Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justine Nolan, Professor of Law and Justice and Director of the Australian Human Rights Institute, UNSW Sydney

The question of how to restore integrity to public institutions is on the minds of many government officials right now, both on the local and international stage.

Handpicked political appointments to public institutions in Australia, such as the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), and most recently the selection of John Barilaro for the NSW government’s New York-based trade commissioner, have come under fire. Critics say theses appointments compromise the perception of the bodies’ independence and reduce public confidence in the ability of the appointees to perform their roles.

Read more:
View from The Hill: The challenge of ‘grey’ corruption and creating a culture of integrity

‘Jobs to mates’

Giving “jobs to mates” is an age-old political concept, if one that rarely benefits an institution or those under its protection. A recent report from the Grattan Institute highlighted the often poor performance of political appointees, noting that almost a quarter of the political appointees at the AAT failed to meet their performance targets.

This might sound like a procedural issue, but the AAT is a public institution that conducts reviews of Commonwealth law and makes decisions that affect our daily lives. Don’t we want experts making these decisions rather than someone who has made a huge donation or is politically connected to the government that appointed them?

Read more:
Here’s a simple way to stop governments giving jobs to mates

Politicising public appointments promotes distrust, can compromise performance, and encourages a corrupt culture that prioritises mateship over merit.

Global relevance

On the global stage, the same concerns arise. Respected institutions such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) are coming under pressure from NGOs and human rights practitioners to appoint experts, not political mates, to restore credibility to the world’s most prominent human rights organisation.

At the UN, the process has recently begun to appoint the next United Nations Human Rights Commissioner – the world’s most senior human rights figure. The vacancy was caused by the unexpected resignation of current commissioner, Michelle Bachelet following her controversial May 2022 visit to China.

On that trip, she was accused of being a pawn in the Chinese government’s efforts to downplay the human rights crisis in Xinjiang and their persecution of the Uyghur population. Her visit was widely critiqued as severely damaging to the credibility of the UN human rights office.

Too often the human rights commissioner role is filled by political appointees, rewarding diplomats or government staff. The recent pressure by human rights organisations calls for the post to be filled by “someone of high moral standing and personal integrity, and who is independent and impartial and possesses competency and expertise in the field of human rights”. where is this quote from? Please linklink text

In other words, these groups want a commissioner who is able to improve the UN’s human rights arm’s credibility.

The way forward

Last week, Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus introduced a bill in parliament that would require senior leadership appointments at the AHRC to be publicly advertised, merit-based, and limited to a maximum of seven years. One may have assumed such efforts at transparency were already in place, but no.

Many recent appointments have been made without an open, merit-based process. These include the 2021 selection of Lorraine Finlay by the Morrison government as Human Rights Commissioner, the 2019 selection of Ben Gauntlett as the Disability Discrimination Commissioner, and the 2013 appointment of Tim Wilson as Human Rights Commissioner.

Read more:
Australia’s ‘A’ rating on human rights is under threat with a handpicked, politically engineered commissioner

This bill is a welcome and essential step towards restoring the AHRC’s credibility and that of other public institutions. However, an open process that promotes transparent, merit-based selection across all political institutions is also necessary to improve public faith.

As the Albanese government considers creating a national integrity commission, it should also establish a transparent, standardised process for overseeing public appointments, including establishing a national public appointments commissioner.

One of the greatest challenges for governments and the public institutions they create is often not the process of lawmaking but implementation of those laws. This makes integrity and transparency in public appointments vital. Without them, these bodies operate much less independently and are less likely to put the interests of the public first.

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

– ref. The fix is in: how to restore public faith in government appointments – https://theconversation.com/the-fix-is-in-how-to-restore-public-faith-in-government-appointments-187991

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andy Marks, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Strategy, Government and Alliances, Western Sydney University

Clear air is essential ahead of an election. Space to make the case to voters. Room to build positive momentum. And yet, hurtling towards a poll in March 2023, the NSW Liberal-National government is gasping for breath.

Questions over the relinquished New York trade office appointment of former NSW Nationals leader John Barilaro have sucked substantial oxygen from premier Dominic Perrottet’s efforts to renew a 12-year-old administration.

With further revelations likely in upcoming parliamentary hearings and the findings of an independent internal inquiry pending, these issue are far from resolved. The frustration within senior Coalition ranks is palpable. It wasn’t meant to be this way.

Determined to avoid the fate of their federal colleagues, Perrottet and Treasurer Matt Kean set out a comparatively progressive reform agenda in the June state budget.

A big focus on the environment, clean energy, targeted cost-of-living relief and $16.5 billion in programs for women saw the economic blueprint labelled “Australia’s first teal budget”. Clear air abounded.

A shift in the vibe

For a moment, a government wounded less than a year earlier by the loss of a relatively popular leader amid a corruption inquiry looked to have achieved a remarkable turnaround. Even the “it’s not illegal” attitude to pork-barrelling seemed to have been eschewed in favour of participatory funding programs like WestInvest.

A spirit of cooperation was emerging. The premier’s push for federal–state health reform with his Victorian counterpart, Daniel Andrews, added to the perception this was a government capable of embracing a political “vibe shift” and rising above party lines for the greater good.

Other signs of maturity were evident in a shift away from the infrastructure boasts in the run-up to past campaigns. On budget night, the treasurer declared:

We must invest in more than just bricks and steel. We must choose to invest in our greatest asset – our people.

With a fresh and notably “constructive” Labor opposition leader in Chris Minns, NSW voters looked set for a contest-of-ideas election rather than the usual partisan arms race. Both parties, it seemed, had understood and adopted the new politics championed federally by the teals. Yet the Coalition is still struggling to convince onlookers it can meet one of the most critical expectations: integrity.

Across the aisle

NSW Labor is not immune. As news broke of the New York appointment, three former Labor parliamentarians were charged with “misconduct in public office”. More than a decade on the opposition benches has proved a steep learning curve for Labor. The Coalition, on the other hand, appears set for some hard learnings of its own.

The federal election result showed how closely voters watch matters of political integrity. It illustrated too that the harshest judgements are being exercised in the safest of Coalition seats. The teal wave crashed in the areas where incumbency was viewed by some commentators as a right rather than a privilege.

Whether the premier can again find the clear air he so sorely needs remains to be seen. Factional loyalties – in the party former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull once declared to be factionless – will be tested. Perrottet may have won the top job with overwhelming party endorsement, but it will only take the drift of one or two key allegiances to undermine his position.

The risk is twofold for the premier. Federal-style disaffection among rusted-on Coalition voters is one thing. Percentage drift in key marginal electorates is another.

The sharp end

In Western Sydney alone, three Liberal-held seats are in play. East Hills and Holsworthy in the southwest intersect with large areas that endured hard lockdown during the worst of the pandemic. There is disquiet. Wendy Lindsay, who holds East hills by a two-party-preferred margin of just 0.5 percentage points, was among a clutch of Coalition MPs reportedly opposing the mandatory vaccination of construction workers from hotspot areas.

In neighbouring Holsworthy, Liberal MP Melanie Gibbons, who made a thwarted bid for preselection in the nearby federal seat of Hughes, announced she would resign at the next election. Labor will undoubtedly marshal significant resources to win back a former heartland area on a 3.3 point margin.

The sharpest challenge for the Coalition might just prove to be the third of those marginal electorates, Penrith. Held by Deputy Premier Stuart Ayres, this outer-western Sydney seat on a margin of 1.5 points is an anchor for the Liberals in Australia’s fastest-growing region, for which Ayres also has ministerial responsibility.

Read more:
NSW has joined China, South Korea and Japan as climate leaders. Now it’s time for the rest of Australia to follow

In his additional role as the trade minister, Ayres has been drawn into scrutiny over the New York appointment. He insists he maintained “arm’s length” distance throughout the process, a position he believes the inquiry will confirm.

However, in the scramble for political clear air, perception often trumps reality. Regardless of the findings of the upper house and internal inquiries, and irrespective of the reset the premier is seeking, the question of integrity is ultimately one that will be answered by voters.

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

– ref. NSW government slides further into trouble as Perrottet struggles for clear air – https://theconversation.com/nsw-government-slides-further-into-trouble-as-perrottet-struggles-for-clear-air-188018

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Herraiz Borreguero, Physical oceanographer, CSIRO

Warmer waters are flowing towards the East Antarctic ice sheet, according to our alarming new research which reveals a potential new driver of global sea-level rise.

The research, published today in Nature Climate Change, shows changing water circulation in the Southern Ocean may be compromising the stability of the East Antarctic ice sheet. The ice sheet, about the size of the United States, is the largest in the world.

The changes in water circulation are caused by shifts in wind patterns, and linked to factors including climate change. The resulting warmer waters and sea-level rise may damage marine life and threaten human coastal settlements.

Our findings underscore the urgency of limiting global warming to below 1.5℃, to avert the most catastrophic climate harms.

Ice sheets and climate change

Ice sheets comprise glacial ice that has accumulated from precipitation over land. Where the sheets extend from the land and float on the ocean, they are known as ice shelves.

It’s well known that the West Antarctic ice sheet is melting and contributing to sea-level rise. But until now, far less was known about its counterpart in the east.

Our research focused offshore a region known as the Aurora Subglacial Basin in the Indian Ocean. This area of frozen sea ice forms part of the East Antarctic ice sheet.

How this basin will respond to climate change is one of the largest uncertainties in projections of sea-level rise this century. If the basin melted fully, global sea levels would rise by 5.1 metres.

Much of the basin is below sea level, making it particularly sensitive to ocean melting. That’s because deep seawater requires lower temperatures to freeze than shallower seawater.

What we found

We examined 90 years of oceanographic observations off the Aurora Subglacial Basin. We found unequivocal ocean warming at a rate of up to 2℃ to 3℃ since the earlier half of the 20th century. This equates to 0.1℃ to 0.4℃ per decade.

The warming trend has tripled since the 1990s, reaching a rate of 0.3℃ to 0.9℃ each decade.

So how is this warming linked to climate change? The answer relates to a belt of strong westerly winds over the Southern Ocean. Since the 1960s, these winds have been moving south towards Antarctica during years when the Southern Annular Mode, a climate driver, is in a positive phase.

The phenomenon has been partly attributed to increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As a result, westerly winds are moving closer to Antarctica in summer, bringing warm water with them.

The East Antarctic ice sheet was once thought to be relatively stable and sheltered from warming oceans. That’s in part because it’s surrounded by very cold water known as “dense shelf water”.

Part of our research focused on the Vanderford Glacier in East Antarctica. There, we observed the warm water replacing the colder dense shelf water.

The movement of warm waters towards East Antarctica is expected to worsen throughout the 21st century, further threatening the ice sheet’s stability.

Read more:
Melting moments: a look under East Antarctica’s biggest glacier

Why this matters to marine life

Previous work on the effects of climate change in the East Antarctic has generally assumed that warming first occurs in the ocean’s surface layers. Our findings – that deeper water is warming first – suggests a need to re-think potential impacts on marine life.

Robust assessment work is required, including investment in monitoring and modelling that can link physical change to complex ecosystem responses. This should include the possible effects of very rapid change, known as tipping points, that may mean the ocean changes far more rapidly than marine life can adapt.

East Antarctic marine ecosystems are likely to be highly vulnerable to warming waters. Antarctic krill, for example, breed by sinking eggs to deep ocean depths. Warming of deeper waters may affect the development of eggs and larvae. This in turn would affect krill populations and dependent predators such as penguins, seals and whales.

Limiting global warming below 1.5℃

We hope our results will inspire global efforts to limit global warming below 1.5℃. To achieve this, global greenhouse gas emissions need to fall by around 43% by 2030 and to near zero by 2050.

Warming above 1.5℃. greatly increases the risk of destabilising the Antarctic ice sheet, leading to substantial sea-level rise.

But staying below 1.5℃ would keep sea-level rise to no more than an additional 0.5 metres by 2100. This would enable greater opportunities for people and ecosystems to adapt.

Read more:
Ice world: Antarctica’s riskiest glacier is under assault from below and losing its grip

Laura Herraiz Borreguero received funding from the European Research Council Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship, through grant number 661015, and the Centre for Southern Hemisphere Oceans Research (CSHOR, Hobart, Australia); She receives funding from the Australian government through CSIRO and the Australian Antarctic Partnership Program (AAPP). She is affiliated with CSIRO, the AAPP.

Alberto Naveira Garabato received funding from the Royal Society through a Wolfson Research Merit Award.

Jess Melbourne-Thomas receives funding from the Climate Systems Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and The Pew Charitable Trusts.

– ref. Troubling new research shows warm waters rushing towards the world’s biggest ice sheet in Antarctica – https://theconversation.com/troubling-new-research-shows-warm-waters-rushing-towards-the-worlds-biggest-ice-sheet-in-antarctica-187483

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendon Hyndman, Associate Dean (Research) & Associate Professor of Education (Personal Development, Health & Physical Education), Charles Sturt University

As enrolments climb and urban spaces become more crowded, some Australian schools have been left with less play space per student than a prison cell.

Standard prison cell guidelines recommend at least 7.5 square metres per prisoner. One Sydney school reportedly has just 1.14 square metres of play space per student.

As experts in health and physical education, we are deeply concerned by reports students are running out of play space.

Why is this a problem? And what options do parents and teachers have to keep young people happy and healthy?

Space at a premium

Australian student numbers are predicated to increase by 17% over the decade to 2026, creating a need for hundreds of new, mostly metropolitan schools and new classrooms in areas previously set aside for play.

With only small blocks available for some inner-city school sites, “vertical” schools have been established in most Australian states. More vertical schools are planned, even at the primary level.

Vertical schools can provide some space for climbing, indoor running and ball sports, as well as outdoor areas such as rooftops.

But a lack of space and a reliance on lifts rather than stairs does not help keep kids active or provide much opportunity to engage with nature.

Australian kids have alarmingly low physical activity levels. Making sure students get the activity they need is vital for them to grow up fit and healthy.

How much space do kids need?

Australian guidelines on free play space – school areas other than buildings, footpaths and car parks – suggest a minimum of ten square metres per student.

However, Australian researchers have recommended school spaces should ideally be increased to 25 square metres per student, combined with access to portable play equipment such as balls, bats and blocks.

Read more:
How to get your kid to eat breakfast before school – and yes, it’s OK to have dinner leftovers or a sandwich

Even more space can have extra benefits. Two studies in Europe showed when more than 15 square metres per student was available, primary school children were much more physically active than those with less than eight square metres.

A study in the United Kingdom found that as play spaces per child increased, so did more vigorous physical activity. Smaller play spaces can result in crowded play, clashes and reduced movement.

8 ways to keep kids active in small spaces

Children need space to discover, take calculated movement risks and extend themselves physically. Here are eight ideas to keep young people active in confined spaces.

These can be adapted to the home, classrooms, gymnasiums and outdoor areas, whatever the weather.

1. Move to a theme

Give kids a body movement theme, such as “stand as tall or as wide was possible”.

Students then move in a variety of ways to match the theme – widening or narrowing their body, twisting, turning, bending, stretching, balancing, rolling and transferring body weight.

2. Use activity ‘zones’

Use task cards to create zones and stations in small spaces where small groups of students can do different activities such as push-ups or skipping. Cards can illustrate ways to undertake the activities at different levels – from easy to medium and difficult.

Sport Australia’s Playing for Life cards allow teachers and parents to match activities to children’s ages.

3. Move to music

Dance offers a wide variety of activities and sequences of movements that can be done in a small space.

Along with making up their own dances, students can perform movements that suggest words for others to guess. Another option is regular one-minute bursts of movement with music throughout the day.

4. Set up obstacle courses

Get students to make up obstacle courses. Not only is this an exercise in problem-solving, it can also increase their motivation around physical education.

5. Use nearby parks and facilities

Many young people do not use their closest park. But public spaces can be a valuable resource for physical education and engagement with the community.

6. Play co-operative games

Develop co-operative movement challenges. These ask groups to work together in a small space, developing not just gross motor skills, but team work and problem-solving. An example is throwing a scarf in the air that both partners need to catch, gradually increasing the distance apart.

7. Adapt the space

Use colours, lines and patterns within spaces as guides for students to follow, aim towards and jump on during movement activities.

It’s also a useful way to break up the space into zones for different activities, and even target games such as bowling and beanbag bocce.

8. Look beyond PE

Beyond physical education school subjects there are other opportunities to be active. This even includes traditional subjects like maths and English, which can be adapted to use movement-based activities.

Read more:
Richer schools’ students run faster: how the inequality in sport flows through to health

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. School playgrounds are getting squeezed: here are 8 ways to keep students active in small spaces – https://theconversation.com/school-playgrounds-are-getting-squeezed-here-are-8-ways-to-keep-students-active-in-small-spaces-185760

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation politics team.

In this podcast, politics editor Amanda Dunn and Michelle canvass Tuesday’s decision by the Reserve Bank to raise the cash rate again, by 50 basis points to 1.85%.

They also talk about Peter Dutton’s announcement that the opposition will inquire into nuclear power, in a contentious decision as it looks to crafting an energy policy for the next election. Most immediately, the Coalition will vote against the government’s legislation for its 43% 2030 emissions reduction target. The vote in the House of Representatives will be this week.

