Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Georgie Russell, Senior Lecturer, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), Deakin University

In January, many people are setting new year’s resolutions around healthy eating. Achieving these is often challenging – it can be difficult to change our eating habits. But healthy diets can enhance physical and mental health, so improving what we eat is a worthwhile goal.

One reason it’s difficult to change our eating habits relates to our “food environments”. This term describes:

The collective physical, economic, policy and sociocultural surroundings, opportunities and conditions that influence people’s food and beverage choices and nutritional status.

Our current food environments are designed in ways that often make it easier to choose unhealthy foods than healthy ones. But it’s possible to change certain aspects of our personal food environments, making eating healthier a little easier.

Unhealthy food environments

It’s not difficult to find fast-food restaurants in Australian cities. Meanwhile, there are junk foods at supermarket checkouts, service stations and sporting venues. Takeaway and packaged foods and drinks routinely come in large portion sizes and are often considered tastier than healthy options.

Our food environments also provide us with various prompts to eat unhealthy foods via the media and advertising, alongside health and nutrition claims and appealing marketing images on food packaging.

At the supermarket, unhealthy foods are often promoted through prominent displays and price discounts.

We’re also exposed to various situations in our everyday lives that can make healthy eating challenging. For example, social occasions or work functions might see large amounts of unhealthy food on offer.

Read more:
No, it’s not just a lack of control that makes Australians overweight. Here’s what’s driving our unhealthy food habits

Not everyone is affected in the same way

People differ in the degree to which their food consumption is influenced by their food environments.

This can be due to biological factors (for example, genetics and hormones), psychological characteristics (such as decision making processes or personality traits) and prior experiences with food (for example, learned associations between foods and particular situations or emotions).

People who are more susceptible will likely eat more and eat more unhealthy foods than those who are more immune to the effects of food environments and situations.

Those who are more susceptible may pay greater attention to food cues such as advertisements and cooking smells, and feel a stronger desire to eat when exposed to these cues. Meanwhile, they may pay less attention to internal cues signalling hunger and fullness. These differences are due to a combination of biological and psychological characteristics.

These people might also be more likely to experience physiological reactions to food cues including changes in heart rate and increased salivation.

Other situational cues can also prompt eating for some people, depending on what they’ve learned about eating. Some of us tend to eat when we’re tired or in a bad mood, having learned over time eating provides comfort in these situations.

Other people will tend to eat in situations such as in the car during the commute home from work (possibly passing multiple fast-food outlets along the way), or at certain times of day such as after dinner, or when others around them are eating, having learned associations between these situations and eating.

Being in front of a TV or other screen can also prompt people to eat, eat unhealthy foods, or eat more than intended.

Read more:
Appetite for convenience: how the surge in online food delivery could be harming our health

Making changes

While it’s not possible to change wider food environments or individual characteristics that affect susceptibility to food cues, you can try to tune into how and when you’re affected by food cues. Then you can restructure some aspects of your personal food environments, which can help if you’re working towards healthier eating goals.

Although both meals and snacks are important for overall diet quality, snacks are often unplanned, which means food environments and situations may have a greater impact on what we snack on.

Foods consumed as snacks are often sugary drinks, confectionery, chips and cakes. However, snacks can also be healthy (for example, fruits, nuts and seeds).

Try removing unhealthy foods, particularly packaged snacks, from the house, or not buying them in the first place. This means temptations are removed, which can be especially helpful for those who may be more susceptible to their food environment.

Planning social events around non-food activities can help reduce social influences on eating. For example, why not catch up with friends for a walk instead of lunch at a fast-food restaurant.

Creating certain rules and habits can reduce cues for eating. For example, not eating at your desk, in the car, or in front of the TV will, over time, lessen the effects of these situations as cues for eating.

You could also try keeping a food diary to identify what moods and emotions trigger eating. Once you’ve identified these triggers, develop a plan to help break these habits. Strategies may include doing another activity you enjoy such as going for a short walk or listening to music – anything that can help manage the mood or emotion where you would have typically reached for the fridge.

Write (and stick to) a grocery list and avoid shopping for food when hungry. Plan and prepare meals and snacks ahead of time so eating decisions are made in advance of situations where you might feel especially hungry or tired or be influenced by your food environment.

Rebecca Leech receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1175250).

Georgie Russell 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. Our ‘food environments’ affect what we eat. Here’s how you can change yours to support healthier eating – https://theconversation.com/our-food-environments-affect-what-we-eat-heres-how-you-can-change-yours-to-support-healthier-eating-220770

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Scott, Professor in Law, University of Canterbury

In 2023 the world witnessed a sustained attack on the very foundations of the international legal order.

Russia, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, continued its illegal invasion in Ukraine. Israel’s response to the October terrorist attack by Hamas exceeded its legitimate right to self-defence. And Venezuela threatened force against Guyana over an oil-rich area of disputed territory.

But is it all bad news for the international legal order?

There are six ongoing international court cases initiated by states or organisations seeking to clarify the law and hold other states to account on behalf of the international community.

These cases offer smaller countries, such as New Zealand, an opportunity to have a significant role in strengthening the international legal order and ensuring a pathway towards peace.

A departure from the legal norm?

Normally, cases are brought to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) when a state’s direct interests are impacted by the actions of another state.

However, six recent court cases reflect a significant departure from this tradition and mark an important development for international justice.

Read more:
South Africa has made its genocide case against Israel in court. Here’s what both sides said and what happens next

These cases argue the international community has a collective interest in certain issues. The focus of the cases range from Israel’s actions in Gaza (brought by South Africa) through to the responsibility of states to ensure the protection of the climate system (brought by the United Nations General Assembly).

Holding states accountable for genocide

Three of the six cases seek to hold states accountable for genocide using Article IX of the 1948 Genocide Convention. Put simply, Article IX says disputes between countries can be referred to the ICJ.

In late December, South Africa asked the court to introduce provisional measures – a form of international injunction – against Israel for genocidal acts in Gaza.

These proceedings build on the precedent set by a 2019 case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar for its treatment of the Rohingya people.

In 2022, the ICJ concluded it had jurisdiction to hear The Gambia’s case on the basis that all parties to the Genocide Convention have an interest in ensuring the prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide.

According to the ICJ, The Gambia did not need to demonstrate any special interest or injury to bring the proceedings and, in effect, was entitled to hold Myanmar to account for its treatment of the Rohingya people on behalf of the international community as a whole.

South Africa has made the same argument against Israel.

In the third case, Ukraine was successful in obtaining provisional measures calling on Russia to suspend military operations in Ukraine (a call which has been reiterated in several United Nations General Assembly resolutions).

While Ukraine is directly impacted by Russia’s actions, 32 states, including New Zealand, have also intervened. These countries have argued there is an international interest in the resolution of the conflict.

In November 2023, following the example of intervention in Ukraine v. Russia, seven countries – Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (jointly) and the Maldives – filed declarations of intervention in The Gambia v. Myanmar, in support of The Gambia and the international community.

States can apply for permission to intervene in proceedings where they have an interest of a legal nature that may be affected by the decision in the case (in the case of the ICJ, under Article 62 of the ICJ Statute). That said, intervening in judicial proceedings in support of the legal order or international community more generally was relatively rare until 2023.

Climate change obligations under international law

But it is not just acts of genocide that have attracted wider international legal involvement.

In 2023, three proceedings seeking advisory opinions on the legal obligations of states in respect of climate change under international law have been introduced before the ICJ, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (https://www.itlos.org/en/main/cases/list-of-cases/request-for-an-advisory-opinion-submitted-by-the-commission-of-small-island-states-on-climate-change-and-international-law-request-for-advisory-opinion-submitted-to-the-tribunal/) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Read more:
Myanmar charged with genocide of Rohingya Muslims: 5 essential reads

These cases can be similarly characterised as having been brought on behalf of the international community for the international community. New Zealand has intervened in the ITLOS case.

Collectively, these six cases comprise actions taken on behalf of the international community with the overarching purpose of strengthening the international legal order.

They demonstrate faith in and support for that legal order in the face of internal and external challenges, and constitute an important counter-narrative to the prevailing view that the international legal order is no longer robust.

