fijians say it was tough
The Australians had five Fijians in their line-up, with two of them, wingers Mark Waqanitawase and Suliasi Vunivalu, scoring their tries.

Samu Kerevi, Rob Valetini and Marika Koroibete were strong in defence and made some good runs but they were nullified by their fellow Fijians, who hit them with some bone-crunching tackles.

Vunivalu congratulated Fiji and said they were consistent.

“They started well and kept that throughout,” he said.

“We tried to come back, but they were very strong.”

Koroibete said it was a physical battle.

“They were on from the start to the end, we tried to keep up with them from the start but they were good,” he said.

“As a team we did not work upfront enough to counter that physicality.”

He said they will now have to focus on Wales.

Fiji head coach Simon Raiwalui
Fiji head coach Simon Raiwalui (left) . . . “Great to have the win but we are still building and will need to focus on the next one after this.” WRC23 screenshot APR

Best Fiji team ever – Serevi
Sevens King Waisale Serevi, who was in the crowd supporting Fiji, said the Flying Fijians team in France was the best ever.

“I think it is the best team ever to play at the World Cup because we are going up and we have beaten Australia now,” he said.

“I believe that maybe we have won a game in the World Cup and going to the quarter-final, we still have two more games and the way we played today showed they can compete on this level.

“The Australia team are a good team, but I think the [Fiji] boys were better today.

“They played to the plan, they played to the strengths of the game they wanted to play. They did everything right and they did compete at the breakdown which is not really the Fijian way of playing rugby.

“I believe with the team that we have we can go through to the quarter-final and we have every opportunity to get to the semi-final.”

First half lead set the pace
Fiji led at halftime 12-8 with halfback Kuruvoli kicking all of Fiji’s points through the boots.

Australia managed a try to Waqanitawase, after the Wallabies had taken a quick lineout throw, with Samu Kerevi running through and passing on to Waqanitawase who dived over.

Fullback Ben Donaldson missed the conversion, but he had opened the scoring in the game with an earlier penalty close to the posts.

Australia was able to defend well against the Fijians in the first 40 minutes, keeping their opponents at bay inside their own half.

Fiji put together several phases and attacks in the first spell, with Kuruvoli masterminding their moves.

Josua Tuisova, Semi Radradra and captain Nayacalevu were all busy on attack while the forwards dominated in the ruck and scrum situations.

A telling factor Fiji displayed was their strong forward plays, holding their own in the scrums and lineouts as well.

But Australia challenged their throw-ins towards the end of the first spell and won two successive Fijian throw-ins near their own line.

Good start in second spell
The Fijians got straight back into the game in the second spell and Man of the Match, winger Tuisova scored out wide after he collected a bouncing ball from a Kuruvoli place kick off the base of a ruck.

They then missed a penalty attempt from Lomani and Tuisova swung the ball wide and out the sideline as they had an opportunity to run the ball with four players sitting outside him.

It was tit-for-tat after that as both teams tried to put phases together.

A penalty midway inside the Wallabies side of the field gave Lomani another opportunity to extend their lead and he made it 22-8 from that kick.

Australian fullback Ben Donaldson converted Vunivalu’s try and closed the gap to 22-15.

Fiji hung on with some great steals in ruck-ball situations to end the game with the famous win, even though Lomani’s last kick sailed wide.

Scorecard:
Fiji 22 – Tries: Josua Tuisova (43′); Conv: Simione Kuruvoli (44′); Pens: Simione Kuruvoli (12′, 21′, 27′, 33′); Frank Lomani (66′).

Australia 15 – Tries: Mark Nawaqanitawase (23′), Suli Vunivalu (68′); Conv: Ben Donaldson (70′); Pens: Ben Donaldson (3′).

Other Pacific results:
Results in other Pacific matches at the World Cup were mixed with Manu Samoa defeating newcomers Chile 43-10 at Bordeaux in pool D while Tongan coach Toutai Kefu admitted his Ikale Tahi side had been outclassed 59-16 by top-ranked Ireland at Nantes in pool B.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Worried about heat and fire this summer? Here’s how to to prepare

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Celeste Young, Collaborative Research Fellow, Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities (ISILC), Victoria University

Shutterstock

The Northern Hemisphere summer brought catastrophic fires and floods to many countries. Down south, the winter was the hottest ever recorded in Australia, fuelled by record ocean temperatures.

Small wonder many Australians are worried about what summer will bring, as a likely El Niño threatens hot and dry fire weather. In the early southern spring, the fire season has already kicked off in New South Wales, Queensland and the Northern Territory, just as anticipated in seasonal predictions. The recent spring heatwave saw dozens of marathon runners in Sydney hospitalised and even threatened lives.

What does this mean for you? It means if you live in the bush, country towns or the outskirts of major cities, it’s time to prepare for the possibility of fire. And if you live anywhere in Australia, you need to plan for heat.

Fire gets attention – but extreme heat can do more damage

Bushfire dominates how we think about summer risks in Australia. But in reality, extreme heat hits harder. That’s because extreme heat can be extremely widespread – and a hidden killer. In particularly hot summers, almost all of us will face some kind of heat stress. Days where you just can’t cool down, or where underlying health conditions flare up.

As the climate becomes less stable, we’re seeing more heat domes – slow-moving high-pressure systems which sit atop an area and blast it. During extremely hot days, we often long for night when the temperature drops. But heat domes can keep heat high overnight.

High heat is more dangerous early in the season before people have acclimatised – and often at relatively low temperatures compared to later in the year.

bushfire smoke NSW
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire – bushfire threats range from fire itself to smoke.
Shutterstock

Will bushfires be back this summer?

For three years, Australia has been preoccupied with floods. Now we’re heading back into fire risk. But it may be different to what you expect. La Niña’s cooler, wetter conditions have led to strong vegetation growth. Grasses dry out more quickly than other vegetation types, meaning grasslands switch rapidly from moist to tinderbox.

The most likely fires we’ll see this season will be grass, scrub and city fringe fires. Very large forest fires like those of the Black Summer are less likely, as these need extended dry conditions.

These fires will be of direct concern to those outside major cities. But city residents will see the effects too, in smoke, transport disruptions and potential crop and livestock losses which can reduce food availability.

What should you do to get ready?

1. Fire

It’s essential to think ahead as much as possible. Let’s say you live near a forest or grassland which could be a fire risk. Which roads would you take? Where would you go? How could you make sure all your loved ones are contactable – and if they’re away from you, how could you make sure they can get to safety? Record the plan and keep a printed copy.

If you’re in a bushfire prone area, explore and make use of planning resources offered by every state, territory and local emergency agency. Download your state’s hazard or bushfire app with real-time alerts.

With your family, friends or housemates, run through different scenarios so you’re on the same page. When should you stay? When would you leave? Practice your evacuation.

If you’ve got lots of leaf litter, dry grass or fallen branches around your home or property, it’s a good time to reduce fuel loads and ensure your emergency exits are clear.

If you’re planning a holiday in bushfire prone areas, you also need to make safe travel plans.

man planning for fire
Anxious about this summer? Plan ahead.
Shutterstock

2. Heat

Getting ready for intense heat means preparing your home. Is your house well insulated? If you have an air conditioner, is it running well and has it been serviced? Could you reduce how much heat comes through your windows by using shade cloth, awnings or window coverings? A bushfire landscaped garden or heat reflective paint can also help reduce fire risk or cool the house. If you’re renting, bring any issues relating to gaps in doors or windows or faulty electricity to the attention of the real estate agent.

Freezer blocks wrapped in towels and refrigerated spray bottles are also cheap cooling options if you have limited cooling options in your house.




Read more:
Extreme heat is particularly hard on older adults – an aging population and climate change put ever more people at risk


If you are working from home, make sure you have backup cooling methods such as battery-operated fans in case of blackouts.

If your home is not well prepared for heat, plan ahead by looking for safer spaces such as a friend’s well insulated or air-conditioned home, a shopping centre, or library where you can seek refuge. Read the Red Cross heatwave preparation guide.

Write a list of key contacts and friends or neighbours who might be particularly at risk and put them in your phone and on your fridge.

As the heat builds, check for heatwave warnings on the Bureau of Meteorology’s site. Know what the symptoms of heat stroke and exhaustion look like.

Businesses must understand their responsibilities to their employees during extreme heat and have plans to manage these.

Do prepare but don’t panic

This year is showing us what climate change looks like. As these risks build and become more severe, we can no longer just think “she’ll be right”.

As climate risks expand and become increasingly severe, understanding and actively planning for these risks is now an imperative.




Read more:
Top 10 tips to keep cool this summer while protecting your health and your budget


The Conversation

Celeste Young has previously received funding from the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre, The National Centre for Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, The Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation Research, The Victorian Department Environment,Water Land and Planning and The Victorian Department of Health.and Human Services.

Nima Izadyar is a Lecturer with the School of Built Environment, College of Sport, Health and Engineering (CoSHE), Victoria University.

Roger Jones has provided technical advice on fire climate regimes to the Victorian Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (Formerly the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning).

ref. Worried about heat and fire this summer? Here’s how to to prepare – https://theconversation.com/worried-about-heat-and-fire-this-summer-heres-how-to-to-prepare-212443

Neighbours vs Friends: we found out which beloved show fans mourned more when it ended

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Gerace, Senior Lecturer and Head of Course – Positive Psychology, CQUniversity Australia

Have you either felt a sense of loss after binging the final episodes of a television series?

Perhaps you’ve experienced this sadness on reaching the last page of a book that you’d been reading for months? Or maybe you held off watching the final instalment of a movie franchise for as long as possible because you anticipated the emptiness that would come once your time with the characters was over?

If you have dreaded or felt downhearted at a fictitious ending, you’re not alone.

Across all media, audiences develop relationships with their favourite characters. Like their real-world counterparts, these fictional relationships involve feelings of affection, perceptions of similarity and even attempts to imagine what it is like to be this other “person”.




Read more:
Amazon’s resuscitation of Neighbours: can Aussie TV become good friends with streaming?


Some researchers consider these interactions similar to other types of relationships we have in our lives. We might see these characters as casual acquaintances or dear friends, feel a mild or more acute sense of upset when they face adversity, and compare or contrast our own feelings about particular social or political issues with theirs.

Importantly, parasocial relationships, which are connections we form with media characters or personalities, are valued, and we often take them seriously.

Let’s consider the television series Friends, whose finale in 2004 was watched by over 52 million US viewers.

Following the final episode, researchers Keren Eyal and Jonathan Cohen asked American undergraduate students how they felt about the conclusion of the series. In this study, the more committed a fan was to the series and the stronger the bond they had formed with their favourite character, the more they felt they had experienced a “breakup” at the end of the series.

When good Neighbours become lost friends

In 2022, the Australian television serial Neighbours aired its final episode. Fans, particularly those in the UK where the series is very popular, were upset. In fact, they seemed to be experiencing a loss akin to the grief we feel when a real-life relationship crumbles or our time with someone important in our lives comes to an end.

I decided to examine the grief and loss reactions of Neighbours fans and what factors were associated with them feeling this loss more acutely.

A total of 1,289 fans, mostly from the UK and Australia, completed an online survey shortly after the airing of the final episode. They reported their reasons for watching the series, feelings towards a favourite character, and how connected they felt with fellow fans. They also described the level of their grief and loss, similar to the survey Friends fans had completed almost 20 years earlier.

Importantly, at the time of completing the survey, fans had no indication that the series would be revived in late 2023. For them, the show and their parasocial bonds were finished.

You’re breaking up with me?

So, what happens when parasocial relationships end?

We can find plenty of small-screen examples of how audiences react. When Molly Jones passed away from cancer on the Australian series A Country Practice in 1985, the nation almost entered a state of collective mourning. Similarly, exits like Maggie Doyle in Blue Heelers and Dr Patrick Reid in Offspring had Australian viewers reaching for their tissue boxes.