Meanwhile, after Anthony Albanese’s weekend Garma speech, attention this week also turned to the proposed referendum to put into the constitution an Indigenous “Voice” to parliament.

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. Word from The Hill: Peter Dutton puts nuclear power on opposition’s agenda – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-peter-dutton-puts-nuclear-power-on-oppositions-agenda-188076

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabriel C Rau, Lecturer in Hydrogeology, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle

Cave explorers have traversed what’s now the deepest known cave in Australia. On Saturday a group of explorers discovered a 401-metre-deep cave, which they named Delta Variant, in Tasmania’s Niggly-Growling Swallet cave system within the Junee–Florentine karst area. Its depth just beat out its predecessor, the Niggly Cave, by about four metres.

With a descent that lasted 14 hours and took many months to prepare for, Delta Variant is causing a stir among explorer communities.

But it holds a different kind of fascination for researchers such as myself, who study the interaction between groundwater and rocks (including in the context of caves). This helps us learn about natural processes and how Earth’s climate has changed over millions of years.

Exciting as Delta Variant is in an Australian context, it is arguably just an appetiser in the wider world of caves; the deepest known cave, located in Georgia, goes more than 2.2 kilometres into the earth.

So how exactly do these massive geologic structures form, right under our feet?

How do caves form?

Put simply, caves form when flowing water slowly dissolves rock over a long time. Specifically, they form within certain geological formations called “karst” – which includes structures made of limestone, marble and dolomite.

Karst is made of tiny fossilised microorganisms, shell fragments and other debris that accumulated over millions of years. Long after they perish, small marine creatures leave behind their “calcerous” shells made of calcium carbonate. Corals are also made of this material, as are other types of fauna with skeletons.

This calcerous sediment builds up into geological structures that are relatively soft. As water trickles down through crevices in the rock, it continuously dissolves the rock to slowly form a cave system.

Unlike much harder igneous rocks (such as granite), calcerous rocks dissolve on contact with water that is naturally acidic. When rain falls from the sky, it picks up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and soils along the way, which makes it acidic. The more acidic the water, the faster it will erode karst material.

So, as you can imagine, cave formation can become quite complex: the specific composition of the karst, the acidity of the water, the level of drainage and the overall geological setting are all factors that determine what kind of cave will form.

In geology there’s a lot of spatial guesswork. Being able to see how deep a cave formation goes is a bit like getting into the deepest layers of a cake, where you may not find the same thing in all directions.

Stalagmites and stalactites

From a research perspective, caves are incredibly valuable because they contain cave deposits (or “speleothems”) such as stalagmites and stalactites. These are sometimes spiky things that point up from cave floors, or droop from the ceilings, or form beautiful flowstones.

Cave deposits form as a result of water passing through the cave. Like trees, these contain growth rings (or layers) that can be analysed. They can also include other chemical signatures the water contained, which can reveal processes that occurred at the time of formation.

While they may not seem like much, we can use these deposits to unravel past secrets about Earth’s climate. And since they’re a feature of the interaction between rock and water during cave formation, we can basically expect to find them in most caves.

How deep can we go?

Descending deep into a cave system is no small feat. You can’t use your mobile (since there’s no reception), it’s incredibly dark and you’re usually relying on a guide line to find the way back out. There could be many dead ends for explorers, so effectively mapping the space requires time and great spatial exploration skills.

While cave systems are usually stable (shallow caves can in theory collapse and form sinkholes, but this is very rare) – there’s always risk. The unexpected geometry of caves means you could find yourself making tricky manoeuvres, twisting and swaying in all kinds of uncomfortable manner as you abseil into darkness.

Although the air pressure doesn’t change to a dangerous extent as you descend, other gases such as methane, ammonia and hydrogen sulfide can sometimes pool and lead to suffocation risk.

Despite all of the above, cave exploration is something people continue to do, and it brings great benefit for researchers in various sub-fields of geology.

And though we’ve come a long way, there are always nooks and crannies we can’t get inside – after all, humans aren’t tiny. I’m sure there are are small spaces, too snug for us to explore, that open into much longer or bigger systems than we’ve ever discovered.

Read more:
Thailand cave rescue: the lessons that must be learned

Gabriel C Rau has received funding from the NSW Government (Australia), the European Commission, the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the German federal government.

– ref. Explorers just uncovered Australia’s deepest cave. A hydrogeologist explains how they form – https://theconversation.com/explorers-just-uncovered-australias-deepest-cave-a-hydrogeologist-explains-how-they-form-188064

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Davey, Head of the Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne

The chemical imbalance theory of depression is well and truly dead. A paper by Joanna Moncrieff and colleagues, long-time critics of the effectiveness of antidepressants, has caused a splash. The paper provides a summary of other summaries that confirm there is no evidence to support the idea that depression is caused by disturbance of the brain’s serotonin system.

They have done us a favour by corralling the evidence that says as much, even if we already knew this to be the case.

But the death of the chemical imbalance theory has no bearing on whether antidepressants that affect the serotonin system are effective. These medications weren’t developed on this premise. In fact quite the opposite is true – the chemical imbalance theory was based on an emerging understanding of how antidepressants were shown to work.

Read more:
Depression is probably not caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain – new study

How did the ‘chemical inbalance’ theory start?

The first two antidepressant medications, both discovered in the 1950s, were observed to have positive effects on mood as side effects of their hoped-for functions. Iproniazid was developed as a treatment for tubercolosis, and imipramine as an antihistamine.

We know now that ipronizaid is a monoamine oxidase inhibitor – it stops the enzyme that breaks down serotonin and similar brain chemicals. But we didn’t know this when its antidepressant effects were first observed in 1952.

Imipramine is a tricyclic antidepressant and, among other effects, it blocks the reuptake of serotonin after it has been secreted, also allowing more to stay in the brain.

A simple hypothesis then presented itself: if both classes of antidepressants were shown to increase brain levels of serotonin, then depression must be caused by low levels of serotonin.

Researchers set out to demonstrate this in patients with depression, showing that serotonin and its metabolites and precursors were lower in the blood, in the cerebrospinal fluid, and so on.

But these studies suffered from what we now know plagued many studies of their era, leading to the so-called “replication crisis”. Studies used small sample sizes, selectively reported their results, and if they failed to demonstrate the hypothesis, were often not reported at all. In short, the findings were unreliable, and since then larger studies and meta-analyses (which summarised the many smaller studies), made it clear the hypothesis wasn’t supported.

Read more:
Explainer: what is depression?

What’s the link between the theory and antidepressants?

In the meantime, pharmaceutical companies spotted a clear line to communicate the effectiveness of their medications. Depression was caused by a “chemical imbalance” that could be corrected by antidepressants.

This coincided with the development of a new class of antidepressants, the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which, as their name suggests, were more selective than the tricyclic antidepressants in targeting serotonin reuptake as their mechanism of action.

These drugs – then known as Prozac, Zoloft, and Cipramil – became blockbusters, and remain widely used today (albeit with a variety of names since expiration of their patents).

Few psychiatrists with an understanding of the nuance of brain function believed the chemical imbalance theory. It never fitted with the way they could see that SSRIs worked, with serotonin function changing hours after taking the medication, but depression not showing improvement for about four weeks.

But there were, and are, many medical practitioners with less sophisticated understanding of depression and neurochemistry who were happy to repeat this message to their patients. It was an effective message, and one that took hold in the popular imagination. I have heard it repeated many times.

So are antidepressants effective?

The new paper by Moncrieff and colleagues, while not saying anything new, does us all a favour by reiterating the message that has been clear for some time: there is no evidence to support the chemical imbalance theory. Their message has been amplified by the extensive media attention the article has received.

But much of the commentary has extrapolated from the study’s finding to suggest it undermines the effectiveness of antidepressants – including by the authors themselves.

This shows a misunderstanding of how medical science works. Medicine is pragmatic. Medicine has often established that a treatment works well before it has understood how it works.

Many commonly used medicines were used for decades before we understood their mechanisms of action: from aspirin to morphine to penicillin. Knowing they worked provided the impetus for establishing how they worked; and this knowledge generated new treatments.

The evidence for SSRIs being effective for depression is convincing to most reasonable assessors. They are not effective for as many people with depression as we might hope, as I have written before, but they are, overall, more effective than placebo treatments.

Critics suggest the magnitude of the difference between the medications and placebo isn’t great enough to warrant their use. That is a matter of opinion. And many people report very significant benefits, even as some people report none, or even that they have caused harm.

Read more:
What causes depression? What we know, don’t know and suspect

If it’s not a chemical imbalance, how do antidepressants work?

In truth, we still don’t really know how or why antidepressants work. The brain is a complex organ. We still don’t have a clear idea about how general anaesthetics work. But few people would refuse an anaesthetic when contemplating serious surgery on this basis.

In the same vein, when contemplating whether an antidepressant might be an option for someone with depression, it is of little consequence that its mechanism of action is incompletely understood.

So let’s put the chemical imbalance theory to bed. We should continue our efforts to understand the nature of depression, while we keep searching for better treatments.

Attending to diet, exercise, and sleep is effective for many people with depression. Psychotherapy can be very helpful too. But many people struggle with depression despite trying these things, and it is for them that we need to keep up our efforts to find better treatments.

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

– ref. The chemical imbalance theory of depression is dead, but that doesn’t mean antidepressants don’t work – https://theconversation.com/the-chemical-imbalance-theory-of-depression-is-dead-but-that-doesnt-mean-antidepressants-dont-work-187769

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

Australia’s east coast gas crisis is set to sharply worsen. A new report from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) notes supply conditions will deteriorate significantly in 2023 if no action is taken. The 56 petajoule shortfall is huge – equivalent to around 10% of domestic demand.

So what’s been done? You would have heard about the “gas trigger” the government is considering pulling. This trigger – formally known as the Australian Domestic Gas Mechanism – is designed to increase gas supply by limiting gas exports during periods of shortfall.

The problem is, it’s too weak and much too slow to respond to fast-moving energy crises like the one we are now in. It hasn’t been used once since being introduced in 2017, as Australia’s LNG exporters can easily avoid the threat of the trigger by putting the bare minimum of gas back into domestic supply.

As it stands, the gas trigger is a wholly inadequate measure to tackle our uncertain energy future in a globally disrupted market. It’s unfathomable why a country with abundant and diverse gas resources does not protect its domestic market more effectively. Remember – this gas crisis is an east coast problem. West Australia put in place a domestic reservation policy years ago, which has worked exceedingly well. Over west, there is no crisis.

How did we get into this mess?

The price of gas in Australia continues to surge, which in turn has helped push up wholesale energy prices by 141% in the first quarter of 2022 compared with last year.

This is driven by huge increases in global demand for gas following shortages in Europe caused by the Russian war on Ukraine, coupled with rising domestic demand for gas-fired power as coal power becomes less reliable with outages from ageing and retired generators.

Read more:
Why did gas prices go from $10 a gigajoule to $800 a gigajoule? An expert on the energy crisis engulfing Australia

The likely result will be much higher domestic energy prices, causing pain on the home front and resulting in more manufacturers closing. The ACCC report makes it clear a shortfall of this magnitude represents a “substantial risk to Australia’s energy security”.

It seems bizarre Australia – one of the world’s largest fossil fuel exporters – is in this situation. Next year, the east coast LNG market is forecast to produce 1981 petajoules of natural gas. Most of this will supply long term contracts.

The excess is often sold by LNG exporters on the international market. In the past, some of this excess has flowed to domestic supply. But the ACCC predicts in 2023, most excess gas will be sold on the international market – taking advantage of high prices – even though our domestic market is likely to need a lot more of it than in previous years.

It’s our gas – isn’t it?

Given the gas is being extracted from under Australian soils and waters, there’s a big question we’re facing. Can – or will – the government compel LNG exporters to direct more of this excess gas to domestic use?

On the east coast, we’re hindered by the lack of a legally binding supply mandate. By contrast, Western Australia has laws forcing LNG exporters to reserve 15% of their gas for the domestic market. These laws have kept their market relatively immune to the wild rises of the globally disrupted market.

Australia’s east coast does not have a reservation mandate. Instead, it has an agreement between the government and LNG exporters who have committed not to sell uncontracted gas to the international market unless they first offer it to the domestic market at a competitive price. This commitment expires on January 1 next year and at this stage has not been extended.

That brings us to the gas trigger, introduced in 2017 as a measure of last resort but never actually used. Instead, it’s lingered in the background. Federal resources minister Madeleine King has argued the trigger can be used as a security mechanism, but that remains to be seen.

How does the trigger work?

The gas trigger has to be activated to have any effect. This is quite a lengthy process. To pull the trigger, the federal minister must notify the industry they are considering making a determination the following year will amount to a gas “shortfall year”. There is big delay between making a determination and imposing export restrictions.

Worse, the minister has to consult with the industry and other agencies. To date, the LNG industry has been able to stop the trigger by putting the barest amount of gas back into domestic supply to prevent a shortfall determination.

If a determination is made, LNG producers exporting more than they produce domestically will be subject to pro-rata volume restrictions during the shortfall year. The amount depends upon the shortfall volume the minister believes will be required.

Read more:
4 reasons our gas and electricity prices are suddenly sky-high

The slow-motion trigger

There are many concerns with this trigger.

First, it’s extremely slow. In practice, export restrictions could take up to eight months to have any effect. As the new ACCC report indicates, this must change so the trigger becomes more responsive to immediate energy concerns.

Second, the estimated shortfall volume may not generate enough gas to alleviate the shortfall because export restrictions can only apply to exporters drawing more gas from the market than they put in.

Third, the gas trigger has never actually been used. At the first hint of a shortfall, the LNG industry has stepped in to supply the minimum amount of gas necessary to avoid a shortfall year being declared.

As a result, the gas trigger is basically ineffective. It’s had no real impact on domestic gas prices and has never functioned as a substantive export control capable of creating stronger domestic gas reserves. That’s precisely why the east coast gas market finds itself in this mess.

It’s time for a rethink. The gas trigger is an inadequate way of tackling a very uncertain energy future in our globally disrupted market. So why keep it? We don’t need to reinvent the wheel. Western Australia’s domestic reservation policy shows us very clearly what does work: laws, with teeth.

Read more:
Want a solution for the energy crisis gripping Australia’s east? Look west

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

– ref. The ‘gas trigger’ won’t be enough to stop our energy crisis escalating. We need a domestic reservation policy – https://theconversation.com/the-gas-trigger-wont-be-enough-to-stop-our-energy-crisis-escalating-we-need-a-domestic-reservation-policy-188057

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

There are signs inflation pressures are easing. Oil prices are down almost 20% on their peak in March. They’ve been falling consistently for a month.

The average capital city unleaded price is down from A$2.11 per litre in early July to a more bearable $1.74.

The money market is pricing in much lower inflation than we presently have over the next one to four years, and consumers’ inflation expectations (although still high at 6.3%) eased off a bit between June and July.

So why did the Reserve Bank just hike its cash rate by an outsized 0.50 percentage points for the third consecutive month, taking it to 1.85%?

Partly because it knows what is to come.

Higher inflation in store

The 6.1% inflation figure released last week was for the year leading to the quarter that ended in June. Since then, in July, we’ve been hit by massive electricity price increases, some as high as 19%, and gas prices that have manufacturers screaming.

The monthly inflation gauge compiled by the Melbourne Institute (the Bureau of Statistics hasn’t yet gone monthly) kicked up 2.1% in July, the biggest monthly jump in two decades.

And there’s something else.

The Reserve Bank’s deepest fear might be that it can’t contain inflation, and that its apparent success over three decades has owed a lot to luck.

Reserve banks blessed by luck

Inflation fell to low levels throughout the world around the world at about the time it fell to low levels in Australia. From the mid 1990s, inflation fell to 2-3% in the US, the UK, Canada and just about every other Western nation, as China deluged the world with low-priced goods and companies began offshoring.

It got to the point where almost as many prices were falling as rising.

The US economic historian Adam Tooze says it’s reasonable to ask whether we had inflation at all from the mid 1990s onwards.

The Bank for International Settlements defines inflation as a “largely synchronous increase in the prices of goods and services” – a situation where prices broadly climb together.

Little real inflation for 30 years

It needs to be largely synchronous to qualify as inflation because otherwise the amount a dollar can buy isn’t clearly changing – any such effect is overwhelmed by changes in the mix of goods and services a dollar can buy.

It is only when prices start to move together, as they are now, that inflation gets normalised and becomes entrenched.

Twenty years ago, in June 2002, by my count 20 of the 87 types of items that made up the consumer price index fell in price. Ten years ago, 32 fell in price.

By economist Saul Eslake’s count, this June only 15 of what are now 90 expenditure classes fell in price – what appears to be the lowest number in decades.

Suddenly, price rises are synchronised

It means the Reserve Bank is having to deal with broad-based inflation of a kind it hasn’t faced since it began targeting inflation in the early 1990s.

Just about the only tool it has to do it – higher interest rates – makes people poorer.

Higher interest rates work in other ways as well.