Instituting proceedings does not guarantee a positive outcome. But it’s worth noting that less than three years after the ICJ issued an advisory opinion condemning the United Kingdom’s continued occupation of the Chagos Archipelago, the UK is quietly negotiating with Mauritius for the return of the islands.

New Zealand’s support for the global legal order in 2024

The international legal order underpins New Zealand’s security and prosperity. New Zealand has a strong and internationally recognised track record of positive intervention in judicial proceedings in support of that order.

In 2012 New Zealand intervened in the case brought by Australia against Japan for whaling in the Antarctic. Following our contributions to cases before the ICJ and ITLOS in 2023, We are well placed to continue that intervention in future judicial proceedings.

Calls have already been made for New Zealand to intervene in South Africa v. Israel. Contributing to this case and to The Gambia v. Myanmar proceeding provides an important opportunity for New Zealand to make a proactive and substantive contribution to strengthening the international legal order.

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

– ref. New Zealand can learn from South Africa, The Gambia and others when it comes to international accountability – https://theconversation.com/new-zealand-can-learn-from-south-africa-the-gambia-and-others-when-it-comes-to-international-accountability-221114

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Patrick O’Connor, Associate Professor, University of Adelaide

Climate change and biodiversity loss are arguably the greatest environmental challenges the world faces. The way we use land is crucial in finding solutions to these problems. In theory, actions such as revegetation and avoiding land clearing can tackle both problems at once – for example, by simultaneously storing carbon in plants and providing habitat for animals.

Sometimes when taking these actions, however, carbon storage is prioritised at the expense of biodiversity. But that need not be the case. Our new research suggests we can act to boost the climate and nature at the same time.

We examined a financial incentive scheme in South Australia’s Mount Lofty Ranges. We found action by farmers to restore native woodlands on their properties also stored carbon in the vegetation. This carbon abatement, if converted into carbon credits, could have paid the farmers for their restoration activities. It suggests existing carbon markets can pay for biodiversity conservation.

To date, few market-based biodiversity schemes in Australia have been designed to reward farmers for delivering these twin benefits – and the same is true for carbon markets. This is a huge missed opportunity for both the climate and nature.

Carbon markets don’t always help nature

Carbon markets encourage farmers and other land managers to help mitigate climate change, through activities such as planting trees or avoiding land clearing. These activities are rewarded with “credits” which can then be sold to buyers wanting to reduce their carbon footprint, such as a polluting company. Similar schemes are emerging for biodiversity conservation.

Efforts to tackle climate change through land-based activities are welcome. But these interventions do not always lead to good biodiversity outcomes. For example, a particular tree species planted to store carbon may not be useful to animals in the area. It may even cause problems such as spreading weeds, which can add to biodiversity decline.

In Australia, the decline of native species and ecosystems is well-documented. The decline is marked in the eastern Mount Lofty Ranges where native vegetation – mostly eucalypt forests and woodlands – has been reduced to about 10% of its former extent.

It means many animal species in the Mount Lofty Ranges are falling in numbers. They include birds such as the diamond firetail, superb fairy-wren and purple-crowned lorikeet.

Reversing this decline requires restoring and protecting the native vegetation that feeds and homes these animals. We wanted to know if carbon markets could pay for such work.

What we found

We examined a payment scheme, known as BushBids, for farmers who manage the region’s degraded woodlands. It was funded by the federal government and administered by the state government.

The scheme, which began in 2006, invited private landholders to tender for ten-year contracts to undertake certain restoration activities. These included retaining fallen logs (instead of collecting them for firewood), limiting stock grazing, controlling weeds, and reducing grazing by both feral animals and overabundant native animals such as kangaroos. Such activities can lead to more carbon being stored in vegetation, debris and soils.

Monitoring showed the activities restored some components of the woodland systems – most notably the diversity of native plant species.

The activities also led to additional carbon being stored in the woodlands. Australia’s carbon market does not currently recognise this type of carbon gain.

But what if it did? We calculated how much carbon was stored by the restoration of degraded native vegetation across 12 sites. We then calculated how much of the cost of this work would have been covered by payments for that carbon storage.

We found the additional carbon stored in the woodlands could pay all, or a substantial proportion, of the price of restoring degraded native vegetation. The exact proportion covered depends on factors such as the carbon price, rainfall and rate of vegetation recovery.

Read more:
Carbon markets could protect nature and the planet, but only if the rights of those who live there are recognized too

Implications for Australia

Our study shows how the price of restoring native vegetation for biodiversity conservation could be covered by trading carbon credits created at the same time. This could be achieved either with separate markets, or markets that include both biodiversity and carbon.

But using markets for both nature repair and carbon storage will only work if the markets are designed well.

That means changes to Australia’s existing carbon market may be required. Research has cast doubt over the integrity of more than half the credits generated in that market. It found under one particular method – regrowing native forests to store carbon from the atmosphere – most carbon storage for which credits were issued either had not occurred, or would have occurred anyway.

Separately, the federal government has recently passed legislation to establish a biodiversity scheme known as the Nature Repair Market. For this scheme to avoid making the same mistakes as the carbon scheme, it should involve methods and standards that lead to the right kinds of biodiversity restoration in the right places.

This means focusing on which species and ecosystems need protection. For example, it should include not just those species listed as threatened with extinction, but species declining in their strongholds, and where the decline of a species would have broader impacts such as damage to agriculture.

Australian farmers have demonstrated that they can restore degraded ecosystems in a cost-effective way – and they should have better access to carbon funding to do it. Done right, this can be a huge win-win for both nature and the climate.

Read more:
‘Untenable’: even companies profiting from Australia’s carbon market say the system must change

Patrick O’Connor has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the South Australian, Victorian, New South Wales and Australian governments including the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Trust. He is a board director of the Nature Conservation Society of SA, a committee member of the Restoration Decade Alliance and a councillor of the Biodiversity Council..

Anthelia Bond received a postgraduate research scholarship from the School of Agriculture Food and Wine at The University of Adelaide, a supplementary scholarship from the South Australian Department for Environment and Water, and an Australia Awards Endeavour Research Fellowship. She is a board director of the Nature Conservation Society of SA, and a member of the Ecological Society of Australia, Modern Money Lab and Scientist Rebellion.

– ref. Climate change and nature loss are our biggest environmental problems – so why isn’t the market tackling them together? – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-and-nature-loss-are-our-biggest-environmental-problems-so-why-isnt-the-market-tackling-them-together-219899

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Kettlewell, Senior lecturer, Economics Department, University of Technology Sydney

A new Netflix documentary, You Are What You Eat, showcases sets of identical twins as they adopt different diets. For eight weeks one twin follows a vegan diet while the other one follows an omnivorous diet. The experiment is compelling because, being genetically identical, the health of each twin is very similar before the trial.

I won’t spoil the ending for those who haven’t seen it, but if you prefer the drab writings of academics over the glitz and glamour of Netflix, you can read the published paper in the journal JAMA Network Open.

The documentary underscores the extraordinary contribution twin studies make to advancing our understanding of the world. But this goes well beyond comparing different diets.

British polymath Sir Francis Galton first documented the striking similarities of twins in 1875, arguing this proved “nature” was an important contributor to our dispositions and health. Since then, twins have been used extensively in research. What is it then that makes twins so special, and how do researchers harness the power of twins?

Twins as comparisons for each other

The Netflix documentary highlights one important feature of twins – they are good for making comparisons. Identical twins share nearly all of their genes, and usually grow up in the same household, meaning they experience the same parenting, schooling and so on.

The documentary is an example of a randomised controlled trial, where participants are selected at random for some intervention (like a new drug) and those not selected serve as controls (in drug trials they might get a placebo). Randomised trials are normally seen as the gold standard in evaluating what works.

Read more:
Randomised control trials: what makes them the gold standard in medical research?

We don’t actually need identical twins for such trials. In fact, relatively few trials use twins. But twins can help to ensure the treatment and control groups are as similar as possible. This is especially important when there are few participants. In the Netflix study, there were only 44. Without twins, their results would have been more uncertain.