Similar effects have been observed with international shows. The deaths of many key characters, including Robb Stark, at the wedding of in Game of Thrones shocked viewers. So, too, did the passing of Jack Pearson of This Is Us and then Mr. Big in And Just Like That. In these cases, their demises were associated with a crockpot and a high-end exercise bike, respectively, making them surreal but nonetheless tragic.

Another way we experience these parasocial breakups is when a series ends. Surprisingly, with the exception of the Friends study, there has been limited research conducted into our loss reactions.

Grief, gratitude and viewer motives

In my research, Neighbours fans reported experiencing strong feelings of grief, including sadness, anger and disbelief. They also reported missing their favourite character a great deal. Not surprisingly, given the series had only just concluded, they did not report feeling a sense of closure to their grief. However, they were very grateful for the role Neighbours had played in their lives and what it had given them.

Fans who experienced greater grief and loss reactions had formed strong relationships with their favourite character, involving empathy and understanding. That is, they reported often feeling sad when their favourite character felt sad or concerned for them, with these reactions often coming about when they imagined how things looked from their perspective.

Greater grief reactions were found in those fans who watched the show for exciting storylines, because it allowed them to experience different lifestyles and situations, and to feel a part of the fan community. Viewers who watched merely to pass the time or just because it “was on” did not experience this degree of loss.

When comparing fandoms, Neighbours fans reported greater loss in my study than the fans of Friends in the US study following their parasocial breakup.

It is important to note that those in the Neighbours sample were very committed fans, perhaps explaining this difference. However, this might also reflect the fact that viewers had not only bonded with, but had developed decades-long relationships with the Neighbours characters.

Finding the perfect blend

Viewers who invest in a series do care about the fortunes of their favourite characters. The sadness we feel when a character or series leaves the parasocial world makes sense from a relationships perspective. Indeed, other studies have found that we react to the deaths of celebrities in some ways as if we knew them.

It should be remembered that parasocial relationships differ from our real-world ones in a key aspect. Parasocial relationships do not allow us to experience the satisfaction that reciprocation in feelings, connection or bonds from a relationship partner affords us.

Indeed, if a person is particularly grieved by a parasocial breakup, it would be a good idea to delve into those feelings. Does the series meet needs for connection to others, companionship, stability or something that is perceived to be lacking in one’s life? Exploring how those needs might be satisfied through real-life relationships would be particularly useful.

The Conversation

Adam Gerace 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. Neighbours vs Friends: we found out which beloved show fans mourned more when it ended – https://theconversation.com/neighbours-vs-friends-we-found-out-which-beloved-show-fans-mourned-more-when-it-ended-212843

What does having a ‘good relationship with food’ mean? 4 ways to know if you’ve got one

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Clare Collins, Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Newcastle

Shutterstock

Travelling on a train recently you couldn’t help but overhear two women deep in conversation about a mutual obsession with food, including emotional triggers that pushed them towards chocolate and pizza.

They shared feeling guilty about a perceived lack of willpower around food and regularly rummaging through the fridge looking for tasty treats to help soothe emotions. Both lamented not being able to stop and think before eating.

Their discussion was a long way from talking about physiological requirements for food to fuel your body and meet essential nutrient needs. Instead, it was highly emotive.

It got me thinking about the meaning of a healthy relationship with food, how a person’s eating behaviours develop, and how a “good” relationship can be nurtured. Here’s what a “healthy” food relationship can look like.

What does a ‘good relationship with food’ mean?

You can check whether your relationship with food is “healthy” by seeing how many items on this list you tick “yes” to. Are you:

  1. in tune with your body cues, meaning you’re aware when you are hungry, when you’re not, and when you’re feeling full?

  2. eating appropriate amounts and variety of foods across all food groups, at regular intervals so your nutrient, health and wellbeing needs are met?

  3. comfortable eating with others and also eating alone?

  4. able to enjoy food, without feelings of guilt or it dominating your life?

If you didn’t get many ticks, you might need to work on improving your relationship with food.




Read more:
Thinking you’re ‘on a diet’ is half the problem – here’s how to be a mindful eater


Why does a good relationship with food matter?

A lot of “no” responses indicate you may be using food as a coping mechanism in response to negative emotions. The problem is this triggers the brain’s reward centre, meaning although you feel better, this behaviour becomes reinforced, so you are more likely to keep eating in response to negative emotions.

Emotional eating and bouts of uncontrolled eating are more likely to be associated with eating disorder symptoms and with having a worse quality diet, including lower intakes of vegetable and higher intakes of nutrient-poor foods.

A review of studies on food addiction and mental health found healthy dietary patterns were associated with a lower risk of both disordered eating and food addiction. Higher intakes of vegetables and fruit were found to be associated with lower perceived stress, tension, worry and lack of joy in a cohort of more than 8,000 Australian adults.

Man eating burger
Constantly thinking about food throughout the day can spell an unhealthy relationship with food.
marcel heil/Unsplash

How to develop a healthy food relationship

There are ways to improve your relationship with food. Here are some tips:

1. keep a ‘food mood’ diary. Writing down when and where you eat and drink, whom you’re with, what you’re doing, and how all this makes you feel, will give you personal insights into when, what and why you consume the things you do. This helps increase awareness of emotions including stress, anxiety, depression, and factors that influence eating and drinking.

2. reflect on what you wrote in your food mood diary, especially “why” you’re eating when you eat. If reasons include stress, low mood or other emotions, create a distraction list featuring activities such as going for a walk or listening to music, and put it on the fridge, noticeboard or in your phone, so it’s easy to access.

3. practise mindful eating. This means slowing down so you become very aware of what is happening in your body and mind, moment by moment, when eating and drinking, without making any judgement about your thoughts and feelings. Mindless eating occurs when you eat without thinking at all. Being mindful means taking the time to check whether you really are hungry, or whether it’s “eye” hunger triggered by seeing food, “nose” hunger triggered by smells wafting from shops or cafes, “emotional hunger” triggered by feelings, or true, tummy-rumbling hunger.

4. learn about your nutrient needs. Learning why your body needs specific vitamins and minerals and the foods they’re in, rather than just mentally coding food as “good” or “bad”, can help you drop the guilt. Banning “bad” foods makes you want them more, and like them more. Mindfulness can help you gain an appreciation of foods that are both pleasing and nourishing.

5. focus on getting enjoyment from food. Mindless eating can be reduced by focusing on enjoying food and the pleasure that comes from preparing and sharing food with others. One intervention for women who had concerns about dieting and weight control used workshops to raise their awareness of food cues that prompt eating, including emotions, or being in places they normally associate with eating, and also sensory aspects of food including taste, touch, smell, sound and texture. It also aimed to instruct them in how to embrace pleasure from social, emotional and cultural aspects of food. The intervention led to a reduction in overeating in response to emotional cues such as sadness and stress. Another review of 11 intervention studies that promoted eating pleasure and enjoyment found promising results on healthy eating, including better diet quality, healthier portion sizes, healthier food choices and greater liking of healthy foods. Participants also reported healthy food tasted better and got easier to cook more often at home.

Pizza slices with hands reaching for them
Sharing and enjoying food with others improves our relationship to food.
klara kulikova/Unsplash

Where to get help to improve your relationship with food

A healthy relationship with food also means the absence of disordered eating, including binge eating, bulimia and anorexia.

If you, or someone you know, shows signs suggesting disordered eating, such as regularly using restrictive practices to limit food intake, skipping meals, food rituals dictating which foods or combinations to eat at specific times, binge eating, feeling out of control around food, secret eating, inducing vomiting, or use of diet pills, follow up with a GP or health professional.

You can get more information from InsideOut, an Australian institute for eating disorders. Try their online food relationship “check-up” tool.

The Butterfly Foundation also has specific resources for parents and teachers and a helpline operating from 8am to midnight, seven days a week on 1800 334673.




Read more:
What is a balanced diet anyway?


The Conversation

Clare Collins AO is a Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, HMRI, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update and the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns.

Tracy Burrows is a Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leader Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, HMRI, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia. She has consulted to the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia, Diabetes Victoria.

ref. What does having a ‘good relationship with food’ mean? 4 ways to know if you’ve got one – https://theconversation.com/what-does-having-a-good-relationship-with-food-mean-4-ways-to-know-if-youve-got-one-202622

National wants to change how NZ schools teach reading – but ‘structured literacy’ must be more than just a classroom checklist

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christine Braid, Professional Learning and Development Facilitator in Literacy Education, Massey University

If it wins the election, the National Party has vowed to shake up how children are taught to read and write. Part of this education overhaul includes a pledge to require the teaching of “structured literacy” in all year 0-6 classrooms.

For many in education, the announcement is welcome. It signals a move to an explicit and systematic form of teaching reading that educators, researchers and parents have long been calling for.

New Zealand certainly needs to lift its literacy rates. Only 60% of 15-year-olds are achieving above the most basic level of reading, meaning 40% are struggling to read and write. Focusing on what research shows works in literacy is vital for improvement.

Some schools have already implemented a variety of structured literacy programmes, often at their own cost. The Ministry of Education has also begun to provide resources for more explicit reading instruction, and has incorporated elements of structured literacy into its education strategy.

But here is where we need to tread carefully and work collaboratively.

There is a growing body of research supporting the introduction of explicit reading instruction – what informs the label of structured literacy. But we don’t yet know exactly what it would look like and how it would be taught.

And, if we don’t remain adaptable, we could end up with a reading curriculum that fails the promise to lift literacy rates.

How has reading been taught?

For decades, New Zealand schools have followed the “balanced literacy approach”. This places value on being immersed in literature, and on the development of oral language. Students are not explicitly taught to sound out words.

By contrast, a structured approach focuses on teaching children to read words by following a progression from simple to more complex phonics – the practice of matching the sounds with individual letters or groups of letters.

A balanced literacy approach requires children to use a wide range of information to read, including illustrations and the context of the story. So children might look at the first letter of a word and then think what might fit in the sentence.

Structured approaches to reading use decodable books that are designed to help children practise a particular letter-sound pattern.

Defining and trademarking reading instruction

When we consider mandating a single approach to reading instruction, we need to develop a clear understanding of the terminology.

Structured literacy is one interpretation of the “science of reading” – a large body of research that pulls from disciplines such as education, special education, literacy, psychology, neurology and others.

The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) trademarked the term structured literacy in 2014. Their definition requires the explicit teaching of foundation skills, including phonics for word reading, in a way that is systematic and cumulative.

But as one part of the broader and evolving body of science of reading research, educators need to be careful not to ascribe too much to one definition of structured literacy. The research base is strong, but it is not entirely clear how to translate this research in the classroom.

Key questions about the structured literacy approach continue to be debated – including how best to teach based on the science of reading, and specific issues such as how many spelling patterns need to be taught explicitly, and how long we need to use decodable texts.




À lire aussi :
Young New Zealanders are turning off reading in record numbers – we need a new approach to teaching literacy


Policy makers also need to be wary of creating a structured literacy checklist for teachers to follow. Some programmes could end up meeting the formal criteria but have no evidence that they work in practice. Others might not meet the criteria but provide positive results for learners.

Teachers and researchers need to work together

Successful implementation of any new literacy approach is going to require teacher education to keep pace with the research.

The National Party has promised to introduce structured literacy as part of teacher training and ongoing professional development – but research to support the teachers will be key.

Teachers have the best knowledge about their classrooms, while researchers can examine and evaluate whether implementation of a new programme has worked or not.

Local research is taking place. Both Massey University and the University of Canterbury have research projects focused on understanding and improving New Zealand’s literacy education.

Connecting research to educational practice is notoriously difficult to achieve but it is vital for ensuring classroom approaches are based on evidence. Research can provide the evidence of what works, which is vital in determining which literacy practices are successful, for whom, and how to implement them.

New Zealanders may want a simple solution to the country’s declining literacy, but teaching and learning are complex.

National’s proposal to introduce structured literacy is a step in the right direction. But it is essential that curriculum guidelines provide a clear framework for teachers, while allowing educators to adapt their teaching practices to ongoing research.