• they increase the reward for saving, diverting some money from spending

• they make it harder to borrow, diverting more money from spending

• and they push up the exchange rate, making imported goods cheaper – or they would have, were other central banks not also pushing up their rates, meaning the Australian dollar is no higher than it was when the bank began pushing up rates in May.

But their chief effect is impoverishing variable mortgage holders, to the tune of hundreds of dollars a month.

The more variable mortgage rates go up (Tuesday’s hike will push up the ANZ standard rate from 4.24% to 4.74%) the less mortgage holders have to spend on other things, and the less they will add to price pressure.

That’s the idea. And it is disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Mortgage buffers are scant protection

In a speech last month Reserve Bank Deputy Governor Michele Bullock said households in aggregate were “well positioned”.

They had saved $260 billion since the start of the pandemic, much of which had gone into redraw facilities and offset and deposit accounts.

Around half were almost two years ahead on mortgage payments, or more. They had “large buffers”.

But, as University of Newcastle economist Bill Mitchell points out, by the bank’s own logic, this just means it will have to squeeze them harder.

Read more:
The RBA’s rate hikes will add hundreds to monthly mortgage payments

It wants Australians to spend less and, if they use their buffers to keep spending as they have, it will have to either give up, or push rates higher until they do.

RBA Governor Philip Lowe says he is navigating a “narrow path” to curb inflation without too much pain. He can’t be certain he knows the way.

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

– ref. Why does the RBA keep hiking interest rates? It’s scared it can’t contain inflation – https://theconversation.com/why-does-the-rba-keep-hiking-interest-rates-its-scared-it-cant-contain-inflation-188011

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Greg Sutherland, Associate Professor, Pathology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney

Have you ever thought about donating your brain to science? Don’t worry, I mean after you die.

Perhaps you’ve heard about donating your body to science or donating organs for transplants and wondered if it’s similar. Or perhaps you have a vague notion donating your brain might be a good idea and want to know what’s involved.

If you do go ahead and donate your brain, it would be stored in a brain bank, perhaps one at the University of Sydney, where I’m the director.

Here are the answers to some of the most common questions we’re asked about donating your brain to science.

Is it like donating a kidney?

No, donating your organs, such as kidneys or your liver, during your life or after your death is for transplants. A brain is definitely not for transplants.

Donating your body to science is also different and is largely so medical or allied health students can study human anatomy including brain anatomy.

Donating your brain to a brain bank after you die allows researchers to use your brain tissue for research.

Read more:
Dead yet? Science, scaremongering and organ donation

What type of brains are you after?

Scientists want to study all types of brains. That includes brains from people who have brain disease, such as dementia or depression, when they sign up for our program, and those who don’t have brain disease initially but then develop it.

To understand why certain people get a brain diseases scientists need to compare affected brains to those from people without brain disease. Brain diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease and stroke are among Australia’s biggest causes of death. Addiction, anxiety and depression are major causes of disease.

How will my brain be used?

Researchers use donated brain tissue to firstly confirm the patient’s diagnosis. Diseases like Alzheimer’s disease can only be confirmed after death.

By studying brain tissue, researchers can also learn about how brain disease progresses. By studying diseases at the microscopic level we are trying to find how they might be better diagnosed and treated.

We still know very little about what happens in the brain to cause these conditions and the reasons why the most promising treatments fail to improve them.

Many treatments’ ability to cure brain diseases in animals, but there is a high rate of failure when they are tried in humans. This is because our brains are so uniquely human, in terms of size and complexity. The only accurate model is the human brain itself.

Read more:
What causes Alzheimer’s disease? What we know, don’t know and suspect

What’s actually involved?

When you die, staff from the brain bank liaise with hospital or aged-care staff, funeral directors, and your next-of-kin. Your body is transported to a mortuary, either at a public hospital or forensic medicine centre, and a brain-only autopsy is carried out.

The entire brain and spinal cord are removed by mortuary staff and immediately transported by brain bank staff to the bank for further preparation.

At the bank, staff work quickly to divide the brain in two: one half is placed into a chemical fixative, while the other half is dissected and placed in a -80℃ freezer. The time between death and fixation or freezing is called the post-mortem interval and it needs to be kept as short as possible to maximise the success of future analytical techniques.

The fixed tissue remains in solution for three weeks before being dissected into a number of blocks that are then embedded in wax and allowed to harden. These blocks are then cut with a very fine blade to produce sections one hundredth of a millimetre thick. These sections are stained for disease-specific proteins to allow a diagnosis to be formally made by the bank’s neuropathologist.

Researchers interested in a specific brain disease apply to the bank’s scientific committee for tissue. A prospective study will often involve both fixed and frozen tissue so complementary spatial (from fixed tissue) and molecular (frozen tissue) studies can be performed.

We store about 500 brains from donors with a variety of diseases and those with “normal” brains.

Why do people sign up?

People donate their brains to science for all sorts of reasons.

A review by colleagues in New Zealand found a major reason was a desire to help others.

Major reasons for not donating included the family was against it, religious concerns, and being unaware that brain donation is possible.

Donation was more likely if people had a thorough knowledge and understanding of the entire process.

Read more:
Donating your body to science? Don’t worry, it’s not what it used to be

OK, you’ve convinced me. What’s next?

The first step is to get in touch with your local brain bank to find out what’s involved.

After discussing with your family or friends and giving informed consent, prospective brain donors will sign up to a program.

Some donor programs are associated with referral clinics for specific diseases such as Parkinson’s disease or motor neuron disease motor neuron disease. In this case, patients will be made aware of brain donation by their specialist and will be contacted by the bank if they give permission.

The brain bank follow donor’s lifestyle and medical history using annual questionnaires and optional additional studies.

We need this information years before you die to build a more complete picture of the person behind the brain, and any issues that may relate to brain disease.

Thank you

Australia’s brain banks have already contributed to many findings, including research into Alzheimer’s disease, alcohol addiction, young-onset dementia and Parkinson’s disease.

So thank you for considering donating your brain to science so we can have a chance of learning more.

Greg Sutherland is the Director of the New South Wales Brain Research Tissue Centre that currently receives funding from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (USA; R28AA012725)

– ref. How do I donate my brain to science? – https://theconversation.com/how-do-i-donate-my-brain-to-science-177322

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Sydes, Honorary Senior Fellow, Melbourne Law Masters, The University of Melbourne

Australia’s freshly elected parliament is hashing out the details of Labor’s Climate Change Bill, which would enshrine an emissions reduction target into federal law. The Greens have the numbers to block the bill in the Senate, and are likely to seek concessions from Labor in return for their support.

Labor has already ruled out the demand to ban new coal and gas projects, saying this would devastate the economy. But Labor did not rule out another Greens policy: introducing a “climate trigger” into Australia’s environment law.

Under that proposal, future projects – such as a new mine or high-emissions industrial plant – would be assessed on the climate harms they’d potentially cause.

Let’s take a closer look at how the climate trigger would work, what it would achieve and, crucially, how it could help Australia reduce emissions.

What is the climate trigger?

To understand the proposed climate trigger, we should first outline the federal government’s role in assessing and approving new projects under Australia’s national environment law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

The government’s role under the act is to assess the impacts of proposed projects on “matters of national environmental significance”. There are nine designated matters, including threatened species, wetlands of international significance and world heritage sites.

If a project is likely to have a significant impact on one of these matters, then the environmental impact assessment and approval scheme is “triggered”.

Surprisingly for legislation intended to protect the environment, climate change is not presently designated as a matter of national environmental significance. This means it’s considered only indirectly, such as how climate change impacts might harm a protected wetland or a threatened species.

The proposed climate trigger would add climate change to the list, and allow it to be dealt with head on.

In practice, this means the impacts of a proposed project on the climate would be thoroughly assessed, and then weighed in the environment minister’s final decision on whether the proposal should be approved.

Past climate trigger proposals

The climate trigger is not a new idea. In fact, when the EPBC Act was first introduced in 1999, the then environment minister sought to develop a greenhouse gas trigger. Nothing eventuated from that commitment.

In 2005, Anthony Albanese, then the shadow environment minister, introduced the Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change (Climate Change Trigger) Bill, but this also did not proceed.

And in 2020, the Greens introduced a climate trigger bill in the Senate which lapsed with the last parliament. The Greens’ new bill will presumably be based on this one.

Meanwhile, a major independent review of the EPBC Act in 2020 by Professor Graeme Samuel did not support a climate trigger on the basis that reducing emissions is best left to other policies and programs.

Professor Samuel did, however, say new projects should fully disclose all potential emissions as part of the assessment process. He did not elaborate on how this should be treated in approval decisions.

What could it achieve?

The climate trigger could be defined in terms of an emissions threshold, or by reference to emissions intensive activities, or by some combination of these. It could, for example, require any development likely to produce over 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year to be assessed under the act.

Coal mining and gas extraction are significant contributors to Australia’s domestic emissions.

Read more:
Australia’s net-zero plan fails to tackle our biggest contribution to climate change: fossil fuel exports

Approving more of these projects will not only make it harder for Australia to meet its climate targets, but also, is completely contrary to the goals of the Paris Agreement. Limiting global warming to 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels this century means putting a stop to new coal and gas.

Australia is the third largest exporter of fossil fuels, behind Russia and Saudi Arabia. Our fossil fuel exports account for more than double our direct emissions. Labor’s emissions reduction targets do not address these downstream emissions.

A climate trigger would see Australia stepping up to take some responsibility for the total emissions from such fossil fuel export projects, including the emissions from burning coal and gas overseas.

Even if new fossil fuel projects are given the go ahead, requiring proponents to disclose emissions through the assessment process would make it possible to regulate these emissions using conditions on approvals.

This would help to address significant problems with new mine proponents underestimating their emissions.

Depending on how it’s framed, a climate trigger could also play a role in regulating emissions from other sources, such as land clearing.

Why we should be cautious

There are two reasons to be cautious about what a new climate trigger might achieve.

First, a climate trigger would require only projects which trigger the act to be assessed and a decision made on approval. This is well short of demands by Greens and others to halt new fossil fuel extraction projects.

We could expect that the climate trigger would make proponents think carefully about emissions before submitting their projects for approval. But the trigger would not of itself prevent new fossil fuel projects from being proposed and approved.

If the desired result is to stop new coal and gas, there are better and more direct ways to legislate for this result.

Read more:
1 in 5 fossil fuel projects overshoot their original estimations for emissions. Why are there such significant errors?

Second, the EPBC Act is widely acknowledged as failing to protect matters of national environmental significance. It has failed to protect threatened species, world heritage sites and internationally recognised wetlands – all of which have been “triggers” under the legislation since 1999.

Adding a new climate trigger to an already failing EPBC Act may not achieve very much without additional reforms.

This includes implementing national environmental standards, as recommended by Professor Samuel, and introducing a national Environment Protection Agency to enforce the act, as promised by the Albanese government.

Arguably, proposals for a climate trigger should be dealt with as part of this larger overhaul of the act.

Read more:
Labor has introduced its controversial climate bill to parliament. Here’s how to give it real teeth

Still, a climate trigger could bring some real teeth to the government’s proposed Climate Change Act, whether introduced as a stand alone amendment to the EPBC Act or as part of wider reforms expected next year.

Perhaps most importantly, a climate trigger would also be a step toward Australia recognising the global harm caused by fossil fuels extracted in Australia, and the need to take greater responsibility for deciding whether these projects should be allowed to proceed.

Brendan Sydes curently consults to Birdlife Australia on biodiversity policy, and has previously worked for the Australian Conservation Foundation as a Biodviersity Policy Adviser. Up until June 2020 he was CEO of not-for-profit environmental law practice, Envrionmental Justice Australia.

Laura Schuijers previously received funding from the Australian Research Council to conduct research into this issue as part of her doctoral thesis.

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

– ref. The Greens’ climate trigger policy could become law. Experts explain how it could help cut emissions – and why we should be cautious – https://theconversation.com/the-greens-climate-trigger-policy-could-become-law-experts-explain-how-it-could-help-cut-emissions-and-why-we-should-be-cautious-187998

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phoebe Macrossan, Lecturer in Screen Media, University of the Sunshine Coast

As Rolling Stone wrote last month, “for at least the past decade, Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter has been the world’s greatest living entertainer.”

The African-American pop star has reached single-name fame status like other mega pop stars Madonna, Cher, Britney and Adele.

Her long-standing and extremely successful career within girl group Destiny’s Child (1990-2006) and as a solo artist (2003-present) has been filled with pop cultural “moments” and record-breaking releases.

As I have written elsewhere, Beyoncé’s stardom is an interesting form of world-building. World-building, or “worlding”, is the ongoing construction and maintenance of stardom by creating an intimate, identifiable, holistic world around the star – not just a singular star image.

The audience is in on Beyoncé’s world-building the same way we watch a film. We know it is “made-up” but we want to believe it’s real – or at least go along with it for the ride.

Read more:
10 years of Beyoncé: A decade ‘causing all this conversation’

Beyoncé World

Our obsession with celebrity is centred around the “search” for the “authentic” person behind the manufactured persona in pop videos.

The Beyoncé (2013) visual album was a sign of the increasing personal intimacy of Beyoncé’s stardom, and her transition to the active creation and ownership of an intimate, identifiable and holistic world.

“Beyoncé World” is created and maintained primarily through Beyoncé’s music videos and visual albums, but also across her concerts, performances and public appearances, and her social media accounts and website.

Other contemporary pop stars construct an “authentic” star image through sharing intimate details of their lives via social media or semi-autobiographical albums and music videos.

But Beyonce’s social media posts are notoriously curated and tight-lipped about her private life.

She rarely posts captions and favours fashion photoshoot images of herself rather than “authentic” makeup free selfies (although she wrote a long caption to launch the Renaissance album – a rarity).

Lemonade
(2016) was Beyoncé’s most personal album. It addressed the infidelities of her husband, rapper and music mogul Jay-Z, as well as her own personal outrage at racial injustices in the United States.

Beyoncé World is not the messy, no-makeup selfies or confession videos of other stars. It is a more curated, high fashion, high art, high concept world for fans to participate in.

Read more:
Black Madonna: Beyoncé projects positive image of ‘good’ motherhood

Taking care of the Beyhive

Beyoncé’s work always makes a splash but her seventh solo album, Renaissance, leaked online 36 hours before its scheduled release. Fans in France were able to buy CD versions two days before its scheduled release.

But Beyoncé has such a loyal fanbase some of her die-hard fans (called the “Beyhive”) thought it was blasphemous to listen earlier than Queen B had intended, posting instructions on social media to wait it out.

If it’s Beyoncé’s world, you need to play by Beyoncé’s rules, and the Beyhive are a key cornerstone of maintaining these rules.

Being “in the know” about specific visual and musical references the star makes (in every single output) helps fans enter into the world-building process – and they certainly want to interpret her art the way she intended it.

Her past two solo albums were both surprises: the internet-breaking digital drop Beyoncé, and the politically charged celebration of Black women in Lemonade. (She also directed, wrote and produced the film/visual album and celebration of Black Excellence, Black is King in 2020, to accompany The Lion King remake.)

Renaissance has received more of a traditional marketing buildup.

The lead single, Break My Soul, was released on June 21, and the full tracklist and album cover were posted on her Instagram before the album’s release.

While she has been teasing the album’s imagery for months, some were hoping for a visual album – or a music video for every song on the album – like her two previous solo releases.

Beyoncé has yet to release any music videos for Renaissance, other than lyric-only videos. This either means the star is about to release a Renaissance visual album or has bigger plans for a longer music film project.

Read more:
Beyoncé’s Lemonade: tell all or fizzy, soap-operatic art object?

Renaissance woman

Renaissance is Beyoncé’s first solo album in more than five years, and her first fully dance album.

A large part of her success is due to her ability to constantly reinvent herself and her music, borrowing from all genres and collaborating with a range of hit-makers and unusual musical artists.

Renaissance covers numerous genres, referencing many musical touchstones and pays an important homage to African-American dance music creators and LGBTQI+ dancehall culture.

The album includes nods to 1970s disco queen Donna Summer and New Orleans bounce-music icon Big Freedia, as well as a collaboration with Grace Jones on the track Move.

Renaissance traverses disco, funk, techno, hip-hop, house, dancehall, Afrobeats and ballroom. Aside from Jones, Beyoncé has worked with a wide range of collaborators including Drake, The-Dream, Honey Dijon, Skrillex, Syd, Hit-Boy, Mike Dean and A.G. Cook, among others.

While Renaissance celebrates diversity in dance music, the star has been called out for using an ableist slur in the song Heated, and has now announced she will remove the lyric. It might be Beyonce’s world, but that doesn’t mean she won’t listen to her fans.

Lemonade came out during a time of great political upheaval in America and directly addressed the Black Lives Matter movement. Renaissance is less overtly political and more a celebration of a post-pandemic opportunity to hit the dance floor. She hopes it inspires fans to “release the wiggle”.

Beyoncé World is not just created by the star and her team, but also by fans connecting the dots between her social media, her website, Renaissance and their own real world.

They’ll know not to take this album too seriously, and to imagine themselves on the dancefloor with Queen B.