For ethical reasons or just sheer practicality, we can’t always run randomised trials. This is where twins can help us out. Say we want to know the effect of education on earnings, or the effect of smoking on developing lung cancer.

These questions, and many more, have been tackled by comparing the differences within sets of identical twins (for example, where one twin smokes and the other doesn’t).

By focusing on differences between twins, we eliminate genetic and common family factors, and can be more confident about causality. Using twins doesn’t fully solve the problem of omitted factors, but it helps to reduce it.

Twins and heritability

Galton’s fascination with twins stemmed from wanting to know why we are the way we are. Is it our genes (nature), or is it our upbringing and personal experiences (nurture)? His early observations were informal, but eventually researchers developed sophisticated methods to disentangle genes and environment.

The main approach is essentially to see whether identical twins, who are genetically the same, are more similar than fraternal twins, who on average share only 50% of the gene variants that make us unique. If the identical twins are more similar, that indicates genes matter.

For example, twin studies have shown that around 40% of individual differences in personality can be explained by genes, along with as much as 80–90% of differences in height and weight at the end of childhood.

Read more:
Curious Kids: Why do people grow to certain sizes?

Limitations and misuse of twin research

One drawback to twin studies is that twins are a select group, and findings may not always generalise to the broader population. Only about 1.4% of births in Australia are twins.

Twin heritability studies also rely on strong assumptions, like that the common family environment matters to the same extent for identical and fraternal twins. This can be overcome by focusing on identical twins reared apart, but these studies are rare.

There has also been some misunderstanding and misuse of findings from twin studies. Galton’s belief in the power of nature led him to promote eugenics, the idea of selective breeding to achieve “genetic superiority”, which had devastating consequences in the 20th century.

But our genes are not our destiny. While a certain combination of genes may raise the likelihood you’re extraverted, who we grow up to be is a complicated interplay between genes, upbringing and personal experiences. Even disorders with a genetic basis, like Alzheimer’s, are rarely certain to occur, and we can take actions to reduce our risk.

The future of twin research

Twin studies have been conducted for decades, with more than 60 twin registries operating around the world. In Australia, the largest registry is Twins Research Australia, who have around 75,000 members.

With more opportunities to link data, genome mapping, and advances in machine learning, what we can learn from twins will only increase in the future. And we can expect twins to continue to play a key role in advancing our understanding of the world for many years to come.

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

– ref. Netflix’s You Are What You Eat uses a twin study. Here’s why studying twins is so important for science – https://theconversation.com/netflixs-you-are-what-you-eat-uses-a-twin-study-heres-why-studying-twins-is-so-important-for-science-221012

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Kirkland, Professor of Geochronology, Curtin University

Some half a billion years ago, life on Earth went through a huge transformation. In what is called the Ediacaran period, after billions of years of single-celled organisms, large multicellular organisms emerged in the fossil record.

These traces of the oldest complex ecosystems have been found in only a handful of locations around the world. The fossils were made by soft-bodied creatures covered by sand, creating impressions of their squashed remains imprinted into rock.

Evidence of these creatures was first found in the Ediacara Hills, in South Australia’s Flinders Ranges. The discovery was pivotal in defining the Ediacaran period: a time in Earth’s past characterised by a specific layer of rock which symbolises a significant change in history.

What was happening elsewhere at this time? Similar-looking fossils have been found in a disused quarry in a farmer’s field at Llangynog in Wales, but until now their precise age was unknown.

In a new study published in Journal of the Geological Society, we have dated these Welsh remnants of ancient marine life. Now, we can confirm they were near contemporaries of the famous South Australian fossils.

A bookmark for rocks

How do geologists figure out the age of fossils? Understanding the age of fossils is extremely useful for correlation and understanding how biological communities evolved.

Luckily, at least for us today, an environmental catastrophe loomed in the shallow sea where these Welsh organisms lived.

Volcanic explosions threw mineral particles over the surrounding landscape and polluted the atmosphere with toxic gases.

The billowing red hot clouds created ash layers. These ash layers contain mineral grains that are isotopically datable, acting like miniature stopwatches that record the time elapsed since they crystallised in a volcano. Hence, volcanic ash acts much like a bookmark in a sequence of rocks, tracking the moment of eruption.

A clock for rocks

A clock tick-tocks every second, but how do we measure time when each tick takes a million years? We use a mineral called zircon.

Trapped within zircon is some uranium that undergoes nuclear decay to lead over millions of years. Scientists know the rate at which this change occurs, so by analysing the composition of the crystal we can use the zircon as a geological clock.

The more precisely we measure the amount of uranium and lead, the more precise the clock. By carefully dissolving, heating and analysing zircon, we have dated the rocks in Wales to 565 million years (plus or minus 0.1%). That is a precise death certificate for the fossils.

Read more:
Scientists can’t agree on when the first animals evolved – our research hopes to end the debate

It’s life, but not as we know it

Evidence from Ediacaran fossils implies that after four billion years of oceans containing single-celled microbes, suddenly – in geological terms at least – the seas teemed with new complex life. Ediacaran life is odd, with strange soft-bodied forms whose interaction with the environment is unclear.

Were the creatures stationary, or did they move around and eat each other? In some ways these creatures would be strangely familiar, yet in another way, bizarre.

Some appeared fern-like, others like cabbages, and yet others were similar to modern sea pens, resembling fat, old-fashioned writing quills.

Nevertheless, fossils from this time preserve the earliest evidence for large-scale multicellular organisms, including the first animals.

A tropical paradise?

Half a billion years ago, Wales was not green and sheep covered and looked much more like a barren volcanic island. The Llangynog fossils are fascinating because they record a shallow marine ecosystem.

In contrast, other famous fossil sites like Charnwood Forest in the United Kingdom and Mistaken Point, Canada record deep-marine conditions.

In the shallow waters of the chain of tropical volcanic islands that’s now Wales, a creature called Aspidella terranovica felt the warmth of sunlight and the sway of the tides 565 million years ago. This fossil is rare and valuable because it shows evidence of movement.

Alongside Aspidella, other disc-like organisms are preserved; these could represent the anchor for fern-shaped filter feeders.

Hidden away in an unassuming quarry in Wales are the remnants of a diverse shallow marine ecosystem containing some of Britain’s oldest fossils, which we have proved have cousins of a similar age in Australia. This time in Earth’s history was just after a global glaciation so severe and widespread that some researchers consider the entire planet froze into a “snowball”.

The Ediacaran fossils show this thaw-out heralded evolutionary change, demonstrating a profound link between our planet’s geological processes and its biological cargo.

Read more:
Friday essay: the silence of Ediacara, the shadow of uranium

Chris Kirkland receives funding from the Australian Research Council and various state government organisations within Australia.

Anthony Clarke receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. 565-million-years-old, some of the oldest UK fossils are eerily similar to famous Australian ones – https://theconversation.com/565-million-years-old-some-of-the-oldest-uk-fossils-are-eerily-similar-to-famous-australian-ones-218128

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Taucher, Lecturer in History, Murdoch University

Following the October 7 attack by Hamas, Israeli forces have carried out sustained attacks on the Palestinian controlled territory, dividing the international community.

Last week, the South African government presented a case to the International Court of Justice. They argued the Israeli government’s attack on Gaza, and especially the actions of its forces within Gaza since early October, could amount to genocide.

Few cases that have gone before the court are as explosive and potentially significant as this one.

Here’s how the hearings unfolded and what happens now.

Read more:
What enforcement power does the International Court of Justice have in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel?

Defining genocide

The crime of genocide is covered in the 1948 United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

It is defined as acts committed with intent to destroy, either in part or in whole, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, including:

• killing members of the group

• causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group

• deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about a groups physical destruction, in whole or in part

• imposing measures to prevent births

• forcibly transferring children.

The Genocide Convention is designed to not only prosecute individuals and governments who committed genocide, but to prevent it from occurring.

Therefore, the Convention states that while genocidal acts are punishable, so too are attempts and incitement to commit genocide, regardless of whether they are successful or not.

The South African case

The South African government argued that Israeli forces had killed 23,210 Palestinians. Approximately 70% were believed to be women and children.