The Conversation

Christine Braid consults as a literacy facilitator for Tātai Angitu, Massey University. She received funding from the Ministry of Education for a research project (2015-2017). James Chapman is quoted in this article and he was Christine’s PhD supervisor and colleague in the research project.

ref. National wants to change how NZ schools teach reading – but ‘structured literacy’ must be more than just a classroom checklist – https://theconversation.com/national-wants-to-change-how-nz-schools-teach-reading-but-structured-literacy-must-be-more-than-just-a-classroom-checklist-213251

Pigs with human brain cells and biological chips: how lab-grown hybrid lifeforms bamboozle scientific ethics

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Koplin, Lecturer in Bioethics, Monash University & Honorary fellow, Melbourne Law School, Monash University

Shutterstock

Earlier this month, scientists at the Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health announced they had successfully grown “humanised” kidneys inside pig embryos.

The scientists genetically altered the embryos to remove their ability to grow a kidney, then injected them with human stem cells. The embryos were then implanted into a sow and allowed to develop for up to 28 days.

The resulting embryos were made up mostly of pig cells (although some human cells were found throughout their bodies, including in the brain). However, the embryonic kidneys were largely human.

This breakthrough suggests it may soon be possible to generate human organs inside part-human “chimeric” animals. Such animals could be used for medical research or to grow organs for transplant, which could save many human lives.

But the research is ethically fraught. We might want to do things to these creatures we would never do to a human, like kill them for body parts. The problem is, these chimeric pigs aren’t just pigs – they are also partly human.

If a human–pig chimera were brought to term, should we treat it like a pig, like a human, or like something else altogether?

Maybe this question seems too easy. But what about the idea of creating monkeys with humanised brains?

Chimeras are only one challenge among many

Other areas of stem cell science raise similarly difficult questions.

In June, scientists created “synthetic embryos” – lab-grown embryo models that closely resemble normal human embryos. Despite the similarities, they fell outside the scope of legal definitions of a human embryo in the United Kingdom (where the study took place).

Like human–pig chimeras, synthetic embryos straddle two distinct categories: in this case, stem cell model and human embryo. It is not obvious how they should be treated.

In the past decade, we have also seen the development of increasingly sophisticated human cerebral organoids (or “lab-grown mini-brains”).

Unlike synthetic embryos, cerebral organoids don’t mimic the development of a whole person. But they do mimic the development of the part that stores our memories, thinks our thoughts, and makes conscious experience possible.

A microscope image shows a grid of squares covered with an irregular growth of strand-like neurons.
A network of neural cells grown on an array of electrodes to produce a ‘biological computer chip’.
Cortical Labs

Most scientists think current “mini-brains” are not conscious, but the field is developing rapidly. It is not far-fetched to think a cerebral organoid will one day “wake up”.

Complicating the picture even further are entities that combine human neurons with technology – like DishBrain, a biological computer chip made by Cortical Labs in Melbourne.

How should we treat these in vitro brains? Like any other human tissue culture, or like a human person? Or perhaps something in between, like a research animal?

A new moral framework

It might be tempting to think we should settle these questions by slotting these entities into one category or another: human or animal, embryo or model, human person or mere human tissue.

This approach would be a mistake. The confusion sparked by chimeras, embryo models, and in vitro brains shows these underlying categories no longer make sense.




Read more:
As scientists move closer to making part human, part animal organisms, what are the concerns?


We are creating entities that are neither one thing nor the other. We cannot solve the problem by pretending otherwise.

We would also need good reasons to classify an entity one way or another.

Should we count the proportion of human cells to determine whether a chimera counts as an animal or a human? Or should it matter where the cells are located? What matters more, brain or buttocks? And how can we work this out?

Moral status

Philosophers would say these are questions about “moral status”, and they have spent decades deliberating on what kinds of creatures we have moral duties to, and how strong these duties are. Their work can help us here.

For example, utilitarian philosophers see moral status as a matter of whether a creature has any interests (in which case it has moral status), and how strong those interests are (stronger interests matter more than weaker ones).

On this view, so long as an embryo model or brain organoid lacks consciousness, it will lack moral status. But if it develops interests, we need to take these into account.




Read more:
Networks of silver nanowires seem to learn and remember, much like our brains


Similarly, if a chimeric animal develops new cognitive abilities, we need to reconsider our treatment of it. If a neurological chimera comes to care about its life as much as a typical human does, then we should hesitate to kill it just as much as we would hesitate to kill a human.

This is just the beginning of a bigger discussion. There are other accounts of moral status, and other ways of applying them to the entities stem cell scientists are creating.

But thinking about moral status sets us down the right path. It fixes our minds on what is ethically significant, and can begin a conversation we badly need to have.

The Conversation

Julian Koplin receives research funding from Ferring Pharmaceuticals.

ref. Pigs with human brain cells and biological chips: how lab-grown hybrid lifeforms bamboozle scientific ethics – https://theconversation.com/pigs-with-human-brain-cells-and-biological-chips-how-lab-grown-hybrid-lifeforms-bamboozle-scientific-ethics-213357

No, the Voice to Parliament would not force people to give up their private land

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Galloway, Associate Professor of Law, Griffith University

Shutterstock

In the polarised debate about the Voice to Parliament referendum, some proponents of the “no” vote have claimed the creation of the new advisory body would lead to the conversion of private land titles in Australia to native title.

The implication is that people will be forced to give up their land. This has sown fear among some Australians.

Last week, a false letter purporting to be from a member of the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria was distributed to homes in regional Victoria, saying the body was moving into the “next phase of reacquiring land”. The minister for Indigenous Australians, Linda Burney, called it a “another example of the dirty tricks campaign” being waged to sow doubt over the Voice referendum.

Similar concerns were raised following the High Court decision in the Mabo case in 1992 and passage of the Native Title Act a year later.

Like the fear-mongering over the Mabo decision, the current alarm over the potential loss of private lands with a Voice to Parliament is unwarranted because this claim is manifestly incorrect.

There are two foundational legal reasons why:

  • because of the words of the proposed constitutional amendment itself

  • and because of the way that native title works.

Would the proposed Voice have powers related to land?

The proposed constitutional amendment that would create the Voice is very simple. It seeks to insert one new section into the Constitution, which reads:

In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:

  1. there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;

  2. the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;

  3. the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.




Read more:
10 questions about the Voice to Parliament – answered by the experts


The words clearly provide for only one activity to be undertaken by the Voice. The new body “may make representations” on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

There is no express or hidden power to either take people’s land or give land to First Nations people. The Voice is a committee that may provide advice to parliament and government on issues relating to First Nations people. That is all.

And this advice is not binding. The parliament of the day is free to ignore it, if it wishes to.

The new provision also gives one sole power to the parliament – it would have the capacity to set up the Voice. It is not possible to understand this provision as creating a special power to take people’s land, or to “convert” land to native title.

Importantly, the power to establish the Voice would not be given to the government – it would belong to parliament. In exercising this power, normal parliamentary processes will apply and the parliament will be accountable to the public.

There are no other changes to the Constitution proposed in this referendum.

How native title works

In the famous Mabo case, the High Court found that the land title of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, held under their traditional law and custom, survived the introduction of British sovereignty over Australia.

Mabo confirmed native title can only be claimed over land where there is no interest in conflict with the exercise of this right. Native title will always give way to grants of exclusive land use.

Following this decision, the law now states that every grant of freehold land (“private” land) extinguishes native title. Further, in the later case of Fejo v Northern Territory, the High Court confirmed that once native title has been extinguished, it cannot be revived.

Consequently, even if the constitutional change creating the Voice did (somehow) recognise native title, it is not possible to “convert” freehold land to native title. On private land, native title no longer exists under Australian law.




Read more:
Australian politics explainer: the Mabo decision and native title


To put these claims of “land conversion” in context, it is helpful to recall the public response to the Mabo decision.

Following the High Court judgement in Mabo, the mining industry ran a national campaign asserting that native title would threaten people’s back yards. The managing director of Western Mining, Hugh Morgan, said the High Court’s decision

put at risk the whole legal framework of property rights throughout the whole community.

This campaign led to significant public fear about the effects of native title.

These claims about native title after Mabo were incorrect. Private landholdings have not been threatened. Indeed, on the ten-year anniversary of the Mabo decision, former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett even admitted that his initial fears had been unfounded.

In reading or listening to claims about the effect of the Voice, it is prudent to question the source of information. If you have questions, seek a reliable source to read the words of the proposed amendment and understand the objective of the constitutional change. If you hear of a claim that seems extreme, it may well be aimed at diverting the public’s attention from the real issues.




Read more:
The Voice to Parliament explained


The Conversation

Kate Galloway 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. No, the Voice to Parliament would not force people to give up their private land – https://theconversation.com/no-the-voice-to-parliament-would-not-force-people-to-give-up-their-private-land-212784

Who really benefits from private health insurance rebates? Not people who need cover the most

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yuting Zhang, Professor of Health Economics, The University of Melbourne

Shutterstock

The Australian government spends A$6.7 billion a year on private health insurance rebates. These rebates are the government’s contribution towards the costs of individuals’ premiums.

But our analysis shows higher rebates for people aged 65 and older are not doing much to encourage them to sign up for private hospital cover, the very group who may benefit the most from it.

This and other research point to these rebates largely going to people on higher incomes, ones who’d be more likely to buy private health insurance anyway.




Read more:
The private health insurance rebate has cost taxpayers $100 billion and only benefits some. Should we scrap it?


Remind me, what are these rebates?

In 1999, the Australian government introduced the private health insurance rebate. Initially, the rebate meant the government paid 30% of the cost of private health insurance for everyone, regardless of income or age. Then in 2005, the Howard government increased the rebate rate to 35% for those aged 65-69 and to 40% for those aged 70 and older, regardless of how much they earned.

Over time, the rebate rates have decreased slightly and now depend on both income and age. However, the higher discount for older people has always remained.

We wanted to understand whether the higher rebates for older people actually encourage them to buy private health insurance.

So we looked at data from more than 300,000 people who filed tax returns over more than a decade (2001-2012). We then compared the trends in insurance coverage of people younger than 65 and older than 65, before and after the 2005 rebate policy change.




Read more:
Private health insurance is set for a shake-up. But asking people to pay more for policies they don’t want isn’t the answer


What we found

We found higher rebates led to a modest and short-term increase in private health insurance take-up. We estimated that lowering premium prices by 10% through higher rebates would only result in 1-2% more people aged 65 and older buying private health insurance in the next two years.

This means higher rebates for older people are a very expensive way to get them to insure.

People aged 65-74 with income in the bottom 25% of earners were the most likely to buy insurance in response to higher rebates that reduced premium prices. That’s an income under $21,848 in today’s money (income increased to 2023 dollar amount, in line with the consumer price index).

What do we propose?

Our findings suggest a more targeted subsidy program would be a more effective way to increase private health insurance. To achieve this, we recommend lowering income thresholds for rebates to target people of all ages on genuinely low incomes.

Currently, people earning as much as $144,000 (singles) or $288,000 (families) can receive rebates.

Other evidence to back our proposal comes from research released earlier this year. This suggests higher income earners are likely to buy private insurance regardless of rebates.

A recent consultation report commissioned by the federal health department reviewed a range of health insurance incentives.

The report recommends removing rebates for those with income higher than $108,000 for singles and $216,000 for families (we recommend removing them at $93,000 for singles and $186,000 for families). The report also recommends increasing rebates for those older than 65 (we believe income, rather than age, is a better marker of someone’s means).

Elderly woman with empty purse in lap
People on low incomes should be targeted instead.
Shutterstock

Are rebates good value for money?

We also need to look at whether rebates provide value for money more broadly, and across all ages.

Existing evidence shows a 10% decrease in premiums due to rebates only leads to a 3.5-5% increase in private health insurance take-up among all Australians. We show this is only 1-2% for people over 65.