Phoebe Macrossan 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. It’s Beyoncé’s world. We’re just living in it – https://theconversation.com/its-beyonces-world-were-just-living-in-it-185603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jaya Dantas, Deputy Chair, Academic Board; Dean International, Faculty of Health Sciences and Professor of International Health, Curtin University

On July 23, World Health Organisation Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus took the unprecedented step and declared the monkeypox outbreak a “public health emergency of international concern” – the highest global alert level for a disease outbreak.

Following this and with 45 cases in Australia, Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly declared last week that monkeypox is now a “communicable disease incident of national significance”.

So what is monkeypox? And who’s eligible for a vaccine?

Most cases in the current global outbreak are occurring among men who have sex with men. How can this group and others who are at risk protect themselves?

What is monkeypox?

Monkeypox is not a new disease, it was found in the late 1950s in lab primates in Denmark, and was first diagnosed in humans in an infant in the 1970s in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

In the past, monkeypox has mainly been transmitted from infected animals to humans (it is a zoonotic disease), and has been endemic to West and Central Africa. Transmission can occur through contact with infected animals including rodents, mice, rats, squirrels, monkeys and other primates.

But in this outbreak we’re seeing human-to-human transmission.

There are two distinct strains of monkeypox. These are the Central African and the West African types, the latter of which is believed to be one linked to the current global outbreak.

According to US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data, 23,620 cases have been reported since May in 80 countries, with 73 countries that had no previous reported monkeypox cases.

There have been at least seven deaths.

Most of the cases in Australia have been in New South Wales and Victoria, among returned travellers and men who have sex with men, and in the age group 21-40 years.

The declaration that monkeypox is now a disease of national significance means the outbreak requires national policies, interventions and public health messaging, with the deployment of more resources to assist affected areas and groups most at risk.

Symptoms and transmission

The incubation period – the time taken to develop the disease after exposure to the virus – is usually around 6-13 days.

Transmission generally requires close contact with an infected person. It can be transmitted via respiratory droplets.

It can also be transmitted through direct contact with body fluids or the rash (“lesions”), often through skin-on-skin contact, or indirect contact such as through contaminated clothing or bedding.

Transmission may occur from people without symptoms, or with barely-detectable symptoms.

Symptoms are similar to smallpox, though less severe. They can include:

• fever
• headache
• aches
• fatigue
• sweats and chills
• cough and sore throat
• a rash that can look like blisters or pimples, which can be painful. These “lesions” typically go through several stages before eventually falling off.

The CDC says most people who get the virus will develop the rash.

A study in the British Medical Journal published last week also found 88% of 197 people with monkeypox in London had lesions on their genitals or anus.

Symptoms generally last between two and four weeks, and the disease usually resolves on its own. Most adults with a healthy immune system won’t have severe illness and won’t experience long-term harmful effects.

There’s no specific treatment for monkeypox yet. People with the infection should be given supportive treatment and light dressings on the rash, depending on the symptoms. Antivirals such as “tecovirimat” have been made available to patients in some countries who have or are at high risk of severe disease, such as being immunocompromised.

People with the infection should isolate immediately for the duration of the illness – usually two to four weeks, until the lesions heal.

Higher risk groups

Monkeypox can affect anyone. But men who have sex with men are at higher risk at the moment. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said 98% of cases so far are among men who have sex with men.

It’s important we provide as much information about the virus as possible, and it’s absolutely crucial we do this in a way that is not stigmatising.

This outbreak is seeing cases spread via close prolonged contact from sexual activity in the LGBTIQ+ group. Many from this group want to take proactive actions to help their community.

Specific actions governments can take include:

• prioritising vaccines as a matter of urgency for those most at risk
• targeting public health messaging so the LGBTIQ+ community can make informed decisions.

Actions individuals can take include:

• maintaining contact details of sexual partners in case of need to follow up
• avoiding sex if you have a rash until you get tested
• considering avoiding skin to skin contact during large gatherings
• if diagnosed with monkeypox, avoiding close physical contact, including sexual contact, with other people for the duration of the illness.

The CDC says condoms may help lower the risk of spread if the lesions are confined to the genital and/or anal region, but they’re likely not enough to prevent transmission on their own.

Read more:
Monkeypox: ‘This is an entirely new spread of the disease’

Who should have the vaccine?

Australia has secured small supplies of two smallpox vaccines, which provide protection against monkeypox.

The vaccine advisory body, the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI), has recommended key risk groups be administered the vaccines. They include:

• those identified as a high risk monkeypox contact in the past 14 days
• men who have sex with men who are at high risk of exposure. This includes those living with HIV, or with a recent history of a high number of sexual partners or group sex
• sex workers, with clients in high-risk categories
• and anyone in the risk categories planning travel to a country experiencing a significant outbreak, with vaccination recommended four to six weeks prior to leaving.

ATAGI has stated that vaccination within four days of exposure to someone who’s infectious with monkeypox will provide the highest chance of preventing disease.

Avoiding close contact with people who have the infection can help prevent transmission. Monkeypox doesn’t spread as easily as the coronavirus and can be kept under control if we are cautious.

The need for vaccine equity and global health leadership

We can’t repeat the “vaccine nationalism” we’ve seen during COVID with rich countries hoarding vaccine doses, as this will unjustly prolong the outbreak.

Currently, according to The Lancet medical journal, a smallpox vaccine sold as “Jynneos” in the US costs around US$100 a dose. The WHO has called on countries and manufacturers to ensure the vaccines, as well as diagnostics and therapeutics, are made available “at reasonable cost” where most needed.

Thus we have major political and policy challenges ahead and will need strong global health leadership going forward.

Read more:
Why ‘vaccine nationalism’ could doom plan for global access to a COVID-19 vaccine

Jaya Dantas is Professor of International Health in the Curtin School of Population Health where she teaches a core unit in the Masters in Public Health and Master of Sexology course and leads a program of research in refugee and migrant health. She is currently lead CI on grants funded by Healthway and CI on a DISER grant. Jaya is the International Health SIG Convenor of the Public Health Association of Australia, has been appointed to the Global Gender Equality in Health Leadership Committee of Women in Global Health, Australia and is on the Editorial Advisory Group of the Medical Journal of Australia. She has lived experience of infectious diseases in India and Africa.

– ref. Monkeypox in Australia: should you be worried? And who can get the vaccine? – https://theconversation.com/monkeypox-in-australia-should-you-be-worried-and-who-can-get-the-vaccine-187917

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Dempsey, Senior lecturer, University of Canterbury

In its plan to retool the economy, the New Zealand government highlighted green hydrogen as a game-changing fuel. It can indeed be used to make climate-friendly fertilisers and steel or to power some modes of transport that aren’t suited to batteries.

But to provide a buffer against the volatility of overseas markets, Aotearoa would need to be as energy independent as possible. Ideally, this would mean consuming only green hydrogen produced here, using abundant renewable hydro, wind and solar resources.

A hydrogen economy is good in theory, but to make the switch at the scale of Aotearoa’s climate ambitions would require about 150 petajoules of hydrogen each year, according to one estimate. That’s about a quarter of our current energy use.

Hydrogen is produced in a process known as hydrolysis – the splitting of water into hydrogen and oxygen gas, using electricity. To produce a quarter of Aotearoa’s energy consumption, hydrolysis would consume an enormous amount of water, about 13 million tonnes each year, the equivalent of a month’s worth of Auckland’s water demand.

This raises both cultural and technical issues, which we must address before embarking on a transition to hydrogen as a green fuel.

Read more:
Breakthrough in gas separation and storage could fast-track shift to green hydrogen and significantly cut global energy use

Consuming water has cultural implications

Freshwater has enormous significance to iwi and hapū. However, their views on hydrolysis as a consumptive use of water are not widely understood. If cultural complexity is ignored, hydrogen infrastructure or processes may fail to achieve an appropriate fit within Aotearoa New Zealand society and the technology could be orphaned.

Instead, we could start addressing this early through wānanga with representatives from a wide range of potentially affected iwi. Recognising and addressing cultural concerns at the outset will allow Māori to shape how the technology is developed and to share in the economic benefits of a hydrogen economy. The intention is to better understand how green hydrogen technologies and infrastructure could belong in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Supposing we are willing and able to make this vast quantity of hydrogen, our experience with other fuels suggests we would need about a month’s worth in storage at any given time. Storage helps to smooth fluctuating market demand, takes advantage of seasonal excess of renewables (in very windy, very sunny weeks) and provides emergency reserves for “dry year” crises.

Storing hydrogen underground

Unfortunately, hydrogen can’t be stored as a liquid except in specialised containers that keep it at extremely low temperatures. Like a freezer, this is always consuming energy.

Hydrogen could be kept in special high-pressure tanks, but we would need more of these tanks than we have people in New Zealand. These tanks would be costly, cover large tracts of productive land and would be prone to damage by natural hazards. Where would they all go?

Scientists have been looking at the possibility of storing hydrogen underground, in great caverns carved in salt or in old oil and gas fields.

We already do this with natural gas in Taranaki. When it’s not needed, gas is injected into an old field called Ahuroa and then extracted as required. Underground storage of gas (methane) is common practice, providing energy resilience. For example, given the disruptions caused by the war in Ukraine, Germany is accelerating gas storage in geologic reservoirs in time for winter.

Read more:
Green hydrogen is coming – and these Australian regions are well placed to build our new export industry

We have recently shown there may be enough space in other Taranaki rock reservoirs to store hydrogen underground. But it won’t be easy.

We know the gas can react with certain kinds of rock. It can even be a meal for hungry microbes. Both these processes would consume a valuable fuel. But predicting whether they will happen requires special laboratory experiments that can replicate the extreme pressure and temperature three kilometres below ground.

We are also still learning how to predict how hydrogen will move underground. We know that some of the injected gas will never come back out. This is the “cushion” that acts a bit like a spring that pushes the other hydrogen back to the surface.

Some hydrogen may also escape into the atmosphere through small cracks in the rock. We’ll need to know how much, set up surveillance to watch for it and consider its effect on the climate.

These are just a few of the challenges posed by underground storage of hydrogen. But our experience with natural gas storage gives us confidence we can manage them with the right research and planning.

Read more:
Don’t rush into a hydrogen economy until we know all the risks to our climate

Making it work

New Zealand’s hydrogen future remains uncertain, but work is underway to prepare. Early signs for underground storage of green hydrogen are promising and there’s lots of enthusiasm for it overseas.

But technical feasibility is not enough: any solution must make economic sense and be acceptable to the wider public, particularly tangata whenua.

Proving the feasibility of any new idea takes time. We need to develop, sometimes fail, refine and then find success. But with each new extreme weather event, its clear we don’t have a lot of time. In this new era of adaptation, governments, industry, communities and scientists will need to work more closely than ever.

David Dempsey has previously received funding to research underground storage of hydrogen in Taranaki.

Andy Nicol has previously received funding to research underground storage of hydrogen in Taranaki.

Kēpa Morgan works for Mahi Maioro Professionals Limited.

Ludmila Adam has previously received funding to research hydrogen geostorage.

– ref. New Zealand is touting a green hydrogen economy, but it will face big environmental and cultural hurdles – https://theconversation.com/new-zealand-is-touting-a-green-hydrogen-economy-but-it-will-face-big-environmental-and-cultural-hurdles-187521

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

The deaths of more than 50 Ukrainian prisoners of war last week is not only an apparent war crime, but also another sign the situation is becoming a race to the bottom when it comes to international law and conventions.

Ukraine and Russia have blamed each other for the attack on the prison in Russian-occupied Donetsk. Ukraine also claims prisoners were being tortured and murdered there. Russia’s British embassy later posted on Twitter that Ukrainian Azov battalion soldiers deserved a “humiliating death” by hanging.

But amid the accusations and counter-accusations of atrocities being committed against prisoners of war, some simple facts are easily overlooked: rules already exist to prevent such horrors, and they apply in Ukraine.

Prisoners of war are explicitly covered by the Third Geneva Convention, drawn up in 1949 to replace the old Prisoners of War Convention of 1929 after the awful lessons of the second world war.

Both Russia and Ukraine are signatories, meaning they have promised to respect it in all circumstances. It’s important to note this is not the protocol of the Geneva Conventions Russian President Vladimir Putin recently quit.

Fog of war

Restraint during a war isn’t easy, but it is essential nonetheless. As well as respecting basic humanity and honour, the rules – which have operated for over 100 years – help combatants build the confidence to eventually find peace.

In the sense that it helps avoid escalating revenge and reprisal for attacks against the defenceless, respect for prisoners of war is also a pragmatic act of self-interest.

Adherence in Ukraine to the fundamental conditions of the Geneva Convention has been hard to gauge, however. Apart from occasional exchanges of prisoners of war, exactly how many prisoners have been taken by each side, and where they are held, remains largely unknown.

Read more:
Russia says peace in Ukraine will be ‘on our terms’ – but what can the West accept and at what cost?

While the Red Cross has been able to visit some POWs and other detainees, it has not been granted access to visit them all. The problem is compounded by claims that some combatants taken on the battlefield are mercenaries and therefore do not count as prisoners of war, meaning they may be executed.

Further complicating things is that both sides are promising to put prisoners on trial for war crimes. With Russia holding over 1,100 Ukrainian prisoners and Ukraine making over 15,000 allegations of war crimes, both parties need to publicly re-pledge to the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war before things escalate.

Rights of the prisoner

The basic rules governing the treatment of prisoners of war are simple enough to state:

• they must be taken prisoner if they surrender unconditionally, cannot be executed if they have stopped fighting, and must not be subjected to reprisals, mutilation or torture

• they may be questioned (name, rank and serial number) but must be humanely treated and protected against acts of violence or intimidation, and against insults and public curiosity

• they must be evacuated as soon as possible after capture to a safe area outside the combat zone, and can’t be used or positioned to deter military operations by their own side

• the location of prisoner-of-war camps should be shared, and the camps clearly marked to be visible from the air, so they are not bombed by mistake

• prisoners’ whereabouts should be shared via a central tracing agency, and they must be allowed to send and receive letters.

Read more:
Ukraine crisis: how do small states like New Zealand respond in an increasingly lawless world?

Beyond these rules, representatives from third-party countries or the Red Cross should be permitted to visit and interview (without witnesses) prisoners and their legal representatives.

And any disputes about the application of the convention rules should be resolved through an enquiry by an independent third party.

War trial risks

It’s the handling of war trials in particular that requires most restraint. Although prisoners cannot be tried simply for fighting against their enemy, the Geneva Convention allows trials for grave breaches of the laws of war (such as murder or torture) – and even the death penalty if the domestic law of the detaining power includes it.

And despite judicial safeguards relating to fairness and the rights and means of legal defence, there is still the risk of a tit-for-tat process: one side finds a prisoner guilty, the other side responds in kind.

Read more:
Russia’s blockade could cause mass famine beyond Ukraine – but it’s a crime without a name

The best way through this is to allow the International Criminal Court (already pursuing its own investigations into the situation in Ukraine) to take the lead, giving the process real independence and integrity.

Trouble is, Russia has withdrawn from the International Criminal Court – just another measure of how far the observation of the laws of war has been eroded in Ukraine.

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

– ref. As Russia and Ukraine trade blame for prisoner-of-war deaths, what becomes of the Geneva Convention? – https://theconversation.com/as-russia-and-ukraine-trade-blame-for-prisoner-of-war-deaths-what-becomes-of-the-geneva-convention-187987

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cally Jetta, Course examiner and lecturer; College for First Nations, University of Southern Queensland

Pauline Hanson’s recent dramatic outburst and walkout from parliament as an Acknowledgement of Country was delivered has been condemned as racist and ignorant.

Social media sites reporting this incident have attracted a barrage of negative comments perpetuating misconceptions around Acknowledgement of Country and Welcome to Country. Many clearly do not understand what they are and see them as “special treatment”. Unfortunately, Hanson has been a source of this line of thinking around so-called “special treatment”, as seen in her 1996 maiden speech to parliament.

Such comments reveal an Australian society still burdened with an unfounded resentment and fear of Aboriginal rights and connection to Country.

So, what is an Acknowledgement of Country? How is it different to a Welcome to Country?

Read more:
The courage to feel uncomfortable: what Australians need to learn to achieve real reconciliation

What is an Acknowledgement of Country?

An Acknowledgement of Country is often made at the start of an event to pay respect to First Nations peoples as the Traditional Owners and ongoing custodians of the land.

An Acknowledgement often highlights the unique position of First Nations people in the context of culture and history, and their intimate relationship with the land.

An Acknowledgement does not exclude anyone. Anyone can deliver one. It costs nothing to give or listen to. You lose nothing from a ten second acknowledgement of the Country, language, and people that existed in a place for tens of thousands of years.

An Acknowledgement does not impact on the rights and status of other Australian people.

Read more:
‘Don’t read the comments’: misinformed and malicious comments stifle Indigenous voices

What is a Welcome to Country?

Acknowledgement of Country is different to a Welcome to Country. Crucially, only Traditional Owners can deliver a Welcome to Country.