Crucially for the court, South Africa argued Israeli forces were often aware that the bombings would cause significant civilian casualties. It said many of the Palestinians were killed in Israeli declared safe zones, mosques, hospitals, schools and refugee camps.

Beyond the death toll, South Africa argued that there were 60,000 wounded and maimed Palestinians. The separation of families through arrest and displacement has caused large scale and likely enduring harm to civilians. South Africa highlighted the displacement of 85% of Palestinians, particularly the October 13 evacuation order which displaced over one million people in 24 hours.

Read more:
South Africa is taking Israel to court for genocide in Palestine. What does it mean for the war in Gaza?

The South African government also alleged the Israeli attacks and the actions of its forces were preventing the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people being met. It particularly emphasised the Israeli decision to cut off water supply to Gaza. The distribution of food, medicine and fuel were also hampered. Israeli attacks on hospitals were also highlighted.

South Africa alleged the denial of adequate humanitarian assistance, especially medical supplies and care, amounts to the imposing of measures to prevent births.

Finally, South Africa focused on speeches by Israeli political leaders and soldiers advocating for the erasure of Gaza. This included Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reference to the biblical destruction of enemies of ancient Israel and military commanders’ reference to Palestinians as “human animals” that need to be eliminated. These were used as evidence of incitement to genocide.

If the International Court of Justice doesn’t find that Israel is committing genocidal acts, South Africa has argued the Israeli forces have demonstrated an intent to commit genocide, and that there should be an interim order made to stop it.

The Israeli response

The Israeli government rejects all of the allegations by South Africa. Israel presented its arguments on January 12.

Israel’s overall argument is that the attacks on Gaza have been directed at Hamas soldiers. It says the civilian casualties have been an unfortunate consequence of carrying out military operations in an urban environment. Accordingly, the deaths, injuries and damage are not genocidal in nature, but instead, are incidental to military action.

Israel has presented evidence that it is delivering food, water, medical supplies and fuel to Gaza, demonstrating the opposite of genocidal intent. The Israeli Defence Force also runs a Civilian Harm Mitigation Unit.

These actions, according to Israel, are “concrete measures aimed specifically at recognising the rights of the Palestinian civilians in Gaza to exist”.

Finally, Israel has argued that the quotes South Africa have argued display incitement to commit genocide have been taken out of context. According to Israel, the court has no grounds to find that there are acts of genocide taking place, or that there is genocidal intent.

At this point, the court will not decide whether Israel has committed genocide or not. Determining that will likely take several years. Instead, the court will decide whether the allegations are at the least plausible, and if so, likely order that Israel and Palestine reach an interim ceasefire, and for Israeli forces to take all necessary steps to prevent genocide.

How significant is it?

If the court rules in favour of South Africa, a major world power – supported by the US and much of the Western world – will have been found to have committed what has, historically, been the most notorious of crimes.

That said, the prospect of any ruling by the International Court of Justice having a meaningful impact on the conflict in Gaza is remote.

The UN and its legal institutions are powered solely by a belief the international community is respectful of international institutions and international law. The problem is when a powerful country does not believe a ruling by a United Nations body applies to them, little can be done to enforce it.

Read more:
After 3 months of devastation in the Israel-Hamas war, is anyone ‘winning’?

The case of Nicaragua vs the United States in 1986 shows this in stark detail. The US initially indicated it would respect the decision of the court, but when the court found against the US, the US simply ignored the decision. For Israel and for its most powerful supporters, a finding against it by the court would likely be something they dispute and ultimately ignore.

Where does this leave Australia?

There is, however, a possibility the ruling could influence smaller powers.

Small to middle powers that rely on international rules to further their interests may be moved to support the cause for a ceasefire more vocally.

The Australian government would find itself in a particularly awkward position.

After all, the Australian government supported Ukraine’s case against Russia, also about genocide.

It has already made a public statement calling for restraint from Israel.

Australia would face a decision between unequivocal support for a country it sees as a partner, or support for a court it would otherwise see as a key arbiter in the international order.

Dean Aszkielowicz has received funding from the Army Research Scheme.

Paul Taucher 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. South Africa has made its genocide case against Israel in court. Here’s what both sides said and what happens next – https://theconversation.com/south-africa-has-made-its-genocide-case-against-israel-in-court-heres-what-both-sides-said-and-what-happens-next-221017

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Corneel Vandelanotte, Professorial Research Fellow: Physical Activity and Health, CQUniversity Australia

It’s that time of year when many people are getting started on their resolutions for the year ahead. Doing more physical activity is a popular and worthwhile goal.

If you’re hoping to be more active in 2024, perhaps you’ve invested in an activity tracker, or you’re considering buying one.

But what are the benefits of activity trackers? And will a basic tracker do the trick, or do you need a fancy one with lots of features? Let’s take a look.

Read more:
How do I improve my motivation to exercise when I really hate it? 10 science-backed tips

Why use an activity tracker?

One of the most powerful predictors for being active is whether or not you are monitoring how active you are.

Most people have a vague idea of how active they are, but this is inaccurate a lot of the time. Once people consciously start to keep track of how much activity they do, they often realise it’s less than what they thought, and this motivates them to be more active.

You can self-monitor without an activity tracker (just by writing down what you do), but this method is hard to keep up in the long run and it’s also a lot less accurate compared to devices that track your every move 24/7.

By tracking steps or “activity minutes” you can ascertain whether or not you are meeting the physical activity guidelines (150 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per week).

It also allows you to track how you’re progressing with any personal activity goals, and view your progress over time. All this would be difficult without an activity tracker.

Research has shown the most popular brands of activity trackers are generally reliable when it comes to tracking basic measures such as steps and activity minutes.

But wait, there’s more

Many activity trackers on the market nowadays track a range of other measures which their manufacturers promote as important in monitoring health and fitness. But is this really the case? Let’s look at some of these.

Resting heart rate

This is your heart rate at rest, which is normally somewhere between 60 and 100 beats per minute. Your resting heart rate will gradually go down as you become fitter, especially if you’re doing a lot of high-intensity exercise. Your risk of dying of any cause (all-cause mortality) is much lower when you have a low resting heart rate.

So, it is useful to keep an eye on your resting heart rate. Activity trackers are pretty good at tracking it, but you can also easily measure your heart rate by monitoring your pulse and using a stopwatch.

Heart rate during exercise

Activity trackers will also measure your heart rate when you’re active. To improve fitness efficiently, professional athletes focus on having their heart rate in certain “zones” when they’re exercising – so knowing their heart rate during exercise is important.

But if you just want to be more active and healthier, without a specific training goal in mind, you can exercise at a level that feels good to you and not worry about your heart rate during activity. The most important thing is that you’re being active.

Also, a dedicated heart rate monitor with a strap around your chest will do a much better job at measuring your actual heart rate compared to an activity tracker worn around your wrist.

Maximal heart rate

This is the hardest your heart could beat when you’re active, not something you could sustain very long. Your maximal heart rate is not influenced by how much exercise you do, or your fitness level.

Most activity trackers don’t measure it accurately anyway, so you might as well forget about this one.

VO₂max

Your muscles need oxygen to work. The more oxygen your body can process, the harder you can work, and therefore the fitter you are.

VO₂max is the volume (V) of oxygen (O₂) we could breathe maximally (max) over a one minute interval, expressed as millilitres of oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute (ml/kg/min). Inactive women and men would have a VO₂max lower than 30 and 40 ml/kg/min, respectively. A reasonably good VO₂max would be mid thirties and higher for women and mid forties and higher for men.

VO₂max is another measure of fitness that correlates well with all-cause mortality: the higher it is, the lower your risk of dying.

For athletes, VO₂max is usually measured in a lab on a treadmill while wearing a mask that measures oxygen consumption. Activity trackers instead look at your running speed (using a GPS chip) and your heart rate and compare these measures to values from other people.

If you can run fast with a low heart rate your tracker will assume you are relatively fit, resulting in a higher VO₂max. These estimates are not very accurate as they are based on lots of assumptions. However, the error of the measurement is reasonably consistent. This means if your VO₂max is gradually increasing, you are likely to be getting fitter.

Read more:
Health Check: do we really need to take 10,000 steps a day?