So rebates are likely to cost taxpayers more than they generate in savings, and are largely windfalls to those who would privately insure anyway, often those who are financially better off.




Read more:
Do you really need private health insurance? Here’s what you need to know before deciding


What happens if we scrapped the rebates?

It is uncertain how many people would drop private cover if the rebate was removed.

But based on research from when the rebate was introduced, the rebate might account for a maximum 10-15 percentage points of the overall take-up rate. Other research suggests it might be much less than this, closer to 2 percentage points.

In other words, the rebate only appears to influence a small percentage of people to buy private health insurance. So scrapping it would likely have a similarly small effect.

Then there’s the impact of scrapping the rebate, people dropping their cover and putting more pressure on the public system. Earlier this year, we found private health insurance had minimal impact on reducing waiting times for surgery in Victorian public hospitals. So scrapping the rebate might have minimal impact on waiting lists.

Taken together, the billions of dollars a year the government spends to subsidise private health insurance via rebates might be better directed to public hospitals and other high-value care, including primary care and preventive care.

The Conversation

Yuting Zhang has received funding from the Australian Research Council (future fellowship project ID FT200100630), Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the Victorian Department of Health, and National Health and Medical Research Council. In the past, Professor Zhang has received funding from several US institutes including the US National Institutes of Health, Commonwealth fund, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. She has not received funding from for-profit industry including the private health insurance industry.

Judith Liu received funding from Richard Ivan Downing Fellowship Fund (University of Melbourne) during the conduct of the study.

Nathan Kettlewell 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. Who really benefits from private health insurance rebates? Not people who need cover the most – https://theconversation.com/who-really-benefits-from-private-health-insurance-rebates-not-people-who-need-cover-the-most-212611

70% of Australian students with a disability are excluded at school – the next round of education reforms can fix this

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Smith, Senior lecturer, The University of Melbourne

Redd F/Unsplash

The National School Reform Agreement is made about once every five years in Australia. This is the main way the federal government can steer changes in how Australian schools are run.

The current reform agreement ends in December 2024, and the new one is starting to be developed. One of the early priorities is to improve outcomes for all students, “particularly those most at risk of falling behind”. An expert panel will deliver a report to all education ministers by the end of October to inform negotiations.

Meanwhile, a wide-ranging NDIS Review, looking at the sustainability of the scheme, is also due to report around the same time .

Earlier this month, Bruce Bonyhady, the chair of the independent review, said state governments need to build “foundational supports” in schools to reduce the strain on the NDIS. This follows our recent research that showed huge issues with the way students with disability are included in school life. For example, 70% of surveyed students with a disability report being excluded from events or activities at school.

Negotiations around the next school reform agreement alongside the NDIS Review provide a real opportunity to better educate and support students with disability.

What is the National School Reform Agreement?

The National School Reform Agreement is a joint agreement between the federal and state governments that aims to improve student outcomes across schools. It also deals with funding arrangements. Each state or territory makes its own agreement with the federal government.

The Albanese government extended the current agreement by a year, with the new one due to begin in January 2025.

Within the bilateral agreements are activities that support particular student cohorts. But the current setup is not working adequately for students with disability.

In January this year, a Productivity Commission review noted many of the bilateral agreements either did not include specific reform actions for students with disabilities, or did not include details of how this would happen. It also noted there is no NAPLAN data collected on students with disabilities – so it is very difficult to measure academic progress.

The commission suggested linking NDIS data to school reporting. While this would be welcome, it won’t capture students with disabilities who are not part of the NDIS. And it won’t capture the issues people face at the boundaries of the NDIS and education where there is debate over who should provide funding and support.

Containers holding pencils, scissors, paint brushes and rulers.
The Productivity Commission said current school reform arrangements did not have enough detail around students with disability.
Pixabay/Pexels



Read more:
What is the National School Reform Agreement and what does it have to do with school funding?


Unprecedented demand on the NDIS

Meanwhile, the NDIS is not necessarily able to provide the support school students need.

The NDIS was originally designed to provide funding to individuals with significant and permanent disabilities, estimated to be 10% of the 4.4 million disabled Australians. Today, more than 610,000 individuals receive support from the scheme – around 14% of Australians with disability.

There has been a particular growth in terms of the number of children in the scheme. More than half of those in the NDIS are under 18 and 11% of five- to seven-year-old boys are participants.

Some commentators have argued this is not sustainable, with the NDIS budget estimated to reach A$35 billion this year.

Bonyhady says he believes the increase in numbers may be due to a systemic issue. With limited supports outside the NDIS, parents are left with little choice but to try and secure a place on the scheme.




Read more:
20% of children have developmental delay. What does this mean for them, their families and the NDIS?


The NDIS was never intended to replace existing mainstream services such as education and health. But ambiguities about responsibilities for funding often lead to service gaps. Our research has consistently shown students with similar characteristics can receive inconsistent support, depending on:

  • parents’ and/or carers’ understanding of nuances in the system

  • the community support in the school the student attends

  • the training of teachers and supports within that school, and

  • school leadership decisions on allocation of disability support funding.

A young boy leans on a tree.
More than half of NDIS participants are under 18.
Trinity Kubassek/Pexels

The importance of inclusive education

We know students with disability are not being properly included at school. As our research also found, 54% of those surveyed said they felt welcome, and only 27% felt supported to learn. On top of this, 65% of students reported experiencing bullying and 13% preferred not to answer.

Backpacks hang on the back of chairs, behind an empty desk.
Our research also found 70% of students are excluded from school events such as excursions.
Katerina Holmes/Pexles, CC BY-NC-ND

Issues such as inadequate teacher preparedness, heightened risk of bullying, and experiences of exclusion can have lifelong repercussions.

On the other hand, if mainstream schools are inclusive, this can give students with disabilities friendships, higher aspirations and a richer learning experience.

Inclusive education also benefits those without disability. A 2021 meta-analysis showed inclusion at all levels of education reduces discrimination, prejudice and hostility. Academically, results for all students in inclusive primary settings are better than, or equivalent to, non-inclusive settings.

So if we have well-funded, inclusive educational environments, we can not only enrich the academic and personal growth of students with and without a disability, but also alleviate the pressure on the NDIS.

What needs to happen now?

The next reform agreement needs to commit specific funding for the support of students with disability in their school, and the development and training of their educators.

We also need a commitment to report properly on students’ progress. This means progress is measured also at the individual level (involving individual learning plans), rather than simply against a developmental continuum.

Well-funded inclusive education is a human right and is crucial in setting up all young Australians for their future.

The Conversation

Catherine Smith receives funding from Children and Young People with Disability Australia and Down Syndrome Victoria.

Helen Dickinson receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council and Children and Young People Australia

ref. 70% of Australian students with a disability are excluded at school – the next round of education reforms can fix this – https://theconversation.com/70-of-australian-students-with-a-disability-are-excluded-at-school-the-next-round-of-education-reforms-can-fix-this-213369

Like plumbing did for water, Australia’s ‘consumer data right’ could make your personal data safer and easier to share

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ross Buckley, ARC Laureate Fellow, Scientia Professor of Law, UNSW Sydney

Shutterstock

Back in 2017, The Economist published a headline that became a meme. It said data had become the new oil.

By that it meant that the world’s biggest and most profitable companies no longer worked with oil, as they had throughout the 20th century, but with data.

By 2022, three of the world’s five most profitable companies specialised in data – Apple, Microsoft and Alphabet. Only two of the five specialised in oil.

Oil did indeed shape our cities in the 20th century. It facilitated our post-war urban sprawl and connected our cities by air and sea.

But before that, our cities were shaped by plumbing, making it more accurate to say that data is the new water. Like water, controls over its flow will build the next economy.

In a paper accepted for publication in the Australian Business Law Review, we argue the new “consumer data right” will do for our data-driven economy of the future what plumbing has done for our cities.

Like water, data flows through pipes

We have a photo on our office wall of Manhattan in the late 1800s, showing multistorey buildings surrounded by horses and carts, and presumably manure. The smell in summer must have been quite something!


‘Street-cleaning and the disposal of a city’s wastes’, Internet Archive, 1898

Yet over time, a much bigger more developed Manhattan became habitable, largely because of sanitation. Clean water was piped in and sewerage was piped out, safely and efficiently.

We see Australia’s little-known new Consumer Data Right in the same way, as a foundation on which the future will be built.

In the process of being rolled out across a number of industries, beginning with banking and energy, it gives consumers the unquestioned right to direct data businesses hold about them to other providers of their choice so these providers can offer a better value for money service. That means we can share our own data with accredited recipients, who can help us manage our affairs better or access better deals on products and services.




Read more:
Beyond banking, consumer data rights are set to transform our lives


Just as water supply and sewerage disposal systems need to be regulated to be reliable and to protect our health, the flow of data needs to be regulated so its potential can be realised, and breaches and misuse contained.

Until recent decades there was little flow to regulate. Data was generally contained within organisations and kept offline. Few organisations analysed it at scale.

A landmark Productivity Commission report in 2017 made Australia a global leader in planning to regulate data. The resulting 2019 Consumer Data Right mimics plumbing in the way it facilitates flows and removes effluent.

What does the Consumer Data Right do?

As with plumbing, the regime establishes technical standards that specify the format of the data exchanged between organisations, and determine the design and configuration of the data transmission channels which act as pipes through which the data flows.

The movie tag contains https://www.cdr.gov.au/how-it-works, which is an unsupported URL, in the src attribute. Please try again with youtube or vimeo.

Concern for the quality and integrity of the transported data is built into the system’s architecture: data holders and accredited data recipients have to ensure the data they transfer is “accurate, up to date and complete”.

Nothing is allowed to flow without the consent of the consumer whose data it is, which at multiple stages serves as a “valve” that can start or stop the flow.

Data holders have to ask consumers to authorise disclosures of their data and keep records and explanations of such authorisations.

Businesses accredited to receive consumer data can only receive it with the consumer’s consent. And consent cannot be “implied” or “open-ended”. Consumers have to understand what they are consenting to, explicitly say yes, and be able to revoke their consent to data disclosure, collection or use at any time.

Making data breaches less likely

Importantly, when an accredited data recipient no longer needs consumer data (and is not required to retain it for another reason) the recipient has to either destroy or de-identify it.

As well, consumers have the right to require deletion of their data. Until now, they have had no such right.

Accredited businesses are also required to destroy unsolicited data.

Had Optus been accredited under the consumer data right before exposing the data of as many as 10 million current and former customers last year, in what has been labelled “the worst data breach in Australia’s history”, it would most likely have been found to be in breach of its obligations by holding on to data it no longer needed.

Even better, the breach would have been less likely because of the requirements and the stringency of the accreditation process.

Running parallel to the consumer data right for firms that haven’t applied for accreditation are the old practices.

Old pipes are unsafe

All sorts of firms regularly share information about consumers with credit reporting agencies such as Equifax and Illion, regulated by laws including the Privacy Act.

Other data aggregators, such as Envestnet|Yodlee and Mint (which offers a popular personal finance management app), have long accessed consumer data through ‘screen-scraping’ – a technology that relies on consumers handing over their bank login details in return for a service.

The Treasury regards screen scraping as inconsistent with cyber security advice and is seeking advice about banning it as the consumer data right becomes available as an alternative.




Read more:
Why the class action against Optus could be Australia’s biggest


The sooner these old practices are replaced with practices governed by the consumer data right, the stronger Australia’s data economy will become.

What we find strange about the changes taking part in Australia is that overseas they are regarded as pioneering. Here, they get little media attention.

It is time for Australian businesses to embrace what’s coming and start developing uses for the consumer data right that will appeal to customers.

Those that do will help determine how the pipelines of the future are used.

The Conversation

Ross Buckley receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a wide-ranging research project that includes the subject matter of this article.