Traditionally, First Nations people travelling to different Country had to seek permission to enter from the Traditional Owners. If granted, permission was given by way of a Welcome to Country.

Today, inviting an Elder to perform a Welcome is a way to recognise unceded Aboriginal sovereignty of ancestral lands. It’s also a way to honour ancient and continuing First Nations customs.

Wurundjeri Elder Joy Murphy Wandin has described Welcome to Country as practised by her people:

When there was a request to visit Country, the Werrigerri (a young man selected by the Elders of the community) would go on behalf of the community under the voice of the Elder, the Nurungeeta. There would be this negotiation and that could take a long time, it could take months. So that is the background of Welcome to Country. It is not a new thing. It is not because our land was dispossessed; it has nothing to do with that. It is all about respect for our culture and who we are. It is paying respect, especially to our ancestors.

Acknowledgements and Welcomes to Country weren’t invented to divide First Nations and non-Indigenous people.

Although both have been widely revived in recent years, they are traditional protocols. When Aboriginal peoples travel from their own home Country to that of another Aboriginal group, they too acknowledge the traditional custodians.

Similarly, it’s standard practice for a hosting First Nations group to perform a welcome to all visitors – Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike – as a way of being inclusive and welcoming.

In doing this, Aboriginal people are sharing their culture and social protocols and offering the opportunity to feel a deeper connection to the lands you walk upon and visit.

By learning traditional place names, you unlock important information about the character or features of that place.

Read more:
Creating a constitutional Voice – the words that could change Australia

Restoring and maintaining connection to Country

Many Aboriginal people have been removed from Country, or can no longer access it through development, private ownership, farming and mining.

The Stolen Generations and mission era systematically worked to eradicate Aboriginal languages and cultural traditions. For many First Nations peoples, Acknowledgement of Country can help to restore some of this severed connection to Country and identity.

As Professor Mick Dodson explains:

For us, Country is a word for all the values, places, resources, stories, and cultural obligations associated with that area and its features. It describes the entirety of our ancestral domains. While they may all no longer necessarily be the titleholders to land, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are still connected to the Country of their ancestors and most consider themselves the custodians or caretakers of their land.

For some Aboriginal people, Acknowledgement of Country is a constant reminder of the responsibilities of custodians to advocate for the protection of a fragile environment and its cultural heritage.

It reminds us all Aboriginal languages were the first languages spoken in this country. Many are are still spoken. Acknowledgement of Country brings us together and recognises the shared cultural history and landscape we have all inherited.

Joy Murphy Wandin, describes it as:

a very important way of giving Aboriginal people back their place in society, and an opportunity for us to say, “We are real, we are here, and today we welcome you to our land”. It’s paying respect, in a formal sense, and following the traditional custom in a symbolic way.

Understanding what Acknowledgement of Country and Welcome to Country are, and their history and origins can help us recognise the importance and power of continuing these practices.

It’s not about being divisive. It’s about continuing ancient connections to Country, history, and ancestors. It’s a reminder of the responsibility of custodians to the land and its creatures; to protect and look after them.

It’s about honouring and being respectful towards a custom and way of thought much older than the name or concept of “Australia” as a nation state, or any sitting of parliament.

Cally Jetta works for UniSQ. She is a co-founder of the Blackfulla Revolution social media site and current co-admin of ‘Connecting with Country’ Facebook page.

– ref. What is an Acknowledgement of Country and how is it different to a Welcome to Country? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-an-acknowledgement-of-country-and-how-is-it-different-to-a-welcome-to-country-187988

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathon Louth, Industry Adjunct, University of South Australia

At every federal election, there is a moment when election-watchers turn their attention to the seat of Eden-Monaro in New South Wales. Between 1972 and 2013, the party that formed government won Eden-Monaro. It was (and for some, still is) considered a bellwether seat – what happens in Eden-Monaro is representative of the Australian electorate at large.

But there is another election bellwether we never hear about: people experiencing homelessness. Taken as a group, those who experience homelessness are representative of multiple forms of disadvantage and marginalisation.

Yet this is a very diverse group of people. While rough sleepers are the most recognisable, homelessness encompasses living in overcrowded accommodation, couch surfing, and being forced to sleep in cars, caravans or tents.

Read more:
What’s in the name ‘homeless’? How people see themselves and the labels we apply matter

Homelessness in Australia

On any given night, an estimated 116,000 people experience homelessness in Australia. It would be natural to assume that for those affected, finding a home is far more important than voting in an election. Yet the assumption that the need for housing supersedes the need to belong to a political community is not always true. Material needs and the need to belong co-exist and are interdependent.

Beyond the older, single, white male who typifies representations of homelessness, there are disproportionate numbers within this group of unhoused Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, young people, older women, war veterans, ex-prisoners, people who were in out-of-home care as children, people with disabilities, and LGBTIQ+ communities.

People experiencing homelessness commonly also present with trauma, experience of family and domestic violence, and mental health concerns. Compounding this is the current housing crisis, where entirely new groups are entering homelessness service systems.

What our research showed

Working with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) and three specialist homelessness service providers in Adelaide over the 2019 federal election, we undertook one of the largest studies of homelessness and voting habits.

With 164 participants, our research demonstrated that while people experiencing homelessness have much lower enrolment and turnout rates than the general population, this is not due to lower levels of political interest.

In fact, we found political interest among this group was higher in some respects than the general population. As one of the participants in our study said about the act of voting:

That was one of the main things for me, the politicians knowing that okay, we are constituents, members of society, the homeless are actually coming out to vote, that my vote matters.

With a turnout rate in excess of 90% of enrolled voters, Australia has one of the most equitable electoral systems in the world. However, estimating the turnout rate for people experiencing homelessness is considerably more difficult. Data from small sample interactions – unhelpfully – places turnout at between 10 and 67%.

Disillusionment, not apathy

Our study did not attempt to definitively measure the turnout rates of people experiencing homelessness, though about a fifth of our participants reported voting regularly.

Despite the many barriers and disincentives to voting for this group, we found that disillusionment was the real problem. Most participants cared about voting and were interested in elections, but did not vote because they thought it was pointless. As one participant told us:

Why should we vote for someone who doesn’t want us? Who doesn’t want to look after us? […] All of us felt left out, we felt like we’re nothing. And we’re human beings, not animals to walk on just because we’re poor.

Those exit-polled at AEC pop-up booths at specialist homeless services expressed similar sentiments:

I felt sad […] I looked at those pieces of paper and I folded them up and I put them in the box and I walked away in disgust.

Over 80% of our participants said that voting was important yet most of them did not vote, and those who did reported mixed feelings about their electoral participation.

This reflects broader and deeper issues with political representation, especially of people experiencing disadvantage. Voting is how citizens assert their equality with other citizens, make their voices heard, and protect themselves from government neglect. As political scientist Walter Dean Burnham once said: “if you don’t vote, you don’t count”.

Increasing participation

Our study identified numerous ways electoral commissions can improve turnout for those experiencing homelessness. This includes permitting specialist homelessness service providers to be listed as residential addresses. This would allow homelessness service users to enrol and vote in the communities where they have meaningful connections.

We also recommended that any legislative, procedural, or operational changes, such as changes to voter identification requirements or enrolment processes, consider the potential impact on people experiencing homelessness.

However, the disillusionment with the political system felt by many experiencing homelessness is more serious and harder to tackle because it is informal and cultural.

The irony, of course, is that higher levels of electoral participation would make it harder for mainstream parties to ignore the needs, concerns and priorities of the most marginalised.

Being counted matters. We should do everything we can to ensure access to voting, the basic democratic right that protects and enhances all other rights.

This project was funded by the Australian Electoral Commission.

Jonathon Louth is affiliated with Homelessness Australia and is an executive at Centacare Catholic Family Services

Lisa Hill receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a Professor in Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide and Research Chair of the Centre for Public Integrity, an anti-corruption watch-doc.

Veronica Coram receives funding from Centacare Catholic Family Services SA, AnglicareSA and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

– ref. ‘We felt like we’re nothing’: increasing voting among Australians experiencing homelessness – https://theconversation.com/we-felt-like-were-nothing-increasing-voting-among-australians-experiencing-homelessness-187695

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jack Baggaley, Professor Emeritus Physics and Astronomy, University of Canterbury

New Zealand may seem to be under meteor bombardment at the moment. After a huge meteor exploded above the sea near Wellington on July 7, creating a sonic boom that could be heard across the bottom of the South Island, a smaller fireball was captured two weeks later above Canterbury.

Fireballs Aotearoa, a collaboration between astronomers and citizen scientists which aims to recover freshly fallen meteorites, has received a lot of questions about these events. One of the most frequent is about the bright green colour, and whether it is the same green produced by auroras.

Green fireballs have been reported and filmed in New Zealand regularly. Bright meteors often signal the arrival of a chunk of asteroid, which can be anywhere between a few centimetres to a metre in diameter when it comes crashing through the atmosphere.

Some of these asteroids contain nickel and iron and they hit the atmosphere at speeds of up to 60km per second. This releases an enormous amount of heat very quickly, and the vapourised iron and nickel radiate green light.

But is this the same as the bright green of an aurora? For the most recent meteor, the answer is mainly no, but it’s actually not that simple.

À lire aussi :
Equivalent to 1,800 tonnes of TNT: what we now know about the meteor that lit up the daytime sky above New Zealand

The colours of a meteor trail

The green glow of the aurora is caused by oxygen ions in the upper atmosphere, created by collisions between atmospheric oxygen molecules and particles ejected by the sun.

These oxygen ions recombine with electrons to produce oxygen atoms, but the electrons can persist in an excited state for several seconds. In an energy transition known as “forbidden” because it does not obey the usual quantum rules, they then radiate the auroral green light at 557nm wavelength.

A meteor can also shine by this route, but only if it’s extremely fast. Very fast meteors heat up in the thin atmosphere above 100km where auroras form.

À lire aussi :
Are the northern lights caused by ‘particles from the Sun’? Not exactly

If you want to see a green auroral wake from a meteor, watch out for the Perseid meteor shower, which has now started and will peak on August 13 in the southern hemisphere.

Also arriving at about 60km per second, the Perseids are extremely fast bits of the comet Swift-Tuttle. Some Perseids trail a beautiful, glowing and distinctly green wake behind them, particularly at the start of their path.

Once the Canterbury meteor hit on July 22, the capricious winds of the upper atmosphere twisted the gently glowing trail, resulting in a pale yellow glow towards the end (as seen in the GIF below, also recorded by Greg Price for an earlier meteor). This is caused by sodium atoms being continually excited in a catalytic reaction involving ozone.

Are we being bombarded by meteors?

Yes and no. The arrival of big, booming green meteors and the dropping of meteorites isn’t rare in New Zealand, but it is rare to recover the rock. Fireballs Aotearoa is working to improve the recovery rate.

In an average year, perhaps four meteorites hit New Zealand. We’re encouraging citizen scientists to build their own meteor camera systems so they can catch these events.

By comparing the meteor against the starry background and triangulating images caught by multiple cameras, we can pin down the meteor’s position in the atmosphere to within tens of metres.

Not only does that help us find the rock, but it tells us what the pre-impact orbit of the meteoroid was, which in turn tells us which part of the solar system it came from. This is a rather efficient way of sampling the solar system without ever having to launch a space mission.

Fireballs Aotearoa is rapidly populating Otago with meteor cameras and there are half a dozen more in other parts of the South Island. The North Island isn’t well covered yet, and we’re keen for more people (in either island) to build or buy a meteor camera and keep it pointed at the sky.

Then next time a bright meteor explodes with a boom above New Zealand, we may be able to pick up the meteorite and do some good science with it.

Many thanks for the input from Jim Rowe of the UK Fireball Alliance, and Greg Price who photographed the July 22 meteor and the persistent train.

William Jack Baggaley receives funding from University of Canterbury.

– ref. Meteors seem to be raining down on New Zealand, but why are some bright green? – https://theconversation.com/meteors-seem-to-be-raining-down-on-new-zealand-but-why-are-some-bright-green-187836

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vu Lam, Visiting Fellow in International Relations, Australian National University

Australia faces many global and regional challenges – the human and economic toll of the pandemic, the rippling effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, troubled relations with Pacific Island countries. But the most consequential of all is US–China rivalry. With the not-so-peaceful rise of China and the waning of American supremacy, Australia has been walking a tightrope, and for the past couple of years the balancing act has not been entirely successful.

The change of government is a good time to discuss Australia’s top foreign policy priorities and how to deal with them. Revisiting the “middle power” concept – what it means and how it works – can help clarify how Australia can better handle these challenging times.

Australia as a middle power

Although not everyone agrees about what defines a middle power, Australia is consistently considered to be among them, as measured by material capabilities, international behaviour and/or self-identity. Even if we define middle powers according to the outcomes rather than the intent of their actions, Australia has been a typical, if not quintessential, middle power. The Lowy Institute Asian Power Index confirms that much.

The most frequently named middle powers have shown a strong commitment to seeking multilateral and cooperative solutions to global and regional issues (with emerging middle powers more focused on their regions).

This is a rational choice, not least because these nations have neither the sheer material power nor the “soft power” afforded to great powers.

Multilateral diplomacy works well for middle powers. Separately, they are vulnerable to great power rivalry; together, they can have a more significant impact on the international system.

Strategic ambiguity (as opposed to blind loyalty to certain powers or groupings) also works well for middle powers. Taking sides can increase the risk for smaller states in a conflict between great powers. China has certainly noticed what it calls a “cold war mentality” in relation to Australia’s increasingly close ties to the US.

What went wrong

No matter what is defined as “the national interest” by the government of the day, Australia has two enduring interests: a security interest aligned with the west and an economic interest increasingly aligned with the east.

The defence alliance with the US is vital to Australia’s national security. But China continues to be Australia’s largest trade partner, with Asia accounting for 65% of Australian’s two-way trade in 2021.

This is why, despite all its political and security concerns, Australia has traditionally sought to maintain a balance between its strong economic relationship with China and its defence alliance with the US. In return, China expressed its appreciation at times when Australia acted independently of the United States. The policy of strategic ambiguity appears to have worked in Australia’s favour when it came to Taiwan and other issues extremely sensitive to China.

But Australia–China ties have hit a rough patch recently. The starting point was China’s provocative activities in the South China Sea and the global impact of its Belt and Road Initiative. That friction was compounded by Australia’s eager embrace of the United States’ vision for the Indo-Pacific.

China has doubled down on its economic and diplomatic coercion since at least 2017. More recently, in response to the Morrison government’s call for an independent investigation into the origin of COVID-19, it has imposed sanctions on many Australian exports.

In response, Australia further cemented its alliance with the US. It helped revive the Quad grouping with India, Japan and the US in 2017, and joined AUKUS, the Australia–UK–US enhanced strategic partnership, in 2021.

The problems multiply

While the economic impact of China’s sanctions has been mild in the short term, there is no telling the future. The disruption of global supply chains due to COVID-19 and now the Russian invasion of Ukraine highlights China’s dominant role in business-to-business trade.

Not only has the prolonged war in Ukraine caused a worldwide cost-of-living crisis, but it also showcases the vulnerability of smaller states and the further decline of the US-led world order. Putting all eggs in one basket may not be a wise choice for Australia.

Besides the China problem, Australian relations with Pacific Island countries have seen better days. Among the reasons for the deterioration are Australia’s reluctance to join forces to mitigate climate change, and its transactional approach to bilateral relations with neighbours.

Australia’s growing defence reliance on the US also polarises key partners in Southeast Asia. Regional powers like Vietnam and Indonesia are vying for multilateralism and cautious about antagonising China. Probably not helpful was the previous government’s scepticism about international organisations together with a longer-term decline in resources for engagement, evidenced by the fact that funding for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has declined over the past three decades.

The way forward

To deal with these challenges, Australia needs a (re-)balancing act based on bilateral and multilateral diplomacy involving a wider pool of key stakeholders in the Indo-Pacific.

Less provocative rhetoric and efforts to identify mutual interests can help de-escalate the tension with China. Diplomacy should be brought back into the forefront, as the new government has sought to do.

Of course, a complete reset of China–Australia ties is unlikely given deep-seated human rights and national security concerns. But the American alliance doesn’t have to come at the cost of derailing trade relations with China. To reduce trade dependence on China, meanwhile, Australia should strengthen relations with India, ASEAN and other trading partners.

Read more:
Beyond boats, beef and Bali: Albanese’s unfinished business with Indonesia

To that end, Australia must show Asia and the Pacific that it is a responsible and reliable partner, a “good international citizen”. Expanding development aid, education programs, cultural exchanges and other public diplomacy initiatives can help a great deal. “Climate change” is a common concern among these partners, and should be at the centre of the discussion.

Diplomacy is a long game. It is harder to mend relationships than to break them. It may take a while for Australia to see how diplomacy can help, but middle power diplomacy definitely serves Australia’s national interest.

Vu Lam 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. Can Australia recapture the spirit of middle power diplomacy? – https://theconversation.com/can-australia-recapture-the-spirit-of-middle-power-diplomacy-187990

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Mamo, John Curtin Distinguished Professor of Health Sciences, Director, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University

Alzheimer’s disease is the most prevalent form of dementia and, with a rapidly ageing global population, it is fuelling unprecedented demand for costly patient care. There have been an estimated 400 clinical studies since the first Alzheimer’s drug trial in 1987.