So what’s the take-home message? Focus on how many steps you take every day or the number of activity minutes you achieve. Even a basic activity tracker will measure these factors relatively accurately. There is no real need to track other measures and pay more for an activity tracker that records them, unless you are getting really serious about exercise.

Corneel Vandelanotte receives research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council, the National Heart Foundation of Australia, and the Medical Research Future Fund. He also receives funding from Health and Wellbeing Queensland and Wellbeing SA for delivering the 10,000 Steps program.

– ref. Thinking of using an activity tracker to achieve your exercise goals? Here’s where it can help – and where it probably won’t – https://theconversation.com/thinking-of-using-an-activity-tracker-to-achieve-your-exercise-goals-heres-where-it-can-help-and-where-it-probably-wont-219235

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lynette Washington, Research Fellow, UniSA Business, University of South Australia

A significant proportion of Australian workers – about one-fifth – would be prepared to sacrifice between 16% and 33% of their salaries for the right to work from home, which works out at A$12,000 to $24,000 of those workers’ salaries.

But a much larger proportion, more than one half, would be prepared to sacrifice nothing, being either not strongly convinced about the benefits of working from home or actively preferring to go into the workplace.

Surprisingly, our findings are consistent with those of other surveys conducted both during and before the pandemic, suggesting the widespread move to working from home during COVID hasn’t changed preferences.

Before COVID, on the day of the 2016 Australian census, only 2% to 8% of the workforce in major Australian cities worked from home.

During COVID, on the day of the 2021 census 21% worked from home. A Bureau of Statistics survey conducted amid lockdowns in late 2020 found 31% worked from home most days.

Our survey of 1,113 workers from Australia’s 17 largest urban areas was limited to those in jobs whose tasks could be done either remotely or in central locations.

What we found

We offered the workers surveyed a choice of eight job arrangements with different salary ranges calculated with reference to their current salaries, and different degrees of flexibility about working from home.

We also asked about attitudes to remote working, experience with remote working, commute patterns and age, gender, education and household size.

We found most workers – 55% – weren’t prepared to sacrifice salary for the right to work remotely. Most of these (31% of all workers) didn’t see significant benefits to working from home.

But a substantial proportion, 23.5% of all workers, while seeing benefits to their productivity and health and wellbeing from working from home, were concerned about what it would do to their organisational relationships, learning opportunities and prospects for advancement.

Interestingly, workers who had the most experience of working from home before the pandemic raised these concerns most often. Workers with the least experience of working from home pre-pandemic were the least likely to be concerned about its impact on their careers and work relationships.

This might be because before the pandemic we didn’t have great work-from-home policies and procedures to support remote workers.

Read more:
Remote working improves the lives of female managers – but at a cost

Gender matters, age matters

Women valued the ability to work from home far more than men, on average 28% more. This indicates that women are more likely to make a trade-off between long-term career prospects and the benefits of flexible work.

In terms of age, workers in their 30s and 50s valued the ability to work from home the most while workers in their 20s valued it the least. This might be because workers in their 20s at the start of their careers are the most likely to value direct interactions with their colleagues and supervisors.

Knowledge workers value remote work the most

Middle and high-income earners in white-collar “knowledge economy” jobs were the most likely to value working from home. They were willing to forgo $12,000 to $24,000 of their annual salary to have the ability to do it some of the time.

Workers in low-wage clerical or administrative jobs in sectors such as retail and training were among the least likely to value working from home. They were also among the most concerned about its impacts on their relationships with colleagues and opportunities for learning and advancement.

Workers in small firms also placed low values on the ability to work from home, perhaps because these firms lacked the technological capacity to fully support it.

Read more:
The shift to working from home will be difficult to reverse

Opinions split on productivity

About half of the workers surveyed thought they were less productive at home. About another quarter found no impact. The final quarter found a significant improvement in both the quality and quantity of their work.

Many said that while their working from home might cut the amount they got done per hour, it didn’t cut the total amount they got done because the flexibility it offered allowed them to catch up at other times.

High and medium-wage professionals were the most optimistic about their productivity at home, and workers in low and medium-wage service jobs the least optimistic – a pattern that mirrored what they were prepared to sacrifice for the right to work at home.

How to become an employer of choice

Our findings suggest many employers of knowledge economy workers might be able to attract and retain high-quality staff by offering the ability to work from home in lieu of higher salaries.

But this will not be the answer for all employers looking to retain the best staff.

With many workers wary of what could happen to their career prospects if they stayed at home, and 55% of workers placing no value on remote work, some employers will need to find other ways to attract the best workers.

Many workers value both face-to-face relations and flexibility. Finding the right balance will become increasingly important now that COVID has shown us how many of our jobs can be done from home.

This research wass funded by the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre, the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, and Transport for NSW.

Akshay Vij receives funding from the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, Transport for NSW, and the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre.

– ref. What’s it worth to work from home? For some, it’s as much as one-third of their wage – https://theconversation.com/whats-it-worth-to-work-from-home-for-some-its-as-much-as-one-third-of-their-wage-217554

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Saskia Roberts, PhD Candidate, School of History, Australian National University

This piece contains spoilers for Poor Things.

Poor Things can be described in one word: polarising. Yorgos Lanthimos’ film follows Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), a scientist’s experiment created from a woman’s body and a child’s mind.

It won two Golden Globes and received a standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival.

Yet others walked out of the Venice screening during its many sex scenes, one which depicts a father teaching his two sons the birds and the bees by letting them watch him and Bella in the act. (This scene has been re-edited for the United Kingdom release to comply with local classification requirements.)

While some critics lauded Poor Things as a feminist exploration of sexual liberation, others saw it as a male director and screenwriter’s exploitative attempt to portray female sexuality. Vulture writer Angelica Jade Bastién took the latter view, arguing the film:

is not interested in the sex lives of women as much as the ways in which a young woman’s body can be positioned and used […] I want to see what a grown woman thinks and feels about sex!

But I think it is wrong to read Poor Things as a film about grown women. Its most controversial scene involves children witnessing sex, and Bella begins the movie with a child’s brain. Poor Things is about the sexuality of girls. It accurately depicts girls’ early sexual feelings and shows us some more positive ways of understanding girlhood sexual desire.

Discovering sexuality

I have interviewed 23 Australians who were teenage girls between 1970 and 2010 about how they learned about sex, and their experiences were echoed in Poor Things.

Early in the film, Bella teaches herself to masturbate and is delighted by her discovery. Many of my interviewees had similar memories, often describing themselves as “exploring” their bodies and finding enjoyable sensations in the process.

Nicole* grew up in the 2000s and told me she did not know what she was doing when she first masturbated, but

somehow when I was pretty young […] [I] discovered that it felt good.

Interviewees, including Nicole, were normally aged between five and 10 during these experiences (which are normal and common among children).

Interviewees regularly described their early forays into masturbation as disconnected from adult sexuality. These were simply experiments with their bodies.

But this also meant my interviewees often believed nobody else masturbated. Sue, born in the 1960s, even created her own term for masturbation, because she had never heard anyone speak about it before:

It was my bobble wobble. I had no idea that it had a name.

Bella also thinks she is the first person to masturbate, and humiliates her maid by demonstrating her newfound discovery. This is the first of many incidents in which she learns “polite society” does not speak about sex, let alone perform it in public. While Bella mostly ignores these warnings, many of my interviewees were acutely aware of societal expectations about girlhood sexual desire.

Read more:
‘Is it normal for girls to masturbate?’

Girls are interested in sex

In the recent past, the media depicted boys as much more sexual than girls, who were supposedly interested in romance instead. Even magazines like Dolly – which catered to girls and spoke openly about sex – assumed girls’ sexual impulses would be awakened by their boyfriends’ advances.

This is clear even in well-meaning advice to girls about not being “pressured” into sex, which presupposes girls would not initiate sex themselves. Studies about Dolly and Girlfriend have also found their columnists downplayed girls’ sexual desires and insisted they were responsible for controlling boys’ sexual behaviours.