Natalia Jevglevskaja 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. Like plumbing did for water, Australia’s ‘consumer data right’ could make your personal data safer and easier to share – https://theconversation.com/like-plumbing-did-for-water-australias-consumer-data-right-could-make-your-personal-data-safer-and-easier-to-share-210969

PNG Post-Courier: Our democracy, our Melanesian way

EDITORIAL: By the PNG Post-Courier

“Is there a democratic Papua New Guinean nation — or is it merely an arbitrary nation built on a shaky, crumbling foundation of disparate traditional customs and the Melanesian Way?

“Has the system of government become a hybrid of concepts that fail to work on any level — a bastardisation of both democracy and custom?” Susan Merrell asked in her article, published in the PNG Echo on 13 July 2015.

Paul Oates, in another article published by PNG Attitude in July 2021, remarked that: “It has taken me a long time to reach an understanding of what the problem was leading up to Papua New Guinea’s independence.

PNG POST-COURIER
PNG POST-COURIER

In that article, titled “System we gave PNG just doesn’t work”, Oates argued that “At the time, in the 1970s, the thought process was that the Westminster system works for us in Australia, this we can impose this obviously working system as a unifying force for a people and their many hundreds of cultures.”

Oates, Merrell and many other critics have [concluded] that democracy has failed in PNG and, as Oates puts it, “the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy would never work when the majority of the people involved didn’t understand it and never would”.

It is true a lot of our people were illiterate at Independence on 16 September 1975, the idea of independence was a beast travelling up the Highlands Highway, gobbling everything and everyone in its way and the Westminster system of government and elections were foreign concepts that were far removed from their traditional governance systems.

Educating the populace on what democracy was about was out of the question. The high illiteracy level and the logistical nightmare would have made a massive public campaign hard.

Our founding fathers chose the democratic system of government over the other forms of government, because this system was best for a country like PNG with a population divided by varying and distinct cultural practices and ideologies. It was a concept of
a government that would unify the people.

When the national constitution was adopted in 1975, it gave birth to the Westminster system of government, a concept that, if understood clearly, should have allowed our people to choose their government through regular, free and fair election.

But that was not to be. Without knowing what democracy was and what the Westminster system of government was, our people went to the first national general election in 1978.

Since that election, and at every other later election, our people have incorporated the Melanesian Way of leadership into the new democracy we adopted and a home-grown system had flourished.

The results we have today is the price we are paying.

Compounding this is other underlying challenge like the integrity of the Electoral Roll that must be addressed.

Another issue is the weak political party system we have. A small country, PNG has 46 registered political parties to date, each with their own policy platforms. It is a nightmare for the voters, no one bothered to get to know all the political parties well.

The country’s weak political party system [has also been] the cause of the instability in the governments since 1975. In PNG, governments do not only change at the elections but on the floor of Parliament, through motions of no confidence in the prime minister.

The instability in PNG politics has forced prime ministers to spend more time and resources managing the politics rather than the government and country.

Furthermore, the “systemic and systematic” corruption, the escalating lawlessness and the decline in the economy are matters that are impacting on lives and businesses.

The challenges are huge, it will require massive legislative and structural reforms across all sectors of government to ensure PNG really meets its development goals moving into the next 50 years.

It will also take a massive change in mindset, attitudes and behaviours by our people to achieve true peace and harmony.

“That these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

— Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President, The Gettysburg Address, 19 November 1863

This PNG Post-Courier editorial was published on 15 September 2023, the day before Papua New Guinea celebrated its 48th year of independence. Republished with permission.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Climate minister Chris Bowen says replacing coal-fired power stations with nuclear would cost $387 billion

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

The government says replacing Australia’s retiring fleet of coal-fired power stations with nuclear energy would cost some $387 billion.

The costing, put out by the Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen, is a pre-emptive strike against the opposition, which is moving to include nuclear power in the energy policy it takes to the next election.

Bowen said the nuclear option would represent a $25,000 cost impost on each of more than 15 million Australian taxpayers. The costings were done by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water.

To replace Australia’s retiring coal fleet of 21.3GW, a minimum of 71 300MW small modular reactors would be needed, Bowen says. This could cost $387 billion, with the estimated capital cost of $18,167/kW for SMRs in 2030, compared to large scale solar at just $1,058/kW, and onshore wind at $1,989/kW.

Those in the opposition promoting the nuclear option argue that including it is the only way Australia will get to net zero emissions by 2050. But there are no details of the speed or extent of the use of nuclear energy that would be in the policy, which has yet to be drafted and approved by the Coalition. The role of nuclear would also be constrained by the pace at which the technology for small reactors is being developed.




Read more:
Grattan on Friday: The Coalition’s likely embrace of nuclear energy is high-risk politics


Opposition leader Peter Dutton said in a speech in July: “If the government wants to stop coal-fired power and phase out gas-fired power, the only feasible and proven technology which can firm-up renewables and help us achieve the goals of clean, cost-effective and consistent power is next generation nuclear technologies which are safe and emit zero emissions.”

Dutton said nuclear technologies and renewables should be seen as companions not competitors.

“New nuclear technologies are factory-built, portable, scalable and can even be relocated,” he said. “New nuclear technologies can be plugged into existing grids and work immediately.”

“We could convert or repurpose coal-fired plants and use the transmission connections which already exist on those sites,” Dutton said in the July speech.

Bowen said the $387 billion was 20 times the cost of the Albanese government’s Rewiring the Nation fund. The government says this fund will support unlocking over 26GW of new renewable generation capacity, and over 30GW of transmission capacity.
Bowen describes the opposition’s pursuit of nuclear energy as a pipe dream, saying nuclear is around three times more expensive than firmed renewables.

He said the opposition wanted “to trump the benefits of non-commercial SMR technology, without owning up to the cost and how they intend to pay for it.

“Peter Dutton and the opposition need to explain why Australians will be slugged with a $387 billion cost burden for a nuclear energy plan that flies in the face of economics and reason.”

Bowen’s attack comes as the government is facing a backlash from farmers against the new power lines needed to transmit renewable energy.

Writing on The Conversation website recently, the Grattan Institute’s energy expert Tony Wood said solar and wind farm investment had markedly slowed because there was not as yet the right grid.

The Conversation

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

ref. Climate minister Chris Bowen says replacing coal-fired power stations with nuclear would cost $387 billion – https://theconversation.com/climate-minister-chris-bowen-says-replacing-coal-fired-power-stations-with-nuclear-would-cost-387-billion-213735

Australian advocacy group condemns killing of 5 West Papuans – challenges Canberra

Asia Pacific Report

An Australian human rights advocacy group for West Papuans has condemned the killing of 5 youths found dead in Dekai, capital of Yahukimo Regency, and have challenged Canberra to reconsider government ties with Indonesian security forces.

Criticising the latest deaths, Australia West Papua Association (AWPA) spokesperson Joe Collins said: “While West Papuans are being killed by the Indonesian security forces, we have Australia and Indonesia sitting down at the ninth bilateral consultation to discuss
bolstering anti-terror cooperation”.

Antara News reports that Indonesia and Australia have committed to continue “anti-terrorism” cooperation through dialogue at bilateral, regional, and multilateral forums, as well as technical cooperation.

Collins said it was time that the Australian Defence Department and DFAT (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade) “seriously looked at their ties with the Indonesian security forces” and the affect their aid and training had on West Papuans.

The five civilians who were found dead at the mouth of the Brasa River were aged between 15-18 and were members of the Kingmi Papua Church.

According to church officials, the five youths usually delivered food to the village after buying it at Dekai.

Sebby Sambom, a spokesperson for the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) fighting for independence from Indonesia, was reported to have said that the five victims found dead on Friday were not members of the TPNPB.

‘Not ours’ says TPNPB
“They’re not our members. They were purely civilians who wanted to return to their villages and were shot and bombed by the Indonesian military,” he was quoted as saying by the Papuan news outlet Jubi.

The chair of the Yahukimo Church Fellowship (PGGY), Pastor Atias Matuan, named the five dead civilians as Darnius Heluka, Musa Heluka, Man Senik, Yoman Senik and Kaраі Payage.

On Friday, PGGY accompanied the family to collect the bodies at the Yahukimo Regional General Hospital (RSUD).

“Their bodies had gunshot wounds to the stomach, chest and legs,” Pastor Matuan said.

The pastor also reported that TNI officers had a guard post at the Dekai urban boundary, and residents wanting to travel from Dekai were required to report there.

“Residents must report to the security post. If they don’t, they’re considered part of the TPNPB, even though they don’t carry military equipment,” he said.

Victims buried
The five victims were buried at the Kilo Enam Public Cemetery, Dekai, on Friday.

Joe Collins of AWPA said there appeared to be a “total lack of trust” between the security forces and local people in the region.

Pastor Matuan said that his party “had difficulty mediating in the armed conflict because he felt that the Indonesian security forces did not trust the Servant of God”.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

‘It was set up to fail us’ – Palestinians reflect on 30 years of the Oslo Accords

Though the Oslo Accords and its signatories made many promises to the Palestinians, in reality, it carved Palestine up into bantustans and ghettos with limited self-autonomy for Palestinians on a minuscule portion of their homeland.

By Yumna Patel

On September 13, 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and leader of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Yasser Arafat shook hands in front of an elated US President Bill Clinton on the White House lawn.

The image capturing that handshake came to be one of the most famous images of all time, representing one of the most defining moments in recent Palestinian history.

It was the day that the Declaration of Principles (DOP), or the first Oslo Agreement (Oslo I) was signed, kicking off the so-called peace process that was meant to culminate with “peace” in the region and resolve the so-called “conflict”.

But the Oslo Accords never actually promised an independent Palestinian state, or even something that remotely resembled it. In reality, it carved the occupied Palestinian territory up into bantustans with limited self-autonomy for Palestinians on a minuscule portion of their homeland.

It paved the way for Israel to swallow up more land, resources, and tighten its grip on the borders and the people living within it.

Even the promises that were made — halts on settlement construction, withdrawal from certain areas of the occupied territory, and the eventual transfer of control of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority (PA) — never happened.

Wednesday marked 30 years since the first Oslo Accords were signed. And though final status negotiations have failed repeatedly over the decades, the Oslo Accords have remained in effect, creating a unique situation on the ground for Palestinians.

The PA, which was set up as an interim government, has become permanent, and its leaders have remained unchanged for 17 years. Both the Fatah-dominated PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza have evolved into authoritarian regimes, causing many young Palestinians to declare their governments as “subcontractors of the Israeli occupation”.

In the meantime, Israel has a tighter grip than ever before on Palestinian life and land, with Gaza under tight blockade and the West Bank carved up into small cantons, or apartheid-style “bantustans,” as analysts put it.

With each passing year, the Israeli government has become increasingly right-wing, breaking its own records on violence against Palestinian communities and the construction of illegal settlements deep in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem.

To say that the reality on the ground is desperate would be an understatement. And many Palestinian youth, who grew up in the shadow of the accords and all its false promises, blame the accords, or “Oslo” as it is locally called, in large part for the situation they find themselves in today.

Setting the stage
Before that fateful day on the White House lawn in 1993, there was a lot happening for Palestinians both at home and abroad.

From 1987-1993, the Palestinian streets were in upheaval. It had been two decades since Israel occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, and Palestinians were fed up.

The First Intifada, or the first Palestinian uprising, took Israel and the world by surprise. A mass civil disobedience campaign swept the country, and turned into years of protests and subsequent repression by the Israelis.

Despite the violence that plagued the Palestinian streets, many Palestinians found themselves hopeful — that by standing up to the occupation, they could change their reality.

Then, in the fall of 1991, the world convened in Madrid for a “peace conference”. Sponsored by the US and the Soviet Union, it was the first time Israel and the Palestinians were to engage in direct negotiations.

The PLO, which is internationally recognised as the representative of the Palestinian people, was operating in exile in Tunisia, and was barred from attending the conference. In its place, a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation was tasked with representing the Palestinian people instead.

Dr Hanan Ashrawi was one of the advisors to the delegation.