The demand for treatment solutions however, is not without significant risk. There have been recent allegations that research underpinning widely held understandings of what causes Alzheimer’s may be fraudulent. The impact of this on clinical trials is a potentially huge blow for people living with Alzheimer’s and their carers.

In this case, it might be a stretch to say all Alzheimer’s research is now compromised. But the allegations can prompt us to interrogate whether the governing bodies of research and drug approvals are truly effective.

A potentially flawed hypothesis

The concerns of possible Alzheimer’s research fraud follow findings by neurologist and physician Matthew Schrag, detailed in the journal Science.

Schrag wrote that an ongoing Alzheimer’s trial investigating the experimental drug simufilam was based on manipulated images published by scientists years earlier. If true, then volunteer patients to drug trials, including the simufilam studies, may be facing unnecessary health risks associated with experimental treatment – likely with no hope of clinical benefit.

Moreover, years of drug development costing tens of millions of dollars might have been wasted. The fundamental premise of what causes brain cell death in Alzheimer’s and by extension, what type of drugs are needed to be developed for treatment, may now need reconsideration.

Some contemporary Alzheimer’s clinical trials are based on a now potentially flawed hypothesis: that brain cell death is triggered by the early formation in the fluid that bathes the brain, of small clumps of protein called amyloid-oligomers.

One highly influential and highly cited study is at the centre of the current controversy. The authors claimed mouse models of Alzheimer’s showed memory impairment was associated with the accumulation of amyloid-oligomers. Schrag found compelling evidence the image presented in the 2006 paper may have been modified.

Read more:
What causes Alzheimer’s disease? What we know, don’t know and suspect

What about peer review though?

The internationally adopted peer review system, where discipline experts anonymously review scientific data put forward for publication, usually ensures robust outcomes. This should reassure the public about a study’s scientific claims. However, as the saying goes, science doesn’t lie, but people may.

In this instance, Schrag reviewed scores of images in scientific papers authored by neuroscientist Sylvain Lesné and suggested significant image tampering had consistently occurred. Leading independent image analysts and internationally recognised Alzheimer’s researchers backed Schrag’s claims.

Neuroscientists can rightfully be exceedingly disappointed publications that changed what we know about Alzheimer’s or other diseases now appear based on manipulated data. It potentially brings neuroscientists into disrepute and undermines public confidence.

The allegations have brought trials for two drugs with simfilam under serious scrutiny.

It’s important to stress simufilam has not been approved by any regulatory agency. But a recent United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the drug aducanumab – against expert advice which warned there wasn’t enough evidence to show it worked – has made physicians treating people living with Alzheimer’s extra sensitive.

Read more:
The FDA approved a new drug to treat Alzheimer’s, but Medicare won’t always pay for it – a doctor explains what researchers know about Biogen’s Aduhelm

Other avenues of research

So does news of this potential fraud mean the field of Alzheimer’s research is corrupted? Can we be confident that what is prescribed to patients is safe and works?

We should keep in mind the broader context that publishing incorrect data is rare and research misconduct is even rarer. If incorrect data is identified, restorative practices are usually swift and comprehensive, including publishing “errata” corrections, or possibly, a retraction of findings by scientific journals. Significant penalties are also imposed for deliberate research misconduct.

Also, there are multiple clinical trials considering multiple aspects of the complex Alzheimer’s cascade from what causes the disease to how it affects memory and thinking. These are based on credible scientific findings.

Amyloid-oligomer clearance, which is now being questioned, is only one avenue that scientists have pursued.

The overwhelming majority of scientists are doing the right thing all of the time and if regulatory approval authorities such as our Therapeutic Goods Administration and the FDA continue to sensibly and thoroughly examine the evidence provided for approval, then we can hope for a better future for people living with Alzheimer’s.

Read more:
Dementia: the quality of your night’s sleep can affect symptoms the next day – new research

John Mamo receives funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; the Medical Research Future Fund; the Australian Research Council and Multiple Sclerosis Western Australia.

– ref. What allegations of Alzheimer’s research fraud mean for patients – https://theconversation.com/what-allegations-of-alzheimers-research-fraud-mean-for-patients-187911

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Peel, Director, Melbourne Climate Futures, The University of Melbourne

When the new federal parliament opened last week, a record number of female politicians took their seats: 38% in the House of Representatives and 57% in the Senate. This changing of the guard, with women at the forefront, brings an opportunity to accelerate Australia’s efforts on climate change.

The major parties were virtually silent on the issues of gender equity and climate change throughout the 2022 election campaign. Yet, both issues proved to be turning points for the Australian electorate.

Climate change – one of the key platforms on which the teal candidates successfully campaigned – is central to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s parliamentary agenda. A bill to enshrine a climate target into Australian law was among the first introduced to parliament last week.

Women are on the front line of climate change impacts, which makes our experiences and leadership critical at decision-making tables. From Barbados to Finland, we’ve seen women’s leadership on climate bring fair, innovative and ambitious policies. We hope a new era in Australian climate policy is upon us, too.

À lire aussi :
Domestic violence soars after natural disasters. Preventing it needs to be part of the emergency response

Women and climate change

Women around the world are disproportionately impacted by climate change due to existing systemic inequalities. For example in Africa, when disaster strikes, women may find it more difficult to evacuate their homes as primary caregivers, be unable to read written warnings, or be overlooked in rescue attempts in favour of men.

Australia’s experience is no exception. For example, researchers note sharp surges in domestic violence in the wake of disasters, such as bushfires.

Women also have a critical role to play in achieving ambitious and innovative climate action. As the Women’s Leadership statement at last year’s Glasgow climate summit noted:

Despite increased vulnerability to climate impacts, we recognise that women and girls have been creating and leading innovative climate solutions at all levels.

There are scores of examples of female climate leadership and the benefits that follow when women and girls are afforded the opportunity to take a lead on climate action, throughout recent history.

Notable examples include Christiana Figueres, who steered international climate negotiations to a successful outcome in 2015, with the adoption of the Paris Agreement.

Greta Thunberg’s vigil to sit outside the Swedish Parliament every Friday protesting inadequate climate action inspired a youth climate protest movement.

Other young women such as National Director of Seed Mob Amelia Telford in Australia, and Pacific Climate Warriors founding member Brianna Fruean are at the forefront of First Nations’ climate advocacy efforts.

An OECD Working Paper released this year notes that women’s participation in decision-making often leads to the development of comparatively strong and sustainable climate policies and goals.

Case in point, Finland, under leadership of progressive Prime Minister Sanna Marin, recently committed to one of the most ambitious climate targets, legislating net zero by 2035 and carbon negative by 2040.

Meanwhile, Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley aims to phase out fossil fuels by 2030 and is a passionate advocate for developing nations vulnerable to climate change.

In the private sector, women’s participation is also crucial. The OECD cites evidence that when women occupy at least 30% of board seats they bring about change to climate governance within companies.

An end to Australia’s climate wars?

The Australian government’s sharp focus on climate change is a far cry from the “climate wars” that have been a roadblock to meaningful climate policy in this country for the past decade.

But Australia wasn’t always a problem country in international climate negotiations. At times, we’ve been a climate leader.

À lire aussi :
Climate wars, carbon taxes and toppled leaders: the 30-year history of Australia’s climate response, in brief

Under Julia Gillard’s Labor government, for example, Australia was one of the first countries to introduce a national legislated carbon price in 2011. This changed in 2013, when the newly elected Prime Minister Tony Abbott swiftly repealed this landmark law. Almost a decade of inaction on climate change by the federal government followed.

Signs of progress on climate change began to take shape at the 2019 federal election, when conservative but green Independent MP Zali Steggall ousted Tony Abbott from his long-held seat of Warringah.

The May election then brought a teal wave of female independents, along with gains for Greens and Labor women candidates. These women – such as Kate Chaney, Zoe Daniels, Monique Ryan, Sophie Scamps, Kylea Tink, Zali Steggall and Allegra Spender – are set to play a transformative role in our politics and society.

They campaigned on a climate and integrity platform, calling for stronger 2030 climate targets, increased renewable energy generation and passing a Climate Change Act to legislate and lock in emissions reduction targets.

Labor’s Climate Change Bill was one of the first pieces of legislation to be introduced to the new parliament, and negotiations are now well underway between Labor, the Greens and the female independents to pass it.

À lire aussi :
There’s a smart way to push Labor harder on emissions cuts – without reigniting the climate wars

An early success borne from these negotiations has been establishing that Labor’s current target – 43% emissions reduction by 2030 – is a floor, not a ceiling, for ambition.

Still, as Kate Chaney put it in her first speech, “we need to go further”. This includes addressing questions about accountability for achieving the target, and a mechanism to ensure future governments continue to lift their ambition.

Towards a positive climate future

The success of the teal independents represents the enormous groundswell of anger and frustration felt by many people who might have, in the past, voted for the Coalition government.

This immense transformation points to the need for Australia to place gender equity, climate action and integrity at the centre of our decision-making.

As our national climate laws and policies take shape, we watch with anticipation to see how Albanese will navigate two houses occupied by women with strong, clear climate objectives and unprecedented support from their electorates.

À lire aussi :
Misogyny, male rage and the words men use to describe Greta Thunberg

Annabelle Workman received a Strategic Australian Postgraduate Award scholarship during her PhD. She is affiliated with the Climate and Health Alliance.

Kathryn Bowen has received funding for climate and health research, policy advice and technical assistance from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, WHO, Asian Development Bank, UNDP, UNEP, USAID, GIZ, EU, Future Earth, City of Melbourne, Victorian Department of Health. She is affiliated with the Climate and Health Alliance as a member of the Advisory Board and sits on the Science Committee of the World Adaptation Science Program.

Rebekkah Markey-Towler receives funding for a PhD at the Melbourne Law School from Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Jacqueline Peel ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Women are turning the tide on climate policy worldwide, and may launch a new era for Australia – https://theconversation.com/women-are-turning-the-tide-on-climate-policy-worldwide-and-may-launch-a-new-era-for-australia-187853

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amanda Keddie, Professor, Education, Deakin University

One of Australia’s most prestigious boys’ schools has just announced it will go co-ed.

Last week, Sydney’s Cranbrook School – whose alumni include Kerry and James Packer and Atlassian founder Mike Cannon-Brookes – announced it will be fully co-educational by 2029.

Cranbrook joins a growing list of private schools around the country that are either considering going co-ed or have already done so. These include Newington and Barker College in Sydney, The Armidale School in NSW and Canberra Grammar in the ACT.

Does this mean we are seeing the beginning of the end of all-boys’ schools?

Single sex vs co-ed

Single sex vs co-ed debates have been going for decades in education circles. Which creates better outcomes? Is the answer different for boys than for girls?

It’s also one that many parents have a strong personal view on, perhaps influenced by what they experienced growing up.

À lire aussi :
Single-sex vs coeducational schools: how parents can decide the best option for their child

The short answer is, decades of research into the topic remains inconclusive.

When it comes to students’ academic achievement, the biggest predictor of success is not gender but socio-economic status, whether they live in a rural or remote area, and race (especially if they are Indigenous).

The gender question

When it comes to social outcomes, the debate becomes more complicated.

Some research has criticised single-sex schools for segregating girls and boys, exaggerating differences between them and putting them in opposition to each other. This is not helpful when preparing students for understanding gender diversity and negotiating the world beyond school.

But research has also shown how boys take up much more physical space and teacher time in schools and classrooms than girls. Boys tend to be more disruptive, and require more discipline and attention.

Some research indicates boys may do better in co-ed environments than girls. Education researchers have long-acknowledged that girls can be a positive influence on boys’ behaviours – but to the detriment of their own learning. For example, girls may be asked to sit next to disruptive boys as a calming influence.

This, of course, reproduces inaccurate and tired gender stereotypes of girls as passive and diligent and boys as boisterous and unruly.

What did #MeToo do?

A critical recent shift has also been the #MeToo movement. In the education context, in 2020, former Sydney private school student Chanel Contos started a petition asking for students to share their stories of sexual assault.

In response to Contos’ petition, Cranbrook’s head prefect at the time, Asher Learmonth made a speech, noting, “Our school features heavily […] too heavily […] once again.” Cranbrook was among the schools Contos wanted to see introduce consent education.

À lire aussi :
‘He had hundreds of pictures of me’: tales of sexism from female teachers in elite boys’ schools

The reckoning about gender relations in general and the school petition in particular, has focused much-needed attention on the sexism, misogyny and abuse that can breed in hyper-masculine environments.

All-boys’ schools also tend to be private schools – and this privileged environment can amplify a sense of entitlement. The point is, all or mostly male environments (whether they be in sport, business or politics) are not good for gender equality.

A social shift

What we are seeing here is not a shift in educational theory, but a shift in society’s expectations. As Cranbrook school leaders explained their decision to go co-ed:

Many see the transition as being a necessary and inevitable step forward in the context of a modern society.

But when we’re talking about the shift to co-ed, don’t forget that private schools are also businesses and they have to attract students.

Parents may be more attracted to co-educational private schools given the recent stories about the culture at some all-boys’ schools thanks to the schools’ petition and other high-profile reports of sexist behaviour. Going co-ed is not just a way to foster a “modern” environment at school, it makes good business sense as well.

Including girls in all-boys’ schools might seem a good solution to the problem and prevalence of sexism. However this is not an easy fix. Unhealthy attitudes about gender are rife in all schools as they are in the broader social world.

So, all schools need to be supported to create safe, respectful learning and social environments, with adequate training and teaching resources.

Amanda Keddie receives funding from The Australian Research Council to lead a project on school autonomy and social justice.

– ref. As another elite boys’ school goes co-ed, are single-sex schools becoming an endangered species? – https://theconversation.com/as-another-elite-boys-school-goes-co-ed-are-single-sex-schools-becoming-an-endangered-species-187857

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott East, Lecturer, UNSW Sydney

Review: D Harding with Kate Harding Through a Lens of Visitation, Chau Chak Wing Museum

Entering D and Kate Harding’s Through a Lens of Visitation, Kate’s textile work Cylinders (2020) was the first thing to draw my attention. Higher than the surrounding works, it draws the eye with its bold geometric patterning in greens and ochre contrasting with the more organic palette of the surrounding work.

D Harding is a star of contemporary Australian art with a flourishing international profile. Their mother, Kate, is a textile artist who in recent years has used quilts to tell stories of family and country.

This exhibition shows the connections between a mother and child and the culture that forged them, foregrounding the contribution of Indigenous women.

D and Kate Harding are descendants of the Bidjara, Ghungalu and Garingbal peoples, and have strong continuous connections to the internationally significant heritage site of Carnarvon Gorge in central Queensland.

Attracting tourists for its natural and cultural values, the gorge is known for its exceptional rock art. However, the tourist lens has often obscured the spiritual importance for First Nations people. This exhibition and accompanying publication corrects this lens by foregrounding the living culture of First Nations people from a number of different viewpoints.

Threading together the artists’ Indigenous culture with rigorous scholarship, this exhibition challenges Australian art history.

An undulating landscape

The exhibition is predominately of textile works by both artists, accompanied by two of D’s large-scale paintings.

Throughout the exhibition, object and textile works are placed on tightly assembled plinths of various heights.

Plinths are the common white supports used to ensure sculptural works and statues can be examined closely. Most viewers do not even notice them. But in D’s work, the line dividing the plinth from the work is blurred.

As you enter, the lowest plinth is closest to the entrance, and the highest – standing at two metres tall – is in the back corner furthest from the entry. This creates an undulating landscape for the audience as they enter the gallery, and we feel an invitation to explore.

D told the audience at the opening the plinths signalled “hierarchies of care”. They adopted this gallery convention to present Indigenous culture with the same care reserved for classical treasures. Interventions like this counter the way museums have historically portrayed First Nations culture as anonymous ethnographic curiosities.

Attention to the object

In the middle of the field of plinths are two wrapped objects which remain secret, packaged neatly as if by a conservator preparing for safe storage.

The wall text reveals what audiences cannot see: two of D’s 2018 works Untitled Cloak and Repression cloak (ceremony for a gay wedding). Occupying the remainder of the plinths in the Penelope gallery are six textile works, visible but neatly folded to obscure a clear view.

The wrapped objects recall Christo and Jeanne-Claude, drawing attention to the object, asking audiences to look at the overlooked. D’s wrapping safeguards Indigenous knowledge not for general consumption and ensures cultural safety.

This is most explicit in a redacted reproduction of a photograph of Carnarvon Gorge: what is withheld from view may be as significant as what is on display.

À lire aussi :
In remembering Christo, we remember what art once was

The exhibition encourages thoughtful inquiry. Each of the works on display was developed through years of sustained practice with deep respect for their materials, knowledge of place, Songlines and Indigenous cultural practices.

In Kate’s textile work this inquiry is achieved through a range of quilts which employ natural dyes including the bold angular geometry of Carnarvon (2020) to the more organic forms which dominate White Hill – looking for food at Clermont (2020). Her works are stylistically diverse, each conveying different story lines.