These ideas clearly influenced my interviewees. Many were deeply ashamed of masturbating by the time they were teenagers. Some were told not to masturbate by their parents. Others became fearful when their friends called masturbation disgusting. Charlotte* even read a book that said masturbating children developed excess phlegm. She concluded:

obviously you’re not meant to have fun like that […] obviously you’re not meant to do it yourself.

None of this stopped my interviewees from masturbating. It only stopped them from talking about it or thinking anyone else did it too.

Read more:
Goodbye, Dolly, the magazine that helped so many young women grow up

A healthy sexuality

Teen media did not always have a negative influence. Several interviewees told me they learned the word “masturbation” from Dolly, which portrayed it as a normal and healthy practice. “Oh, that’s what I’ve been doing”, thought Nicole when she found instructions on how to masturbate in the magazine. This discovery was reassuring; so too were discussions about masturbation with friends (though very few people were brave enough to mention it out loud).

But my interviewees still felt conversations about sexual pleasure were missing from their media and their education. Jess, born in the 1990s, told me:

[In] high school, I had a great understanding of the mechanics. But pleasure had never been part of the discussion, you know?

Perhaps Poor Things could be instructive here.

Bella does not feel embarrassed about enjoying sex, nor in talking about it. This allows her to cast aside her controlling lovers and to question the conditions at her brothel workplace. She develops a healthy relationship to her sexuality; she knows sex should be enjoyable for her, not just for men, and that she should not be coerced into it.

Bella Baxter may be a fairy tale character who makes her own sexual rules. But we can learn from her. We can treat girls’ masturbation as natural and normal. We can show future generations there is nothing shameful about sexuality. And we can teach girls to know not just their sexual rights, but also their sexual pleasures.

Read more:
Poor Things: meet the radical Scottish visionary behind the new hit film

*Names have been changed.

Saskia Roberts 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 shame and pleasure of masturbation: Poor Things gets girls’ early sexual feelings right – https://theconversation.com/the-shame-and-pleasure-of-masturbation-poor-things-gets-girls-early-sexual-feelings-right-220662

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ray Kerkhove, Associate Professor (Adjunct), School of Education., University of Southern Queensland

Last year, chair of the Australian War Memorial Kim Beazley called for First Nations “guerilla campaigns” of the Frontier Wars to be included in the Australian War Memorial. His bid was criticised by the RSL Australia’s president Major General Greg Melick.

Melick argued Indigenous casualties of the Frontier Wars could not be honoured at the War Memorial because they did not fight “in uniform”. But the Australian War Memorial already honours “ununiformed” First Nations soldiers – namely Dayak people who assisted in Borneo during World War 2.

Major General Melick’s criticism highlighted a misconception that First Nations’ warriors are not comparable to ANZAC soldiers. Many Australians do not believe First Nations people had military-style practices. Rather, they are regarded as victims of genocide.

Co-author Ray Kerkhove’s book How They Fought places First Nations’ practices within the framework of military history. This debunks the idea First Nations people lacked the structures and disciplines necessary to organise meaningful responses to the invasion.

Read more:
In The Australian Wars, Rachel Perkins dispenses with the myth Aboriginal people didn’t fight back

Why recognition of First Nations’ fighting strategies matters

Australia is increasingly aware of the genocidal nature of its Frontier Wars. But as Historian Grace Karskens notes, this is often perceived as “no battles, no resistance and no survivors”.

Acknowledging massacres helps emphasise the inequalities in these conflicts. But categorising all skirmishes this way without acknowledging how First Nations people fought back, or were sometimes victorious, can indirectly imply First Nations peoples were always passive victims.

The broader implications of this narrative have impacted public education. Historians Matthew Bailey and Sean Brawley found both teachers and the wider community had difficulty accepting Australia’s frontier conflicts as “war”, because they had been presented to them as one-sided slaughter.

Thankfully, Arrernte and Kalkadoon director Rachel Perkins’ documentary series recently reinstated Aboriginal peoples’ resistance as historical reality. Even so, Australia’s collective understanding of how Aboriginal peoples fought back remains limited.

We still know quite little of the “guerrilla campaigns” Kim Beazley wants to honour. For instance, the complex inter-group negotiations across mobs.

Many other questions remain unanswered: how were warriors organised for attacks? How effective were their actions? What strategies were employed?

A small start was made in 2017 through a visiting fellowship with the Harry Gentle Resource Centre (Griffith University). This project mapped the role of Birn, Bugurnuba and other inter-tribal alliances in pushing back against the invasion of south-east Queensland.

Read more:
3 key moments in Indigenous political history Victorian school students didn’t learn about

First Nations’ perspectives of frontier wars

Another breakthrough came through reconstructing First Nations’ historical perspectives of these wars. Two examples are Ambēyaŋ historian Callum Clayton-Dixon’s work in 2019: Surviving New England and (the same year) co-author Ray Kerkhove and historian Frank Uhr’s The Battle of One Tree Hill.

To amplify the work of his colleague Clayton-Dixon, Gamilaraay/ Kooma co-author Boe Skulthorpe-Spearim began presenting his own research on this topic in a podcast series called Frontier Wars. Boe’s research methods included yarns with Elders and historians.

As a Knowledge sharer, Boe’s podcasts affirmed growing evidence the Frontier Wars were more than massacres. This was a truth historians Nicholas Clements and Henry Reynolds were also unveiling in Tasmania, as was historian Stephen Gapps in collaboration with Wiradyuri people in central NSW.

It’s becoming more and more apparent that First Nations resistance was organised and efficient. Co-author Ray Kerkhove’s How They Fought identified specific structures and tactics First Nations peoples’ employed during the Frontier Wars. Kerkhove analysed over 200 written reminiscences and hundreds of settler and First Nations accounts of skirmishes across Australia.

Kerkhove’s How They Fought suggests resistance was mostly a “slow drip” of constant harassment against the colonisers – but effective in halting settlement for many years in some regions. It identifies the complex tactics First Nations groups developed for raids, sieges, pitched battles and even their attempts to take over the pastoral industry of particular regions within the Northern Territory and South Australia.

Kerkhove’s research proposes First Nations’ forces had military-style training, ranking, “policing” patrols, defensive ‘bastions’, and intelligence networks. The research highlights the frequency and scale of inter-tribal meetings and partnerships during the Frontier Wars – for instance, in Tasmania, southern Queensland and western NSW. It finds traditional weapons were effective in causing many settler fatalities. The research also finds many new weapons, fire, steel, glass, guns and horses were adopted to halt the tide of settlement.

Read more:
The Australian War Memorial must deal properly with the frontier wars

The sophistication of First Nations warfare needs to be acknowledged

Australia needs to understand the Frontier Wars were more than a sequence of massacres. Mob fought back. They had victories. First Nations peoples quickly recognised they were dealing with an existential threat, and created widespread resistance. This history is finally being written.

Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples emphasise the deep pain they feel when ANZAC rolls around each year, knowing Australia still does not formally recognise or acknowledge the blood, battles, lives and land that were lost.

Often this lack of recognition stems from limited knowledge of the sophistication of First Nations’ resistance. These “ununiformed” warriors had their own insignia and protocols. They acted with great valour and genius, against incredible odds. First Nations warriors should receive the same dignity we accord our ANZAC fallen.

Boe Skulthorpe-Spearim is affiliated with Warriors of the Aboriginal Resistance (WAR), and Treaty Before Voice.

Ray Kerkhove 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 First Nations ‘ununiformed warriors’ qualify for the Australian War Memorial – https://theconversation.com/why-first-nations-ununiformed-warriors-qualify-for-the-australian-war-memorial-219109

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kevin Bell, Adjunct professor, Monash University

The Voice referendum was a disappointing result for many, but there is hope that much of its vision could be achieved via a different path. The Joint Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs has presented a report to federal parliament calling for the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The committee was led by Uncle Patrick Dodson, a Yawuru poltician who is retiring from the senate on January 26, the anniversary of Australia’s invasion.

The declaration is essentially a list of human rights Indigenous peoples have under international law. These rights are presented as articles. These include the right to self-determination and participation in decision-making in matters that affect them.

If the committee’s call to implement the declaration is accepted by the federal government, this right to participation in decision-making could be achieved in many ways. This includes non-constitutional implementation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart.