“We went with a sense of mission that we are representing a people who have dignity, who have rights, who have courage, who have defied this military occupation. And we are going to present ourselves to the world, and we are going to extract our rights,” Ashrawi told Mondoweiss, reflecting on the moment in history that propelled her onto the global stage.

“So we were confident, and there was a spirit of optimism, maybe naivete, if you will,” she said.

The Madrid conference set the stage for years of peace negotiations facilitated by Washington and Moscow. Despite its flaws, those involved in the Madrid conference, like Ashrawi, seemed hopeful that political negotiations could really lead somewhere.

“That was a period, albeit a short-lived period, of hope, of optimism, of confidence,” Ashrawi said.

“And when we came back, people believed that they could achieve liberation through a political process, but that these were dashed afterwards completely.”

Backchannel negotiations
While public negotiations were being held on the global stage in the months after the Madrid conference, a different set of negotiations were being held behind closed doors between two unlikely partners.

In 1993, in Oslo, Norway, Israel and the PLO engaged in backchannel discussions that resulted in an unprecedented conciliation.

The PLO, a militant liberation organisation, recognised the state of Israel and its “right to exist in peace and security”. In exchange, Israel recognised the PLO as a “representative of the Palestinian people,” falling short of actually recognising the Palestinians’ right to sovereignty.

After months of secret negotiations, and in a shock to many Palestinians, Rabin and Arafat shook hands in September 1993, as the Declaration of Principles (DOP), or first Oslo Accords (Oslo I), were signed.

The move came as a shock to many Palestinians, including those who had been engaging in public peace negotiations for years, and were seemingly unaware of the secret deal that was materialising behind the scenes.

“The signing of the DOP was a real disappointment,” Dr Ashrawi told Mondoweiss. “I wasn’t upset or disturbed because there were backchannel discussions that we weren’t part of, or that it was signed behind our back.

“I said then very openly, that I don’t care who signs it or who negotiate it. I care about what’s in it, what’s in the agreement.”

When Dr Ashrawi saw the agreement, she said she was “extremely disappointed” and concerned over what she described as “built-in flaws,” which she said she felt at the time would end up backfiring on the Palestinians.

“Because [the accords] did not challenge the reality of the occupation, and they did not deal with the real issues, with the core issues, with the causes of the conflict itself. The totality of the Palestinian experience was excluded. The fragmentation was maintained, the phased approach was maintained, the Israeli actual control on the ground was maintained, and all the postponed issues had no guarantees, no oversight.”

Dr Yara Hawari, a political analyst for Palestinian think tank Al-Shabaka, said the Oslo Accords “were always set up to fail”.

“[They were set up] to make Palestinians lose out on what was supposedly peace negotiations, and so many decades on we’ve seen that actually, it has been complete capitulation for the Palestinian people.”

What did the accords say?
The Oslo Accords were a number of agreements, signed between 1993 and 1995, that laid the foundation for the Oslo process — a so-called peace process that, over the course of five years, was to culminate in a peace treaty that would end the Israeli-Palestinian “conflict”.

So, what exactly did the accords say? And why were they so controversial?

“The Palestinians were told that the Oslo Accords would be a peace process, and that over an interim period, Palestinians would be led to eventual statehood. And it was designed to be a phased process.

“So at each stage, Palestinians would be granted more and more sovereignty,” Dr Hawari said.

“But in reality, what we saw was that the West Bank was completely divided up into bantustans. The Gaza Strip and the West Bank were completely separated from each other, and the Palestinian leadership was turned into this service-functioning body, and Palestinians were deprived of complete autonomy.”

While they outlined economic and security agreements, the creation of the interim Palestinian National Authority (PNA), and limited Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza, the accords never actually agreed upon any of the major issues plaguing the Palestinian struggle: the borders of a future state, illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, the return of the Palestinian refugees to their homes, and the status of Jerusalem as a future capital.

“The totality of the Palestinian experience was excluded. The fragmentation was maintained, the phased approach was maintained, the Israeli actual control of the ground was maintained, and all the postponed issues had no guarantees, no oversight, no arbitration, and no accountability,” Dr Ashrawi said.

There was never any intention to accept any kind of sovereignty or self-determination for the Palestinians.

The fallout
In the years after the first Declaration of Principles was signed, the new Palestinian Authority went into full swing, forming their new interim government and welcoming back home hundreds of Palestinians who had been living in exile.

But by 1999, when the 5-year-interim period laid out by the accords had ended, little had been accomplished in terms of final status negotiations.

Israel had not followed through on its promise to fully withdraw from certain areas of the West Bank and Gaza, and despite promises to halt settlement construction, Israel was still building Jewish-only settlements on Palestinian land.

And in 2000, spurred on by Ariel Sharon’s inflammatory visit to the Al-Aqsa mosque, the Second Intifada erupted. Israel’s military forces reoccupied the West Bank, and the next few years were marred by mass killings, arrests, and the construction of an illegal wall that separated families and annexed more Palestinian land.

Whatever fragments had remained of a peace process vanished.

The settlements and shrinking spaces
In the midst of the Second Intifada, America’s attempts to revive a peace process with the Camp David summit in 2000 proved to be futile. And yet, though the peace process was dead in the water, the framework laid out by the Oslo Accords remained in place.

That meant Palestinians were left with a government that was intended to be temporary but with no independent state for that body to govern. And Israel, through military force, still had control over the borders, resources, and effectively, the lives of millions of Palestinians

“The key promise of Oslo was Palestinian statehood, and we know that has obviously not been achieved,” Dr Hawari told Mondoweiss.

“Instead, what we see is these little pockets of false Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank. There were many other promises that were made as well: economic promises, promises to do with control over resources, and actually, none of those have been fulfilled.

“The only people that have won from the accords, or who have actually gained, are the Israeli regime, which now controls the West Bank in its entirety, has Gaza under siege, and basically has looted all of the Palestinian resources.

“And this was laid out in the Oslo Accords.”

In the years following the signing of the Oslo Accords, Palestinians witnessed their spaces shrinking rapidly, as Israel promoted vast settlement construction deep within the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem.

Between the signing of the Oslo Accords and the outbreak of the First Intifada, the number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank increased by almost 100 percent.

In the year 2000, the settler population in the West Bank stood at just over 190,000. Today, that number has surpassed 500,000 settlers, all of whom are living on Palestinian land, in violation of international law.

Including settlers living illegally in East Jerusalem, the settler population in the occupied Palestinian territory has surpassed 700,000.

An increase in settler population, coupled with an extreme right-wing Israeli government, has meant a significant increase in settler violence, with Palestinian civilians on the frontlines.

In the first eight months of 2023, the UN documented more than 700 settler attacks against Palestinians. The attacks have resulted in damage to homes, property, farmland, physical injuries, and even death.

Because of the maps drawn by the Oslo Accords, the PA only has security jurisdiction over 18 percent of the West Bank, meaning that in the event of a settler attack, most Palestinian civilians are left to fend for themselves.

A disillusioned youth
In the wake of the Oslo Accords, a new generation of Palestinians was born that would come to be known as the “Oslo Generation” — whose youth would be defined by false promises and loss of life, land, and the power to choose their own future.

“We witness our own family and friends being killed and arrested on a daily basis. We get humiliated at military checkpoints whenever we’re trying to leave or enter our cities or villages.

“And we witness our people being expelled from their land while more and more settlements are being built in their place,” Zaid Amali, a Palestinian activist in Ramallah, told Mondoweiss.

When asked what he thought of Palestinian and international leaders still promoting a two-state solution and “peace negotiations” on the global stage, Amali responded:

“It may be more convenient for them to stick to that framework, but it’s very unrealistic and naive to still hang on to it because Israel has systematically destroyed the two-state solution.

“And to us as well, it feels insulting and disrespectful to keep talking about this in theory, when in reality, on the ground, it’s the complete opposite of what’s happening.”

In the 30 years since the first accords were signed, the Palestinian Authority, which was intended to be an interim government, has become permanent. And yet, elections have only ever been held twice in 3 decades. Any attempts over the last 16 years at holding elections or reviving reconciliation talks between rival factions have been squandered.

PA leaders in the West Bank and Hamas authorities in Gaza have consolidated power in the hands of a few elites while growing increasingly authoritarian, cracking down on dissent, censoring the media, and jailing and even killing dissidents.

“The way the system became, in a sense, right now is quite disappointing,” Dr Ashrawi told Mondoweiss. Without naming names, Ashrawi continued, “People became more concerned with power, with control, other than with service.

“[They became] more concerned with self-interest, influence, and the trimmings of power rather than the whole idea of contributing and serving the people.”

When asked how things deteriorated into the present-day situation, Dr Ashrawi attributed it to an overall “abuse of power.”

“There were gradually constricting spaces for freedoms and rights that ultimately, now you don’t even have a legislative power. Even the judiciary was subjugated to the executive.

“The executive became concentrated in the hands of the few, and so we have distorted any semblance of democracy that we may have had and that we have tried to establish even under occupation,” she said.

“I don’t blame the occupation for everything. There are things under our control that were abused and distorted.”

The concentration of power in the hands of authoritarian figures like President Mahmoud Abbas has meant that an entire generation, like Zaid Amali, is now nearing or surpassing the age of 30 without ever having participated in a national election.

Amali, 25 years old, said it’s an extremely frustrating reality for young Palestinians like him.

“It’s frustrating because we should be able to elect our own government in a democratic way,” he said.

“This government should reflect our interests and manage the needs of the Palestinian people and represent us in a true way.”

“But on the contrary, it’s actually serving the interest of the few at the expense of the majority in Palestine. And when we talk about Palestinian youth, they do form the majority of the Palestinian population.

“So, for us young Palestinians, it is, again, very frustrating to see that this government is not really working in our interest. But oftentimes, unfortunately, [it is] against us.”

Turning to armed resistance
In 2023, the Palestinians who were born the year the Oslo Accords were signed turned 30. Until today, none have had the opportunity to participate in political life on a national level. Economically, their opportunities are few and far between.

Unemployment in occupied Palestine is close to 25 percent — while in Gaza alone, that number is closer to 50 percent.

All the while, Israel’s grip on Palestinian life grows ever tighter. 2022 and 2023 marked record-breaking years for Israeli violence against Palestinians, as well as settlement expansion. The situation on the ground has grown desperate, causing many young Palestinians to take matters into their own hands.

Since 2022, the West Bank has seen a resurgence in armed resistance, with militias led by Palestinians as young as 18 years old. Many of the armed resistance groups, some of which operate under a banner of unity and defiance of factional rivalries, have seen massive popular support.

But both the Israeli and Palestinian governments have deemed these armed militias as a threat to the status quo cemented after the Oslo Accords. As part of its policy of security coordination with the Israelis, which was outlined in the accords, the PA has in recent months jailed dozens of Palestinian fighters, along with political dissidents, activists, journalists, and university students.

While some fighters have accepted clemency and handed over their weapons willingly, those who haven’t are being hunted down and arrested.

“We don’t know who’s against us, the [Palestinian] Authority or the Israeli army,” one young man in the Jenin refugee camp told Mondoweiss, just days after a visit by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to the camp — his first visit in 11 years.

“For four years before my arrest [by the Israelis], I was also wanted by the PA. We don’t feel safe at all with the presence of [the PA].”

“Right now, they are actually working against us,” the young man said, referring to the PA’s arrest campaign targeting fighters in areas like Jenin, as part of an ongoing joint security cooperation effort between the PA and the Israeli government.

“It’s all one operation, one operation with the Israeli military and intelligence. When the army comes to attack us, the PA goes and hides away in their stations.

“They [the PA] are trying to get us to turn ourselves in and hand over our weapons, and give up this cause that we are fighting for. But we won’t give it up, no matter what.”

But the PA’s attempts to curb resistance only seem to be backfiring. Public opinion polls from this year show that 68 percent of Palestinians support armed resistance groups, and close to 90 percent believe the PA has no right to arrest them.

Additionally, more than half of Palestinians believe that the continued existence of the PA serves Israel’s interests, not the interest of the Palestinian people.