In this exhibition, D’s acclaimed painting practice is accompanied with textile work, making the two artists’ work often indistinguishable. This is most visible in Emetic painting (International Rock Art Red and White) (2020), whose forms and colours resonate with those found in Kate’s quilts.

The potential of materials to convey historical stories is clear in Blue ground/dissociative (2017), which uses white ochre on an arresting ground of Reckitt’s Blue pointing to the diverse traditions informing this exhibition.

The individual works, their careful display in this exhibition and the publication demonstrate a profound respect for both the language of contemporary art and Indigenous traditions.

It is a significant achievement.

D Harding with Kate Harding: Through a lens of visitation is on now at the Chau Chak Wing Museum at the Univerity of Sydney.

Scott East receives funding from the Australian Research Council Linkage Infrastructure, Engineering and Facilities Program (Grant LE210100021).

– ref. D Harding and Kate Harding: two artists exploring connections between mother and child, and the culture that forged them – https://theconversation.com/d-harding-and-kate-harding-two-artists-exploring-connections-between-mother-and-child-and-the-culture-that-forged-them-186825

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ross Westoby, Research Fellow, Griffith University

Predictions of catastrophic climate change seem endless – and already, its effects are hard to ignore. Events such as bushfires, floods and species loss generate feelings of sadness, anxiety and grief in many people. But this toll on the human psyche is often overlooked.

Our research has investigated the negative emotions that emerge in Australians
in response to the destruction of nature, and how we can process them. We’ve found being in nature is crucial.

Our latest research examined an eco-tourism enterprise in Australia. There, visitors’ emotional states were often connected to nature’s cycles of decay and regeneration. As nature renews, so does human hope.

As our climate changes, humans will inhabit and know the world differently. Our findings suggest nature is both the trigger for, and answer to, the grief that will increasingly be with us.

Emotions of climate distress

Our research has previously examined how acknowledging and processing emotions can help humans heal in a time of significant planetary change. This healing can often come about through social, collective approaches involving connection with the Earth’s natural systems.

Eco-tourism experiences offer opportunities to connect with nature. Our recent research examined the experiences of tourists who had recently stayed at Mount Barney Lodge in Queensland’s Scenic Rim region.

The eco-tourism business is located on Minjelha Dhagun Country, next to the World Heritage-listed Mount Barney National Park. The region was badly affected by the Black Summer bushfires of 2019-2020.

Through an online questionnaire conducted last year, we sought to understand visitors’ psychological experiences and responses while at the lodge.

Seventy-two participants were recruited via an information sheet and flyer placed in the lodge reception. The youngest was aged 18, the oldest was 78 and the average age was 46. Some 71% were female and 29% were male.

We found 78% of respondents experienced sadness, anger, anxiety and other grieving emotions in response to current pressures on the Earth’s life supporting systems.

One reflected on how they “have laid awake at night thinking about all the biodiversity loss [and] climate change and wept” and another said they felt “so sad for the animals” in the face of bushfires or urban sprawl.

Read more:
This is Australia’s most important report on the environment’s deteriorating health. We present its grim findings

Another participant spoke of their sadness following bushfires in the Snowy Mountains fires of New South Wales:

This area is where I [spent] much of my youth, so it was really sad to see it perish. I felt like I was experiencing the same hurt that the environment (trees, wildlife) was – as my memories were embedded in that location.

This response reflects how nature can give people a sense of place and identity – and how damage to that environment can erode their wellbeing.

But grief can also emerge in anticipation of a loss that has not yet occurred. One visitor told us:

When I was little, I thought of the world as kind of guaranteed – it would always be there – and having that certainty taken away […] knowing that the world might not be survivable for a lot of people by the time I’m a grown-up – it’s grief, and anger, and fear of how much grief is still to come.

Anger and frustration towards the then-federal government were also prominent. Participants spoke of a “lack of leadership” and the “government’s inability to commit to a decent climate policy”. They also expressed frustration at “business profits being put ahead of environmental protection”.

Participants also said “it feels like we can’t do anything to stop [climate change]” and “anything we do try, and change is never going to be enough”.

Healing through immersion in nature

Emotions such as ecological grief and eco-anxiety are perfectly rational responses to environmental change. But we must engage with and process them if their transformative potential is to be realised.

There is increasing evidence of nature’s ability to help people sit with and process complex emotional states – improving their mood, and becoming happier and more satisfied with life.

Participants in our study described how being in natural areas such as Mount Barney helped them deal with heavy emotions triggered by nature’s demise.

Participants were variously “retreating to nature as much as possible”, “appreciating the bush more” and “spending as much time outside [so] that I can hear trees, plants, and animals”.

Read more:
6 books about the climate crisis that offer hope

Participants explained how “being in nature is important to mental wellbeing”, is “healing and rejuvenating” and “always gives me a sense of spiritual coherence and connection with the natural world”.

For some, this rejuvenation is what’s needed to continue fighting. One participant said:

If we don’t see the places, we forget what we’re fighting for, and we’re more likely to get burned out trying to protect the world.

Similarly, one participant spoke of observing the resilience and healing of nature itself after devastation:

[I] find peace and some confidence in its [nature’s] ability to regenerate if given a chance.

The call back to nature

Our findings suggest immersing ourselves in nature more frequently will help us process emotions linked to ecological and climate breakdown – and thus find hope.

Eco-tourism sites promote opportunities for what’s known as eutierria – a powerful state that arises when one experiences a sense of oneness and symbiosis with Earth and her life-supporting systems.

Through this powerful state, it’s possible for one to undertake the courageous acts needed to advocate on behalf of nature. This is essential for the transformations Earth desperately needs.

Read more:
Where to find courage and defiant hope when our fragile, dewdrop world seems beyond saving

Ross Westoby and Karen McNamara are married to each other but work at different universities. Ross is a member of the Greens Party.

Karen E McNamara receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Rachel Clissold works for the International Centre for Environmental Management in Vietnam.

– ref. ‘Laid awake and wept’: destruction of nature takes a toll on the human psyche. Here’s one way to cope – https://theconversation.com/laid-awake-and-wept-destruction-of-nature-takes-a-toll-on-the-human-psyche-heres-one-way-to-cope-187837

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ross Goldingay, Lecturer in Wildlife Conservation & Biology, Southern Cross University

Australia’s wildlife is increasingly threatened with extinction. One key driver of this is habitat clearing and fragmentation. An associated factor is the expansion of our road network, particularly the upgrade and duplication of our highways.

Governments expand our major highways in the interests of road safety and traffic flow. But major roads become barriers to wildlife movement, as well as places where cars can hit and kill many animals.

Our new research explores whether highway underpasses help animals safely cross roads. We wanted to know if animals actually use underpasses – and if they had hidden dangers by funnelling animals through a confined space, making it easier for predators.

What did we find?

To find out whether underpasses work, we used wildlife cameras to monitor 12 underpasses for more than two years in north-east New South Wales. Five under the Oxley Highway at Port Macquarie and seven under the Pacific Highway south of Grafton.

What we found was quite astounding. Vastly more animals than we expected were using the underpass. We detected over 4,800 medium-large mammals and goannas, while smaller species such as snakes and rodents also used the underpasses but were less reliably detected by our cameras.

Species such as eastern grey kangaroos, swamp wallabies, red-necked wallabies, red-necked pademelons and lace monitors crossed some underpasses more than once a week. Rufous bettongs and echidnas crossed individual underpasses every two to four weeks. These crossing rates suggest animals use underpasses to forage on both sides of the freeways.

We were particularly interested in whether the endangered koala would use the underpasses. They did, occasionally. We found they were not avoiding the underpasses, because they were detected infrequently in the adjoining forest.

Do underpasses with fences reduce or eliminate wildlife roadkill? Anecdotal evidence for our study road at Port Macquarie suggested roadkill rates were very low. Only four roadkills (two eastern grey kangaroos, one red-necked wallaby and one brushtail possum) were reported to the local animal welfare group for this road segment over a three year period encompassing our study. However, we should not be complacent. Roadside fences develop holes and need to be repaired to maintain their value.

Do underpasses attract predators?

Many people believe underpasses increase predator risk. This idea – known as the “prey-trap hypothesis” – suggests predators will be drawn to places where they can easily pick off unsuspecting animals funnelled into the confined space of an underpass.

We detected red foxes, feral cats and dingoes using these underpasses. But of these, only foxes were detected frequently enough to be a potential concern.

We tested the prey-trap hypothesis by testing three predictions. If the hypothesis was correct, foxes should be more common in the underpasses than in the forest, foxes should focus their activity at underpasses where potential prey are more abundant and the timing of use of underpasses by foxes and potential prey should coincide.

What we observed didn’t match these predictions. At Port Macquarie, foxes were detected at three underpasses, while being absent from two. Of the three underpasses used by foxes, one particularly favoured by foxes was not favoured by bandicoots and pademelons, the potential prey.

Read more:
Safe passage: we can help save koalas through urban design

We expected to detect foxes close in time to prey detection. But on average, there was a gap of over three hours between detecting foxes and bandicoots or pademelons, and over four hours between foxes and wallabies. We also found foxes were less often detected on nights when potential prey were using the underpasses.

These observations suggest potential prey may be avoiding the underpasses when foxes are about.

What conclusions can we draw?

Underpasses are a useful tool to enable wildlife to move across landscapes with roads. Not all ground-dwelling species of wildlife will find underpasses to their liking, but many do.

Could we retrofit underpasses to highways with very high roadkill rates? That depends. The conditions have to be right. For an underpass to be installed, you need the road to be adequately elevated. You also need roadside fences, to prevent animals taking the shorter but much more dangerous path across the highway. These fences don’t work if there are intersections, freeway off ramps or driveways.

What we need is to prioritise areas where underpasses are possible, where threatened species exist and roadkill rates are high. It’s very expensive to retrofit underpasses into existing roads, which is why we have to focus on priority areas.

In the future, it could be possible to use cattle-grid type structures to stop animals like koalas getting around fences and onto the roads. These are currently being trialled.

To figure out how to make underpasses even more effective, we need more publicly available research. At present, there’s a great deal of monitoring sitting in expensive but unpublished reports from consultants.

Underpasses are not a panacea for impacts on wildlife. And we shouldn’t use their effectiveness as a justification to run highways through pristine areas. They’re a tool to minimise impacts of road projects that have wide community support.

Read more:
10 million animals are hit on our roads each year. Here’s how you can help them (and steer clear of them) these holidays

Ross Goldingay received funding from Transport NSW (Roads & Maritime Services) to conduct fieldwork reported in this article.

– ref. Good news: highway underpasses for wildlife actually work – https://theconversation.com/good-news-highway-underpasses-for-wildlife-actually-work-187434

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael J. I. Brown, Associate Professor in Astronomy, Monash University

We’ve now seen the first data from the James Webb Space Telescope. It has observed the atmospheres of distant planets, groups of nearby galaxies, galaxy light bent by unseen dark matter, and clouds of gas and dust in stellar nurseries.

We have also seen headlines claiming Webb has found “the oldest galaxies we have ever seen”, but what does that mean?

I’m a professional astronomer who studies old galaxies, and even I find this a little puzzling.

Looking far, looking back

One of the key science goals of Webb is to peer back in time and observe the early Universe. Webb can do this because, like all telescopes, it is a time machine.

Light travels at 300,000 kilometres per second, so when we look at the Moon we are seeing it as it was a second ago. As the planets of our Solar System are millions or billions of kilometres away, we see them as they were minutes or hours ago.

Going further still, when we look at distant galaxies with telescopes we are often looking at light that has taken millions or billions of years to reach us. This means we are seeing these galaxies as they were millions or billions of years ago.

Read more:
When you look up, how far back in time do you see?

What has James Webb seen?

The James Webb Space Telescope is able to see more distant galaxies than other telescopes, including the Hubble Space Telescope.

Like Hubble it is above the glowing and turbulent atmosphere of the Earth. However, whereas Hubble has a 2.3 metre mirror for focusing light, Webb has a vast 6.5 metre mirror formed from 18 hexagonal segments. Finally, Webb is optimised to detect infrared light, which is what we observe from the most distant galaxies as the expansion of the Universe has stretched ultraviolet and infrared light into the infrared.

Among the first data obtained by Webb were infrared images looking towards a cluster of galaxies called SMACS 0723.

The light from SMACS 0723 has taken 4.6 billion years to reach us, so we are seeing it as it was 4.6 billion years ago. That’s slightly older than the Sun and the Earth, which only formed 4.56 billion years ago.

In recent weeks, galaxies far beyond SMACS 0723 have gained attention. Webb has detected a number of galaxies in the direction of SMACS 0723 and other regions that could be so distant their light has taken 13.5 billion years to reach us.

I say “could” because more data will be needed to absolutely confirm their distances, but some of these galaxies are very compelling candidates (others less so).

As the light has taken 13.5 billion years to reach us, we are seeing these galaxies as they were 13.5 billion years ago. The Universe itself is 13.8 billion years old, so we could be seeing galaxies as they were just a few hundred million years after the Big Bang.

Young, old or early?

While these very distant galaxies have been advertised as the “oldest galaxies”, I find this a little confusing. We are actually seeing these galaxies as they appeared when they were very young, perhaps a hundred million years old or so.

It is true that these galaxies will be old now, but our own Milky Way galaxy is very old now too. While our Sun is 4.56 billion years old, many stars in our galaxy are 10 billion years old and some stars in the Milky Way are 13 billion years old.

Furthermore, the very distant galaxies Webb has spotted will look very different today. Galaxies grow by acquiring gas and dark matter, forming new stars and merging with other galaxies.

A small galaxy that was vigorously forming stars soon after the Big Bang may have ended up being the seed of a galaxy that today is very massive and stopped forming stars long ago. That small galaxy and its old stars could also have ended up being just part of a larger galaxy formed relatively recently by merging galaxies together.

A record set to fall

So should we call these most distant galaxies young or old? Perhaps neither.

James Webb is seeing the earliest galaxies yet observed – some of the first galaxies that formed soon after the Big Bang.

I have thrown in one last caveat – “yet observed”. Webb has only just begun its mission, and current analyses are based on data collected over hours.

With days’ worth of data, Webb will push its view out to fainter and further objects, and see yet-more-distant galaxies. The record for the most distant and thus earliest observed galaxy will probably tumble a few times before the year is out.

Michael J. I. Brown receives research funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University.

– ref. Is the James Webb Space Telescope finding the furthest, oldest, youngest or first galaxies? An astronomer explains – https://theconversation.com/is-the-james-webb-space-telescope-finding-the-furthest-oldest-youngest-or-first-galaxies-an-astronomer-explains-187915

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Wallwork, Post-doctoral Researcher, University of South Australia

Bang! A child trips and grazes their knee. Your toddler bumps his head on the table. Your niece stubs her toe. The tears flood in.

Do you: (a) tell them to “brush-it-off”, (b) make a fuss and laboriously check for grazes, or (c) give them a cuddle, quick check, and encourage them to keep playing?

I am a physiotherapist and clinical pain neuroscientist from the University of South Australia. Recently, my colleagues and I published research investigating strategies to promote recovery and resilience in young children after injury.

While a parent or caregiver’s response to a child’s bumps or scrapes will depend on the child, the situation and the injury, generally, my research suggests a response like option c: comfort and reassurance (a cuddle), first-aid scan (quick check for grazes), and encourage them to manage their pain using distraction (return to activity).

Learning how to respond to pain

Everyday pain and injuries – such as minor bumps, cuts, grazes – are critical learning experiences for young children, and can influence how they interpret and respond to pain or injury experiences in the future.

This is important because one in five adolescents and adults will experience persistent or chronic pain problems, such as back pain, headaches or abdominal pain.

Read more:
Parents’ reactions can lessen or worsen pain for injured kids

We don’t (yet) know how to prevent children from developing persistent pain problems. But teaching people with persistent pain about how pain works helps reduce their pain.

We all learn about pain and injury through our own life experiences. When we get an injury, pain follows. Therefore pain must mean injury, right?

Actually, it’s not that simple. One of the difficulties health practitioners face in teaching people about pain is that they are often challenging long-held beliefs about how pain and recovery works.

Instead of trying to challenge these life-long developed beliefs, we can work “bottom-up” and start educating children about pain and injury from early on.

Investigating helpful pain behaviours

With a vested interest in this myself (I have two young children), my colleagues and I wanted to find out what parents and caregivers can do to teach children about pain that might promote “helpful” pain behaviours. That is, behaviours that are likely to lead to recovery, and build resilience for the future (and hopefully prevent future pain problems).

To address this, we investigated “everyday” pains – mostly because they are common in young children, but also because experience through learning can be very powerful.

So, we conducted a study asking eighteen international experts from child health, psychology, development, resilience, as well as parents and educators, what parents and caregivers could do to promote recovery and resilience after minor pains and or injury.

While recognising that all children and experiences will be unique, here are five key tips from the experts:

1. Teach children about the meaning of pain

Teach children that pain is our body’s alarm system: it’s there to protect us from danger.