A strong majority of the standing committee including the Greens’ members supported the implementation of the declaration. The coalition members dissented on the key recommendations. DjabWurrung Gunnai Gunditjmara senator Lidia Thorpe supported the recommendation but went further to propose the declaration be enshrined in federal legislation. Thorpe’s proposal was rejected by parliament.

Read more:
The political subjugation of First Nations peoples is no longer historical legacy

What is the UN Declaration for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?

Indigenous peoples’ human rights in Australia (and elsewhere) were grossly violated by colonisation which resulted in past and ongoing injustices. The declaration recognises and lists those rights with the purpose of addressing those injustices.

A key right in the declaration is Article 4:

Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.

The declaration was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2007 after 20 years of negotiation by Indigenous peoples and governments around the world.

Indigenous figures in Australia played leading roles in these processes. Development of the declaration involved people such as Uncle Les Malezer, a Gubbi Gubbi and Butchulla man who was the chair of the Indigenous peoples caucus and addressed the United Nations General Assembly when the declaration was adopted.

Yarawu barrister and academic Uncle Mick Dodson helped draft the declaration, and Professor Megan Davis, a Cobble Cobble woman, was part of the UN declaration working group.

The declaration has garnered strong support among Indigenous communities in Australia.

The Joint Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs report states applying the declaration could improve access to land rights, help combat racial discrimination and support Indigenous businesses, social services and cultural organisations.

We suggest it would also add great momentum to historic processes already underway, such as truth-telling and treaty-making in Victoria.

The main purpose of treaty-making is to give effect to Indigenous peoples’ self-determination. Implementing the declaration would support treaty-making because it would involve recognising self-determination as a right.

Read more:
Gaza update: deadlock in the UN security council means no relief for suffering Palestinian civilians

How the declaration could be implemented by law and/or policy

The Joint Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs’ report examined how the declaration could be implemented in Australia and whether it should be through legislation, under policy, or both.

Senator Thorpe’s private member’s bill called for the declaration to be enshrined in federal legislation. The bill would have required the federal parliament to ensure its legislation was consistent with the declaration. It would also have required the federal government to adopt an action plan for its implementation. The bill was rejected.

The majority of the standing committee decided against supporting Thorpe’s approach, preferring a more flexible process. Their report examined how Canada and New Zealand’s legal and policy-based approaches for implementing the declaration appear to have been effective. This is different to senator Thorpe’s approach which requires legislating the declaration as an absolute minimum.

The standing committee recommend instead that Indigenous peoples have a choice of approach, through negotiations with governments and others, based on their right to self-determination. Whether this would need at least the minimum standards and essential framework to be set down in legislation is an open question yet to be answered.

The Voice offered a bold vision of a constitutionally protected say for Indigenous peoples in federal law-making and administration. This would have been consistent with the right to self-determination and to participation in decision-making specified in the declaration.

The committee’s report states the declaration offers a bigger vision than the Voice.

It recognises not only the importance of First Nations peoples’ self-determination and participation in decision-making, but also rights to housing, health, work and freedom from discrimination and other human rights.

Implementing the declaration does not necessarily require constitutional enshrinement.

While the Voice would have given Indigenous people a powerful say in those areas, implementing the declaration could elevate that say and those areas to the level of human rights. This is greatly needed in the aftermath of a disappointing and painful referendum result.

As a barrister in the 1990s Professor Bell represented the Yawuru People including Senator Dodson and Mick Dodson in their native title case in the Federal Court of Australia.

Wayne Atkinson 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. Following the Voice failure, Indigenous politicians are calling for the UN’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to be implemented. What is it and what would it mean? – https://theconversation.com/following-the-voice-failure-indigenous-politicians-are-calling-for-the-uns-declaration-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples-to-be-implemented-what-is-it-and-what-would-it-mean-219695

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

A national Freshwater poll for The Sunday Telegraph had a 50–50 tie between Labor and the Coalition, unchanged from a Freshwater poll for The Financial Review in mid-December.

The Poll Bludger reported that primary votes were 39% Coalition (steady since December), 31% Labor (steady), 14% Greens (up one) and 15% for all Others (down one). This poll was conducted January 10–11 from a sample of 1,007.

Freshwater has had better results for the Coalition than other polls, so Labor would probably have led if there was a Newspoll.

Anthony Albanese led Peter Dutton by 47–38 as preferred PM (43–39 in December). On Labor’s target to achieve 82% renewables by 2030, 51% said it would mean higher energy costs while 16% thought their bills would be reduced. On the cost of living, 81% said Labor had not done enough and 68% said they would not do enough in the next six months.

Morgan polls, Resolve likeability and Newspoll aggregate data

In my last polls article I reported that Labor led by 51–49 in the Morgan poll conducted December 4–10. In the Morgan poll conducted December 11–17 there was a 50–50 tie. In the poll conducted January 2–7 from a sample of 1,716, the Coalition led by 51–49.

Primary votes were 39% Coalition (up one since mid-December), 29% Labor (down three), 13% Greens (up 1.5), 5% One Nation (up 0.5) and 14% for all Others (steady).

Nine newspapers released likeability ratings for various politicians from the early December federal Resolve poll on December 28. The most popular politicians were Foreign Minister Penny Wong (net +14 likeability), Tasmanian independent senator Jacqui Lambie (net +10), Nationals senator Jacinta Price (net +6), ACT independent senator David Pocock (net +5) and Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek (net +2).

The most unpopular politicians were former PM Scott Morrison (net -35), ex-Greens senator Lidia Thorpe (net -29), former deputy PM Barnaby Joyce (net -27) and Pauline Hanson (net -25).

Albanese had a net -3 likeability, much better than his net approval of -11 in the same poll, while Dutton’s net likeability was -12 (-8 net approval). Greens leader Adam Bandt was at -10 net likeability while Treasurer Jim Chalmers was at net zero.

Newspoll aggregate data for its three federal polls conducted from early November to mid-December was released on December 27. The overall sample was 3,655. In the previous aggregate data, from Newspolls conducted before the October 14 Voice referendum, Labor led by 54–46. In this release, Labor’s overall lead was down to 52–48.

The Poll Bludger said Labor’s lead or deficit in the various states was close to the margins at the 2022 federal election. Labor led by 51–49 in New South Wales, 55–45 in Victoria, 54–46 in Western Australia and 55–45 in South Australia. Queensland was the only state with a Coalition lead, by 54–46.

Trump set for big win in Iowa Republican caucus

The Iowa Republican caucus is the first presidential nominating contest of 2024, and it will occur Tuesday AEDT. In the FiveThirtyEight aggregate of Iowa polls, Donald Trump has 51.3%, Nikki Haley 17.3% and Ron DeSantis 16.1%. The next contest is the New Hampshire primary on January 23, where Trump is being challenged by Haley.

Read more:
US elections 2024: a Biden vs Trump rematch is very likely, with Trump leading Biden

I covered the Taiwan presidential election for The Poll Bludger on Saturday, in which the centre-left and pro-independence candidate won with 40.1% of the vote (first past the post was used). Three US and UK byelections that are to be held from February 13–15 were also covered.

Queensland UComms poll: 51–49 to LNP

The Queensland state election will be held in October. A UComms poll for The Courier Mail, conducted December 21–22 from a sample of 1,911, gave the Liberal National Party a 51–49 lead, from primary votes of 36.2% LNP and 34.4% Labor, with no other parties’ votes released. LNP leader David Crisafulli led new Labor premier Steven Miles by 52.2–47.8 as preferred premier.

An October YouGov Queensland poll gave the LNP a 52–48 lead, and a September to December Resolve poll implied a 50–50 tie, but Resolve has been much better for Labor federally than other polls.

Victorian Redbridge poll: Labor has large lead

A Victorian state Redbridge poll, conducted December 2–12 from a sample of 2,026, gave Labor a 55.9–44.1 lead, a 0.6-point gain for the Coalition since a September Redbridge poll. Primary votes were 37% Labor (steady), 36% Coalition (up two), 13% Greens (steady) and 14% for all Others (down two).