“This is a leadership that has led us to a situation where we live in bantustans and essentially in ghettos in the West Bank, Gaza, and colonised Palestine,” Dr Hawari said.

“So we have to reckon with that, and that is internal work that Palestinians have to focus on.

“For us to have a brighter future, we have to take a very good look at our leadership and reassess what we want that leadership to look like.

“Do we want it to be a leadership that capitulates and collaborates with our oppressors? Or do we want a leadership that is revolutionary and centers our freedom in their narrative?”

Republished under a Creative Commons licence.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

OPM calls for decolonisation of West Papua, condemns UN ‘collusion’

Asia Pacific Report

The Free Papua Organisation (Organisasi Papua Merdeka-OPM) has sent an open letter to the United Nations leadership demanding that “decolonisation” of the former Dutch colony of West New Guinea, the Indonesian-administered region known across the Pacific as West Papua, be initiated under the direction of the UN Trusteeship Council.

The letter accuses the UN of being a “criminal accessory to the plundering of the ancestral lands” of the Papuans, a Melanesian people with affinity and close ties to many Pacific nations.

According to the OPM leader, chairman-commander Jeffrey Bomanak, West Papuans had been living with the expectation for six decades that the UN would “fulfill the obligations regarding the legal decolonisation of West Papua”.

OPM leader Jeffrey Bomanak
OPM leader Jeffrey Bomanak . . . an open letter to the UN calling for the UN annexation of West Papua in 1962 to be reversed. Image: OPM

Alternatively, wrote Bomanak, there had been an expectation that there would be an explanation “to the International Commission of Jurists if there are any legal reasons why these obligations to West Papua cannot be fulfilled”.

The open letter was addressed to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, General Assembly President Csaba Kőrösi and Trusteeship Council President Nathalie Estival-Broadhurst.

Bomanak also accused the UN of “gifting” West Papua and Indonesia and the US mining conglomerate Freepost-McMoRan at Grasberg in 1967.

‘Guilty’ over annexation
“The United Nations is guilty of annexing West New Guinea on Sept 21, 1962, as a trust territory which had been concealed by the UN Secretariat from the Trusteeship Council.”

Indonesia has consistently rejected West Papuan demands for self-determination and independence, claiming that its right to sovereignty over the region stems from the so-called Act of Free Choice in 1969.

But many West Papuans groups and critics across the Pacific and internationally reject the legitimacy of this controversial vote when 1025 elders selected by the Indonesian military were coerced into voting “unanimously” in favour of Indonesian rule.

A sporadic armed struggle by the armed wing of OPM and peaceful lobbying for self-determination and independence by other groups, such as the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), have continued since then with persistent allegations of human rights violations with the conflict escalating in recent months.

In 2017, the UN’s Decolonisation Committee refused to accept a petition signed by 1.8 million West Papuans calling for independence, saying West Papua’s cause was outside the committee’s mandate.

“The UN is a criminal accessory to the plundering of our ancestral lands and to the armament exports from member nations to our murderers and assassins — the Indonesian government,” claimed Bomanak in his letter.

“West Papua is not a simple humanitarian dilemma. The real dilemma is the perpetual denial of West Papua’s right to freedom and sovereignty.”

Bomanak alleges that the six-decade struggle for independence has cost more than 500,000 lives.

West Papua case ‘unique’
In a supporting media release by Australian author and human rights advocate Jim Aubrey, he said that the open letter should be read “by anyone who supports international laws and governance and justice that are applied fairly to all people”.

“West Papua’s case for the UN to honour the process of decolonisation is a unique one,” he said.

“Former Secretary General U Thant concealed West Papua’s rights as a UN trust territory for political reasons that benefited the Republic of Indonesia and the American mining company Freeport-McMoRan.

“West Papua was invaded and recolonised by Indonesia. The mining giant Freeport-McMoRan signed their contract to build the Mt Grasberg mine with the mass murderer Suharto in 1967.

“The vote of self-determination in 1969 was, for Suharto and his commercial allies, already a foregone conclusion in 1967.”

Aubrey said that West Papuans were still being “jailed, tortured, raped, assassinated [and] bombed in one of the longest ongoing acts of genocide since the end of the Second World War”.

Western countries accused
He accused Australia, European Union, UK, USA as well as the UN of being “accessories to Indonesia’s illegal invasion and landgrab”.

About Australia’s alleged role, Aubrey said he had called for a Royal Commission to investigate but had not received a reply from Governor-General David Hurley or from Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Baby product business to teach Māori children pride in culture

TE WIKI O TE RĒO MĀORI: By Aroha Awarau

Last year Joelle Holland invested all of the money she had saved for a home deposit and put it into a baby product business called Hawaiiki Pēpi.

The sole focus of Hawaiiki Pēpi is to teach Māori children to be proud of their culture and language.

Hawaiiki Pēpi has already reached more than $100,000 in sales, but most importantly for its owner, it has delivered on its promise to encourage and normalise all things Māori.

TE WIKI O TE RĒ0 MĀORI | MĀORI LANGUAGE WEEK 11-18 September 2023

“I don’t have any experience in business at all. But what I do have is a passion for my culture and the revitalisation of our language,” she says.

“This venture was a way for me to express that and show people how beautiful Māori can be.”

Holland (Tainui, Tūhoe, Ngāti Whātua) came up with the idea after giving birth to her children Ivy-āio, three, and Ryda Hawaiiki, one.

The online business that Holland manages and runs from her home, creates Māori-designed products such as blankets for babies.

Proud to be Māori
“When my eldest child was in my puku, I was trying to find baby products that showed that we were proud to be Māori. There weren’t any at the time. That’s how the idea of Hawaiiki Pēpi came about,” she says.

With the support of her partner Tayllis, Holland decided to take a risk and enter the competitive baby industry.

To prepare for her very first start up, Holland took business courses, conducted her own research and did 18 months of development before launching Hawaiiki Pēpi at the end of last year.

“The aim is to enhance identity, te reo Māori and whakapapa. We are hoping to wrap our pēpi in their culture from birth so they can gain a sense of who they are, creating strong, confident and unapologetically proud Māori.”

Holland grew up in Auckland and went to kohanga reo and kura kaupapa before spending her high school years boarding at St Joseph’s Māori Girls College in Napier.

She says that language is the key connection to one’s culture. It was through learning te reo Māori from birth that instilled in her a strong sense of cultural identity. It has motivated her in all of the important life decisions that she has made.

‘Struggled through teenage years’
“I struggled throughout my teenage years. I was trying to find my purpose. I was searching for who I was, where I came from and where I belonged.

“I realised that the strong connection I had to my tupuna and my people was through the language. Everything has reverted back to te reo Māori and it has always been an anchor in my life.”

Holland went to Masey University to qualify to teach Māori in schools, juggling study, with taking care of two children under three, and starting a new business.

This year, she completed her degree in the Bachelor of Teaching and Learning Kura Kaupapa Māori programme. The qualification has allowed Holland to add another powerful tool in her life that nurtures Māoritanga in the younger generation and contributes to the revitalisation of te reo Māori.

“I loved my studies. Every aspect of the degree was immersed in te reo Māori, from our essays, presentations to our speeches. Although I grew up speaking Māori, I realised there is still so much more to learn,” she says.

For now, Holland will be focusing on growing her business and raising her children before embarking on a career as a teacher.

“My end goal is to encourage all tamariki to be proud of their Māoritanga, encourage them to speak their language and stand tall.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

We are poised to pass 1.5℃ of global warming – world leaders offer 4 ways to manage this dangerous time

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Symons, Senior Lecturer, Macquarie School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University

Marcus E Jones, Shutterstock

For three decades, the goal of international climate negotiations has been to avoid “dangerous” warming above 1.5℃. With warming to date standing at around 1.2℃, we haven’t quite reached the zone we labelled dangerous and pledged to avoid.

But recent scientific assessments suggest we’re on the brink of passing that milestone. Within this decade, global annual temperatures will likely exceed 1.5°C above the pre-industrial average for at least one year. This threshold was already briefly passed for the month of July 2023 during the Northern summer.

The question is, how do we manage this period of “overshoot” and bring temperatures back down? The goal will be to restore a more habitable climate, as fast as possible.

Today an independent group of global leaders released a major report. The Climate Overshoot Commission offers guidance at this crucial time. So far the report’s call for an immediate moratorium on “solar radiation management” (deflecting the sun’s rays to reduce warming) has attracted the most attention. But the details of other recommendations deserve closer inspection.

Introducing the Climate Overshoot Commission (2022)



Read more:
We just blew past 1.5 degrees. Game over on climate? Not yet


How can we respond to climate overshoot?

Historically, climate policies have focused on mitigation (reducing greenhouse gas emissions). More recently, adaptation has gained prominence.

But the climate overshoot report identifies at least four different kinds of responses to warming above 1.5℃:

  1. cut emissions to mitigate warming

  2. adapt to the changing climate

  3. remove carbon that is already in the atmosphere or ocean

  4. explore intervening to limit warming by intentionally reflecting a fraction of sunlight into space.

The commission’s task was to examine how all possible responses might best be combined. Their report was written by 12 global leaders – including former presidents of Niger, Kiribati and Mexico – who worked alongside a youth panel and a team of scientific advisers.




Read more:
The 1.5℃ global warming limit is not impossible – but without political action it soon will be


The four-step plan to reining in warming

Not surprisingly, the commission argues our central task is mitigation. Transitioning away from fossil fuels remains the first priority.

But reaching net zero emissions is just the first step. The commission argues developed countries like Australia should go further and aim for net-negative emissions.

Why net-negative? In the short term, drawing down carbon can create space for the least industrialised countries to fight poverty while transitioning to clean energy. In the longer term, the whole global economy must achieve net-negative emissions if the planet is to return to our current “safe” climatic zone.

The second step is adaptation. Only a few decades ago former United States Vice President Al Gore branded adapting to climate change a “lazy cop-out”. Today we have no choice but to adapt to changing conditions.

However, adaptation is expensive – whether it is developing new crop varieties or rebuilding coastal infrastructure. Since the poorest communities who are most vulnerable to climate harms have the least capacity to adapt, the commission recommends international assistance for locally controlled, context-specific strategies.

As a third step, the commission agrees with scientific assessments that carbon dioxide “will need to be removed from the air on a significant scale and stored securely” if we are to avoid permanent overshoot beyond 1.5℃ warming. But how to achieve large-scale permanent, carbon removal?

Some environmental activists support natural solutions such as planting trees but oppose industrial methods that seek to store carbon in inorganic form such as carbon capture and storage underground. The commission agrees the organic/inorganic distinction is important. However, it points out while forests bring many benefits, carbon stored in ecosystems is often re-released – for example, in forest fires.

The commission worries many carbon removal approaches are phoney, impermanent or have adverse social and environmental impacts. However, instead of ruling out technologies on ideological grounds, it recommends research and regulation to ensure only socially beneficial and high-integrity forms of carbon removal are scaled up.

The fourth step – “solar radiation management” – refers to techniques that aim to reduce climate harms caused by reflecting some of the Sun’s energy into space. No-one likes the idea of solar radiation management. But no-one likes getting vaccinated either – our gut reactions don’t provide a fool-proof guide to whether an intervention is a worth considering.

Should we trust our guts on this one? While climate models suggest solar radiation management could reduce climate harms, we don’t yet properly understand associated risks.

The commission approaches this topic with caution. On the one hand, it recommends an immediate “moratorium on the deployment of solar radiation modification and large-scale outdoor experiments” and rejects the idea that deployment is now inevitable. On the other hand, it recommends increased support for research, international dialogue on governance, and periodic global scientific reviews.

Time to examine intervention in the climate system?

The idea we can avoid dangerous warming completely seems increasingly quaint. Like baggy jeans, the boy band NSYNC and the iPod shuffle, it reminds us of a more innocent era. Yet, Australia’s climate debate often seems stuck in this era.