It’s also important to note that pain and injury don’t always align. How we’re feeling on the inside, for instance, can influence how much pain we are in. If children are hungry or tired, the pain might seem worse.

2. Validate children’s pain and injury

This could involve getting down to the child’s level, acknowledging their pain and or injury, and how they’re feeling.

Ensure children feel safe, heard, and protected.

But don’t make a big fuss of it. Every child and event will be different, so use your judgement to strike a balance.

3. Reassure them

Let them know that their body is amazing and will heal and recover; and the pain will pass.

4. Support children’s emotional development

Role-model empathy, allow children to express their emotions, and encourage them to connect to their body’s warning signs.

This might include helping them talk about or show their feelings. Be mindful to not let your own reactions and emotions intervene. A fearful and shocked reaction to an injury may instil fear in that child.

This doesn’t mean letting the child wail and carry on. Rather, let them express themselves and then encourage them to regulate their emotions. This could involve encouraging deep breathing and connect to what it is they are feeling on the inside.

5. Involve children in managing their own pain and injury

Encourage children to make decisions and attend to their pain and injury, in an age-appropriate way. This might involve getting a band-aid, wet cloth, rubbing the area, or distraction.

Discuss first-aid and healing processes. Pop on a band-aid, tell them their “ouchie” is protected, and that it’s safe to move and play.

Be mindful of your language – demonstrate that they are the healers, rather than “getting fixed”. For example, you could talk about when we eat good food and get lots of good sleep, we are setting up our bodies to have lots of energy to heal and get better. This encourages active involvement in the healing process.

In everyday life, children will be exposed to lessons about pain and injury in many other social, cultural and educational contexts. Pain is commonly shown in children’s movies and TV shows in unhelpful ways, with low levels of empathy and gender stereotypes, where boy characters sustain more injuries than girls, but observers are more responsive to girls.

Therefore, how parents and caregivers communicate with children about pain and injury is important, and can build resilience after injury.

Read more:
Is your child frightened of needles? Here’s how to prepare them for their COVID vaccine

Sarah Wallwork receives funding from a National Health and Medical Research Council Leadership Investigator Grant awarded to GL Moseley ID1178444 .

– ref. 5 tips for building kids’ resilience after bumps, scrapes and other minor injuries – https://theconversation.com/5-tips-for-building-kids-resilience-after-bumps-scrapes-and-other-minor-injuries-187022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist), The Conversation

The first Newspoll since the May federal election, conducted July 27-30 from a sample of 1,508, gave Labor a 56-44 lead (52.1-47.9 to Labor at the election). Primary votes were 37% Labor (32.6% at election), 33% Coalition (35.7%), 12% Greens (12.2%), 6% One Nation (5.0%), 2% UAP (4.1%) and 10% for all Others (10.5%).

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s satisfaction rating was 61% (up 20 since the final pre-election Newspoll) and his dissatisfaction rating was 26% (down 20). That gave Albanese a net approval of +35, up 40 points.

The Poll Bludger said Albanese’s net approval is the highest for a PM since early in Malcolm Turnbull’s tenure after he toppled Tony Abbott in September 2015. Prior to Turnbull, Kevin Rudd in October 2009 was the last to exceed Albanese’s net approval.

Albanese has a higher “satisfied” rating than any other new PM after a change of government election. But Newspoll has changed its methods since Rudd was PM, resulting in a lower undecided vote on the PM’s ratings. Net approval should be used for comparison with past PMs.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s initial ratings were 41% dissatisfied, 37% satisfied (net -4). In comparing debut ratings for opposition leaders since 2006, The Poll Bludger said Dutton’s net approval was worse than all except Albanese, who had a -5 net approval in his first poll as opposition leader.

Albanese led Dutton by 59-25 as better PM, which The Poll Bludger says is the widest gap since early 2008 under Rudd. Now that we have a Labor PM, this measure will skew towards Albanese. Better PM skews to incumbents, not parties.

These ratings for Albanese are “honeymoon” ratings that are likely to fade as more opposition builds to his agenda. High inflation is likely to damage Albanese and Labor if it persists.

Read more:
Final 2022 election results: Coalition routed in cities and in Western Australia – can they recover in 2025?

Essential: should the Greens support Labor’s 43% emissions reduction target?

In an Essential poll, conducted in the days before July 26 from a sample of 1,082, 50% thought the Greens should vote for Labor’s policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 43% by 2030, 25% thought the Greens should only vote for Labor’s policy if Labor agrees to changes to bring it closer to Greens policy, and 25% said they did not want further action on climate change.

68% of those who voted Labor at the federal election wanted Labor’s current policy, while just 22% thought Labor should shift towards the Greens’ position. Among Greens voters, 52% thought Labor should shift while 40% did not.

Among the 75% who wanted further climate change action, 44% thought the 43% target is a sufficient contribution from Australia to limit the impact of climate change, while 40% thought more needs to be done.

Voters rated the new Labor government good at handling COVID by 36-27, education by 35-18 and climate change by 33-21. But Labor received a poor rating on cost of living (41-23 poor).

Well over 50% thought the federal government had a lot or a fair amount of influence over various economic issues, implying that voters will blame the government for a poor economy. Labor will hope inflation is under control and the economy is doing better by the 2025 election.

Just eight of 44 constitutional referendums have succeeded

Albanese has proposed a referendum to recognise an Indigenous Voice to Parliament in the Australian Constitution. Our constitution can only be changed by referendum, with a majority of the overall vote and a majority in a majority of the states (so four of the six states).

Just eight of the 44 referendums proposed since federation in 1901 have succeeded. Another five would have succeeded if only a simple popular vote majority had been required, but failed as at least three states were opposed.

The last constitutional referendums were in 1999, when a referendum on becoming a republic failed. The last successful referendums were in 1977, which required the replacement of a casual Senate vacancy with someone from the same party.

Australia has also had four non-constitutional referendums (plebiscites), where the law could have been altered by legislation alone but a public vote was desired. The successful same-sex marriage plebiscite in 2017 was the most recent.

The other three plebiscites were two narrowly defeated conscription plebiscites in the First World War and the plebiscite that chose Advance Australia Fair as our national song in 1977.

The one previous occasion in which a referendum on Indigenous rights was proposed resulted in a record “Yes” vote of over 90% at the 1967 referendum. The same-sex marriage plebiscite had a 61.6% Yes vote nationally, easily winning in every state.

Previous referendums have mostly involved proposals to reform our system of government. It’s likely the high failure rate is because voters take the attitude that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Partisan politics is also a factor, and if the Coalition opposes the Voice, the chance of a successful referendum drops.

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. First Newspoll since election gives Albanese ‘honeymoon’ ratings; Australia’s poor success rate at referendums – https://theconversation.com/first-newspoll-since-election-gives-albanese-honeymoon-ratings-australias-poor-success-rate-at-referendums-187690

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bruno Vicari Stefani, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Solar Technologies, CSIRO

Recent extreme weather events have underscored the need to cut the CO₂ emissions that are driving up global temperatures. This requires a rapid transition of the energy economy to renewable energy sources, the cheapest being solar photovoltaics (PV). And our newly published research points to a way we can drive down costs of the shift even further using cheaper forms of silicon for highly efficient solar panels.

Australia has been leading the way with solar PV installations, but our solar energy journey is just beginning. This year, humanity hit a milestone of 1 terawatt (TW) – 1 million × 1 million watts – of installed solar capacity. However, experts predict 70TW of solar PV may be needed by 2050 to power all sectors of the economy.

To help drive this rapid uptake of solar PV, we need solar panels that are high efficiency and low cost. Over the past ten years, some new solar cell designs have led to record high efficiencies. The problem is these designs also need higher-quality materials, which cost more.

Our recent research suggests we might be able to rethink the type of silicon needed to make these high-efficiency solar cells.

Read more:
Australia is the runaway global leader in building new renewable energy

Not all silicon is equal

More than 95% of solar panels are made using silicon. The silicon used to make solar cells is similar to that used in computer chips. It’s effectively very pure sand.

To make a solar cell work, we need to form an electric field so the generated current can all flow in one direction. This is done by adding impurity atoms into silicon, a process known as “doping”.

In commercial panel manufacturing, the most commonly used type of silicon is “p-type” silicon. This material is doped with atoms that have one less electron than silicon, such as boron or more recently gallium.

We can then introduce a very thin layer on the surface full of atoms with one extra electron relative to silicon, which is called “n-type” silicon. Placing these two types of silicon together forms what is called a “p-n junction”. The massive difference in the number of electrons between the p-type region and n-type region forces electrons to move rapidly, creating an electric field that drives the current in our solar cell.

Conventional solar panels on Australian roofs today are overwhelmingly made using p-type silicon, as it is about 10% cheaper than the alternative “n-type” silicon, doped with phosphorus.

Read more:
The sunlight that powers solar panels also damages them. ‘Gallium doping’ is providing a solution

Higher efficiency comes at a cost

Researchers are continually pushing to drive up the efficiency of solar panels so they can generate more power for consumers. In 2017, a record efficiency of 26.7% was achieved for a silicon solar cell. Last month, LONGi Solar announced an efficiency of 26.5% – very close to the world record – for the same type of solar cell made in a manufacturing environment, rather than in a laboratory.

This type of solar cell is called a “silicon heterojunction”. The special element of silicon heterojunction solar cells is that the surface is capped with a very thin layer – about 1,000 times thinner than a human hair – of amorphous silicon. This thin layer smooths the surface and reduces a lot of the energy losses.

Sanyo developed this cell design in the 1990s. At the time, high-quality n-type silicon wafers were used to make silicon heterojunction cells, even though these wafers are more expensive.

The main reason for this is that sunlight degrades cheaper p-type wafers. However, our understanding of this phenomenon and how to treat it has come a long way since the 1990s.

Our light-bulb moment

For the past 30 years, all silicon heterojunction solar cells, including the record-breaking cells, have been made using n-type silicon wafers. In our research project, we wanted to test whether cheaper, p-type wafers could also be used.

Through comprehensive testing, we found heterojunction solar cells made with p-type silicon did not perform as well. We were puzzled by this. But one day we had a literal light-bulb moment.

We realised that accidental exposure to room lighting for as little as ten seconds before testing reduced the voltage of p-type cells by as much as 30mV, which can cut their efficiency by a percentage point (i.e. from 22% to 21%). This was causing our cells to perform much worse than expected. Much like someone who has severe allergies is more sensitive to pollen in the spring, we realised these high-efficiency silicon heterojunction solar cells made with p-type wafers are much more sensitive to light-induced degradation.

Problem identified, we now have the solution

We believe this observation is the reason high-efficiency cells have only previously been explored using expensive silicon. Past researchers were unaware of the sensitivity of p-type wafers to degrade and did not have the knowledge to overcome it.

Fortunately, we now know the bonding of boron and unwanted oxygen in the silicon wafer causes this degradation. Treatments with a high-intensity laser have been shown to stabilise cells in a matter of seconds.

The laser illumination can make hydrogen, which is already floating around in the silicon, more mobile to move around and “passivate” the unwanted boron-oxygen defects. Exactly how hydrogen does this is still an active area of research, but we know it solves the problem. Our research confirms a short laser treatment can stabilise the performance of p-type silicon heterojunction solar cells.

Armed with this new knowledge, we can further develop high-efficiency technologies with cheaper raw materials. This will reduce the cost of every watt of solar electricity produced. In March this year, solar panel manufacturer LONGi Solar announced an efficiency of 25.47% for a silicon heterojunction solar cell made using p-type wafers.

To see manufacturers making high-efficiency solar cells that are potentially cheaper means our findings have a tangible impact on industry. Reducing solar cell costs will provide cheaper electricity to millions of consumers while addressing climate change.

Bruno Vicari Stefani received funding from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the CSIRO Research Office. Bruno Vicari Stefani performed part of this work during his PhD at the University of New South Wales.

Brett Hallam receives funding from ARENA.

Matthew Wright receives funding from the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council grant number EP/V038605/1.

– ref. Solar is the cheapest power, and a literal light-bulb moment showed us we can cut costs and emissions even further – https://theconversation.com/solar-is-the-cheapest-power-and-a-literal-light-bulb-moment-showed-us-we-can-cut-costs-and-emissions-even-further-187008

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne-Mette Holmgård Sundahl, PhD Candidate in Political Science, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Jacinda Ardern’s popularity has fluctuated over the past five years, with the prime minister’s approval peaking at 76% in May 2020. Those early rises in popularity were met with warnings about the risks of placing a political leader on a pedestal. Some even labelled the phenomenon of “Jacindamania” a personality cult or branded Ardern “a cult of personality politician”.

But this description not only misrepresents Ardern and her popularity – it also dilutes the concept of a “personality cult”, overlooking several of its defining characteristics.

My research explores the difference between mere popularity and personality cults. This work is important as commentators and media increasingly conflate the two ideas.

By definition, a personality cult parallels religious worship, elevating an individual’s authority “through the deliberate creation, projection and propagation of a godlike image”.

A personality cult also entails a specific set of social practices including inflated flattery and toadying, immunity from delegitimising crises and entrenched rituals.

In the contemporary context, the label of personality cult has been more accurately applied to leaders like Russian president Vladimir Putin and former US president Donald Trump.

Debunking the myth of the cult

While a personality cult can develop organically from the general population, it equally needs to be cultivated from above to be used as an instrument of power.

Over the past few years, artists have depicted Ardern as Wonder Woman and as pop cultural figures like Star Wars’ Princess Leia or Rosie the Riveter from WWII marketing imagery.

But there have been no official attempts from Ardern or the government to depict her as a hero – in stark contrast to how both Trump and Putin have contributed to their own glorification.

Trump, for example, photoshopped an image of his face on Rocky Balboa’s body and posted it on social media. The Russian government has released numerous official photos of Putin riding around bare-chested in the Siberian wilderness, cultivating an image of the leader as the ideal Russian man.

No shameless toadying

The most significant differences between Ardern’s popularity and a fully-fledged personality cult can, however, be found in how the public responds to exaggerated depictions of their leader.

Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov called Putin a hero “appointed by Allah” who everyone should bow down to. Former US Secretary of Energy Rick Perry compared Trump to biblical kings, calling him “the chosen one, sent by God to do great things”.

In contrast, the praise Ardern receives is less inflated and excessive.

Read more:
Little red children and ‘Grandpa Xi’: China’s school textbooks reflect the rise of Xi Jinping’s personality cult

And while some argue that Ardern’s halo has blinded her fans to deeper problems, her supporters are not completely blind to her mistakes and shortcomings, with marked fluctuations in approval polls that coincide with her political successes and failures.

Inflation, Omicron and a straining health system have all eroded support for Ardern and the Labour party. Unlike what would be expected with a personality cult, her popularity is not immune to strong political headwinds.

Absence of rituals

In terms of more traditional cult-like behaviour, a personality cult also entails a ritualistic element.

After Putin unexpectedly stopped in the village of Izborsk, his path through town was marked, along with the places he had bought cucumbers, drunk from the fountain, and touched a tree and made a wish.

Magnitogorsk Museum likewise exhibited the overalls he had worn during his visit. Visiting these locations have become a matter of pilgrimage for his followers.

Read more:
What kind of person joins a cult or joins a terror group?

Such behaviour has been absent around the New Zealand prime minister.

Admittedly, Ardern’s weekly updates from her home during the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, covering everything from serious political matters to her daughter’s nap time, could be reminiscent of a ritual, given it engaged people in an activity revolving around her.

However, the weekly updates didn’t originate at the grassroots level, unlike the hero worship of Putin, and their absence has been largely inconsequential for the community.

Read more:
Vladimir Putin, the czar of macho politics, is threatened by gender and sexuality rights

Explaining ‘Jacindamania’

“Jacindamania” illustrates how popularity and a few hero-like depictions are not enough to constitute a fully-fledged personality cult.

That Ardern’s popularity hasn’t manifested itself into social practices and thus transformed into a personality cult, means that she has less authority than is suggested by some commentators.

Ardern can’t use her popularity to make her supporters follow orders blindly. Even loyal Labour voters challenge her political direction.

Trump, on the other hand, encouraged his supporters to unlawfully storm the Capitol in an attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. Recent congressional hearings found these supporters rioted after being encouraged by Trump and stopped when Trump told them to go home.

Tall poppy syndrome could be a barrier

Calling the phenomenon surrounding Ardern a cult thus grossly overestimates the extent of her power – and clashes with New Zealand culture.

With their perception of the country as an egalitarian society and the prevalence of the so-called “tall poppy syndrome”, New Zealanders are arguably less predisposed to worship or elevate a single individual.

New Zealanders’ innate modesty and tendency to downplay achievement are not conducive to the cultivation of a cult from above – or below.

So, while Ardern has experienced waves of popularity both domestically and on the global stage, her support is far from entering the territory of the personality cults surrounding Putin or Trump. She is popular, sometimes, but not infallible.

Anne-Mette Holmgård Sundahl 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. Does Jacinda Ardern’s popularity really qualify as a cult of personality, as some critics claim? – https://theconversation.com/does-jacinda-arderns-popularity-really-qualify-as-a-cult-of-personality-as-some-critics-claim-187516