The widespread hope we “still have time” means we are not yet discussing the merits of more interventionist responses to the climate crisis. However, there’s increasing reason to be sceptical incremental measures will be sufficient. We may soon be forced to move beyond the non-interventionist, conservation paradigm.

Whether or not its recommendations are taken up, the Climate Overshoot Commission’s work shows how the international community has failed to avert dangerous climate change. Reckoning with the consequences of this failure will dominate public policy for decades to come. This new report takes us a step forward.

The Conversation

Jonathan Symons sits on the advisory board for RePlanet NGO and is a member of The Australian Institute of International Affairs (NSW) Council.

ref. We are poised to pass 1.5℃ of global warming – world leaders offer 4 ways to manage this dangerous time – https://theconversation.com/we-are-poised-to-pass-1-5-of-global-warming-world-leaders-offer-4-ways-to-manage-this-dangerous-time-213649

iPhone switching to USB-C is a win for consumers and the environment – but to what extent?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tyrone Berger, Lecturer in Law, Deakin Law School, Deakin University

Shutterstock

This week, technology news has been abuzz as Apple introduced its latest iPhones into the market. Among the usual new feature announcements, one stunning change has stood out in particular. The long-standing rumours are true – the new iPhone 15 series has USB-C standard charging ports.

The ditching of Apple’s proprietary Lightning port, which was first introduced in 2012, means iPhone users will finally be able to recharge their phones with the same chargers they use for other devices.

But what does this major change really mean for Apple, consumers and the environment?

Apple marched to its own beat until now

Since the inception of Apple, the company has been well known to develop various proprietary connectors in lieu of adopting tech standards used elsewhere in the industry.

As one of the major players in the mobile market, the iconic brand has relied on the loyalty of its customers, dictating they have no choice but to use Apple’s proprietary cabling and charging technologies to run their products. As a result, they could retain control of their product ecosystem.

Meanwhile, there is also the USB (Universal Serial Bus), an industry standard designed to standardise the many connections we need on personal computers – to plug in a keyboard or a mouse, for example. The group that develops and maintains the standard includes more than 700 tech companies, including Apple, Microsoft and Samsung. USB-C is the latest iteration of this widely accepted standard.




Read more:
What is USB-C? A computer engineer explains the one device connector to rule them all


Even while maintaining proprietary standards, in recent years Apple has also rolled out USB-C ports on several of its products, most notably all Macs and several iPads.

However, when the European Union proposed in 2020 that all consumer devices should use a universal standard charger, Apple hit back with claims a single connector standard would stifle innovation and create further electronic waste or e-waste.

The EU demands USB-C

It is now apparent Apple lost that battle. The iPhone 15 switch to USB-C comes less than a year after the EU passed legislation to require all smartphones, tablets, digital cameras and other small devices to support USB-C by the end of 2024.

The rules also impose a requirement for “fast charging”, to ensure devices can be charged at the same speed no matter which charger is used.

The purpose behind the move is to mandate a single standardised port so consumers don’t need to carry different cables for different devices. It also means fewer cables need to be manufactured and supplied with new products, thus reducing the e-waste created by discarded electronic goods.

Given the size of the EU market, the new rules may lead to other countries introducing similar legislation. Some exceptions will exist for devices that are too small to have a USB-C port, such as smart watches or health monitors.

Apple also has a history of removing popular ports, such as when it removed the headphone jack from the iPhone 7. However, it’s too early to know whether the USB-C port on the iPhone could suffer the same fate in favour of wireless charging in the future.

A pile of broken mobile phones
E-waste is a growing problem, and limited repair options for consumer electronics are a contributing factor.
Shutterstock



Read more:
Apple’s iPhone 12 comes without a charger: a smart waste-reduction move, or clever cash grab?


How much of an e-waste savings is it, really?

E-waste is one of the fastest growing waste streams globally. This is due to the shortened lifespan of our electronic devices, limited repair options and growing consumer demand for the newest high-tech products.

The EU’s decision to demand USB-C is part of a greater effort to tackle e-waste. Ironically, it could generate more e-waste in the short term as individuals phase out their Lightning cables and old iPhones. However, the EU claims the new regulation could save almost 1,000 tonnes of e-waste annually.

On the grand scale, that’s actually not much, considering Europe generated 12 million tonnes of e-waste in 2019.

The inclusion of a USB-C port probably will not be enough of an incentive for people to upgrade to the iPhone 15, but the move by Apple could in fact be more attractive for those consumers who have been resistant to the iPhone in the past over its charging limitations.

Since there are more than one billion iPhones and iPads with Lightning ports in the world right now, you’re likely to find Lightning cables and accessories for a few years to come.

Depending on how long you’re planning on keeping your current iPhone, chances are Lightning chargers will be more difficult to find in the not-too-distant future.

What can you do about e-waste?

If you’ve switched to a new device with a different charging port, it renders your old collection of proprietary charging cables virtually useless. So, what should you do when it’s time to clean out the drawer full of old devices and cables?

In Australia, there is a National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme (NTCRS) to give “Australian households and small businesses free access to industry-funded collection and recycling services”, but the drop-off points may not be nearby.

In addition to the NTCRS, many state and local governments have their own recycling schemes or collection services. For example, the City of Sydney Council provides a free collection of all e-waste at recycling stations for residents.

Officeworks have also been recycling e-waste with their “Bring It Back” policy, which provides consumers with the opportunity to drop off devices and cables at their stores. Other organisations like MobileMuster offer a similar service where they will recycle mobile phones, chargers and accessories at no cost.




Read more:
If you buy it, why can’t you fix it? Here’s why we still don’t have the ‘right to repair’


The Conversation

Tyrone Berger 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. iPhone switching to USB-C is a win for consumers and the environment – but to what extent? – https://theconversation.com/iphone-switching-to-usb-c-is-a-win-for-consumers-and-the-environment-but-to-what-extent-213549

Electric vehicle fires are very rare. The risk for petrol and diesel vehicles is at least 20 times higher

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hussein Dia, Professor of Future Urban Mobility, Swinburne University of Technology

Two electric vehicle fires have been reported in Australia this week. Five cars were destroyed after a lithium battery ignited in a car parked at Sydney Airport on Monday. Firefighters believed the battery had been detached from the car because it was damaged.

On the same day, another vehicle caught fire after it hit debris on a road near Penrose in the New South Wales southern highlands. It’s believed the debris pierced the battery pack, starting a fire.

Despite these incidents, electric vehicle battery fires are rare. Indeed, the available data indicate the fire risk is between 20 and 80 times greater for petrol and diesel vehicles. Fire risks are also greater for electric scooters and electric bikes.

However, battery fires do pose particular problems, which I’ll discuss later.

How common are these fires?

Australian firm EV FireSafe tracks passenger electric vehicle battery fires worldwide. From 2010 to June 2023, its database records only 393 verified fires globally, out of some 30 million electric vehicles on the road.

Australia recorded only four electric vehicle battery fires over the same period. One was linked to arson. The other three vehicles were parked in structures that burned down and destroyed the vehicles. So it appears these fires didn’t start in the batteries.

But electric vehicle numbers in Australia were low during this 13-year period.




Read more:
Australia’s adoption of electric vehicles has been maddeningly slow, but we’re well placed to catch up fast


Are the risks higher than for petrol or diesel cars?

As electric vehicle numbers grow, this week’s reports might lead some people to fear fire risks will increase. However, data for the past 13 years suggest quite the opposite is true as electric vehicles replace petrol and diesel vehicles.

A May 2023 report by the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency found vehicles powered by internal combustion engines were 20 times more likely to catch fire than electric vehicles in Sweden.

Sweden recorded 106 fires in various electrified modes of transport in 2022. More than half were in e-scooters (38) and e-bikes (20). Out of Sweden’s 611,000 electric vehicles, 23 fires (0.004%) were reported. The fleet of 4.4 million petrol and diesel vehicles recorded 3,400 fires (0.08%).

Globally, EV FireSafe found about 0.0012% of electric passenger vehicles caught fire from 2010 to 2023. While it was difficult to find similar global statistics for petrol and diesel vehicles, EV Firesafe used a range of country reports and found a much higher 0.1% risk of catching fire. That’s more than 80 times the rate EV Firesafe found for electric vehicles.

As well as 393 verified fires worldwide, the EV Firesafe database includes 74 incidents that are being investigated and 21 that have not been verified.

A 2020 Tesla internal report (not verified independently) suggested there was one Tesla fire for every 205 million miles (330 million kilometres) travelled. The Tesla report notes National Fire Protection Association data for the United States showed a much higher rate of one fire for every 19 million miles (30.6 million kilometres).

We still have limited data on fire risk in electric vehicles, most of which are relatively new. More statistically reliable comparisons require more data over much longer time frames.

What causes electric vehicle fires?

Electric vehicle battery packs store a lot of energy in a very small space. When damaged, an internal short circuit triggers a chain reaction called thermal runaway. The battery pack then generates more heat than it can dissipate and catches fire.

About 95% of battery fires are classed as ignition fires, which produce jet-like directional flames. The other 5% involve a vapour cloud explosion.

Under test conditions, thermal runaway in cylindrical lithium ion battery cells causes an ignition fire.

A battery can catch fire for various reasons. It may be caused by physical damage from a collision, manufacturing defects, battery faults, workshop repairs, arson, external fires or overheating.

The EV FireSafe database shows about 18% of fires occurred when vehicles were charging, and 2% within an hour of disconnecting from the charger.

About 25% of incidents occurred in underground spaces, 31% while parked outside and 29% while driving (remaining 15% unknown). Of the vapour cloud explosion fires, 70% occurred in underground spaces and 30% in open-air conditions.

Thermal runaway leads to a vapour cloud explosion in a parked bus.



Read more:
How far to the next electric vehicle charging station – and will I be able to use it? Here’s how to create a reliable network


A battery fire is challenging

Electric vehicle fires do present new problems. Fires must be carefully managed to ensure the safety of firefighters and the public.

Once batteries are on fire, they can be hard to manage. Lithium battery fires burn at extremely high temperatures, can last for days and cause extensive damage. They often reignite just when the fire seems to have subsided.

If not managed properly, battery fires can emit highly toxic gases and chemicals for many hours. Properly trained firefighting crews are needed to handle these fires.

Methods to control a fire include cooling the battery with water, or using a crane to lift the vehicle and submerge it in a large water container.

An electric vehicle fire is suppressed using a ‘dunk tank’.



Read more:
Batteries are the environmental Achilles heel of electric vehicles – unless we repair, reuse and recycle them


Why are the risks higher in e-scooters and e-bikes?

Fire and road safety incident rates are higher for e-scooters and e-bikes. In the first half of 2023, EV Firesafe data show they accounted for more than 500 battery fires, 138 injuries and 36 deaths worldwide. Over the same six months, 35 electric vehicle battery fires resulted in eight injuries and four deaths.

The higher risk for e-scooters and e-bikes is mainly linked to poor-quality battery design and construction, and the use of unapproved chargers.

Electric cars and trucks use the same battery technology but have more sophisticated designs. Advanced cooling systems keep their batteries at optimal temperatures during everyday driving and recharging. This makes them much safer than batteries in e-scooters and e-bikes.

A national approach to electric vehicle fire safety

The recent National EV Strategy considered the risk of fires.

As part of the strategy, the federal government committed to funding the development of world-leading guidance on electric vehicles, road rescue demonstrations and fire safety training.

The surge in electric vehicle numbers means this funding is needed now to ensure firefighters can deal effectively with any fires that do happen.




Read more:
Australia finally has an electric vehicle strategy. How does it stack up?


The Conversation

Hussein Dia receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre, Transport for New South Wales, Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, Victorian Department of Transport and Planning, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, and Beam Mobility Holdings.

ref. Electric vehicle fires are very rare. The risk for petrol and diesel vehicles is at least 20 times higher – https://theconversation.com/electric-vehicle-fires-are-very-rare-the-risk-for-petrol-and-diesel-vehicles-is-at-least-20-times-higher-213468