Voters were asked their ratings of political leaders on a five-point scale, with 3 being neither approve nor disapprove. Labor Premier Jacinta Allan was at net -6, Liberal leader John Pesutto at net -13, Nationals leader Peter Walsh at net -15 and Greens leader Samantha Ratnam at net -21.

On the main impact of protests over the Israel-Gaza war, 30% thought they had threatened the safety of Jewish and Palestinian Australians, 21% raised awareness of the conflict and 19% pressured the Australian government to call for an end.

Tasmanian YouGov poll: Lambie Network has 20%

A Tasmanian state YouGov poll, conducted December 21 to January 4 from a sample of 850, gave the Liberals 31%, Labor 27%, the Jacqui Lambie Network (JLN) 20%, the Greens 15% and independents 7%. Tasmania uses a proportional system for its lower house elections, so a two party preferred is not applicable.

If this were the election result, the JLN would hold the balance of power. By 53–26, voters thought it was time to give someone else a go over the Liberals deserving to be re-elected. A November EMRS Tasmanian poll had 39% Liberals, 29% Labor, 12% Greens and 19% for all Others with no JLN option.

Lawler replaces Fyles as NT chief minister

Eva Lawler replaced Natasha Fyles as Labor’s Northern Territory chief minister on December 21. Fyles had resigned two days prior owing to conflict of interest allegations, and Lawler was unanimously elected by Labor MPs. Fyles will continue as Member for Nightcliff, so there won’t be a byelection.

This is the second change in NT chief minister this term after Fyles replaced Michael Gunner in May 2022. The next NT election is in August, and a November Redbridge poll had Labor well behind the opposition Country Liberals.

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. Freshwater national poll holds steady at a 50–50 tie between Labor and the Coalition as Trump set for big win in Iowa caucus – https://theconversation.com/freshwater-national-poll-holds-steady-at-a-50-50-tie-between-labor-and-the-coalition-as-trump-set-for-big-win-in-iowa-caucus-220286

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Hazel, Associate Professor, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

If you’ve watched cat videos on social media lately, you may have encountered the idea a cat’s coat colour tells us something about their personality.

Orange cats are supposedly “dumb”, always falling off beds or getting themselves stuck in awkward places. Tortoiseshell cats are often said to have a strong-willed attitude (sometimes referred to as “tortitude”). Black cats are “smarter”, if social media is to be believed.

The idea a cat’s personality is linked to their coat colour isn’t new. In 2012 a study of human perceptions of cats reported people generally believe ginger cats are friendly, while tortoiseshell cats are seen as aloof and intolerant.

It’s important to note this is a reflection people believe, rather than how cats are. So what does the research actually say?

Surveys on cat personality are filled out by people

Research suggests that cats, like people, have different personality types. One study proposed the “feline five” personality traits for cats: neuroticism, extraversion, dominance, impulsiveness and agreeableness.

The researchers linked “neuroticism” in cats with being anxious, insecure, fearful of people and tense. Cats low in neuroticism were associated with being stable, trusting, calm and self-assured.

Cats categorised as impulsive scored highly for being erratic, reckless and distractible, while those low in impulsivity were considered to be predictable and constrained.

You might get a sense from these studies that these are not terms cats would choose for themselves, and you’d be right.

Surveys on cat personality are filled out by people. As such, results are affected by human perspectives, projections and biases.

Indeed, a review of methods used to define personality in cats concluded studies reporting differences in personality due to coat colour were likely to be affected by owner bias.

Breed personality

Instead of colour, it’s possible breed is more important when it comes to cat personality.

One study found British Shorthair cats were least likely to seek human contact, while Korat and Devon Rex cats were most likely.

Another study, however, found substantial variation exists within breeds, suggesting a cat’s breed may not fully explain personality.

Both of these studies were once again survey-based and so, again, human bias is likely affecting the results.

If it’s not coat or breed, what else is it?

Genetics is not the only factor influencing personality. The environment and how an animal is raised also has a big effect.

If kittens are not socialised with people by the age of around nine weeks, they are more likely to be anxious and shy around humans and other animals.

Whether your cat was hand-reared, purchased from a breeder or found in a box, they will likely behave differently depending on time spent with their mother.

In reality, humans tend to ascribe certain meanings to particular behavioural traits.

For instance, if a cat is fearful, they may come across as lacking intelligence because they are less likely to interact with their environment in ways we recognise as “smart”.

On the flip side, confident cats comfortable in their environment may seem “dumb”, as they act in a carefree way that registers as “stupid” to the human eye.

Don’t judge a book by its cover – or a cat by it’s colour

While funny social media videos linking personality with cat coat colour might be harmless, the biases they create can have more harmful results. For instance, black cats take longer to adopt from a shelter than cats of other colours, and so are at higher risk of being euthanised.

Black animals are more difficult to photograph, meaning they may not look as attractive in adoption photos. Some people also believe black cats symbolise bad luck, or are associated with witchcraft or evil. Stereotypes of black cats being less friendly may also stem from facial expressions on darker fur being harder to read.

Before you dismiss this as speculation, a study did confirm human bias against black cats using photos of cats of different colours.

We shouldn’t be surprised people make judgements about cats based on their coat colour. We also make judgements based on human hair colour – take the baseless “dumb blonde” and “fiery redhead” stereotypes, for example.

And just like with human stereotypes, putting our cats into arbitrary boxes isn’t useful for anyone.

Instead, it’s best to think of your cat, and any cat, as the individuals they are.

Cats are much more than their coats. People and cats form close emotional bonds.

A cat can be the reason somebody gets up in the morning. Cats can also be fiercely loyal, unwavering companions, friends and family. Let’s not reduce their complex, wonderful individuality to just a colour or type.

Susan Hazel receives funding from the Waltham FoundationTM and is a member of the Dog & Cat Management Board of South Australia, RSPCA South Australia and Animal Therapies Ltd.

Julia Henning 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. TikTok says orange cats are ‘dumb’, and tortoiseshell cats have ‘an attitude’. But how true is that? – https://theconversation.com/tiktok-says-orange-cats-are-dumb-and-tortoiseshell-cats-have-an-attitude-but-how-true-is-that-218033

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland

Gathering for their annual World Economic Forum at Davos in Switzerland this week, the world’s business and political elite will be digesting some unpleasant reading courtesy of the aid agency Oxfam International.

Oxfam’s annual report on global inequality released this morning shows the wealth of the world’s five richest billionaires has more than doubled since the start of the decade, while 60% of humanity has grown poorer.

Among the findings of the report entitled Inequality Inc are that

• billionaires own US$3 trillion more than they did three years ago, meaning their wealth has grown at three times the rate of inflation

• even in Australia, the wealth of billionaires has climbed 70%

• five billion other people can’t afford what they could three years ago.

Progress in Africa, which seemed promising for much of this century, has stalled since COVID.

And large parts of the populations in wealthy countries, feeling left behind, have been lured by the appeal of rightwing populism – ironically, largely promoted by billionaires and their advocates.

Dreams of Davos past

This isn’t how things were supposed to turn out.

In its glory days in the 1990s, the Davos forum was the driving force promoting the idea of stakeholder capitalism in which corporations controlled by shareholders were supposed to advance the interests of everyone who had a stake in their activities: workers, consumers, communities and the environment.

The Forum still promotes the idea on its website.

Back then, as communism collapsed, everything seemed possible.

Pundits like Thomas Friedman spoke of a golden straitjacket in which universal prosperity could be achieved if only the world embraced liberal capitalism, overseen by an electronic herd of fund managers making investment decisions.

With appropriately-constrained policies, governments could ensure a rising economic tide lifted all boats.

In the UK and the US the so-called Third Way policies of Tony Blair and Bill Clinton were seen as delivering capitalism with a human face.

Three decades on, that vision is looking increasingly threadbare.

From the left, there is increasing pressure for radical alternatives; from the right, there is increasing pushback against the Forum’s brand of “woke capitalism”.

Financial managers remain as powerful as ever, but in the aftermath of the global financial crisis and multiple exposures of criminal wrongdoing by their firms, there is less and less faith in their beneficence and collective wisdom.

Read more:
Brian Schmidt: my five days in Davos

Billionaires are becoming the problem

Billionaires were not important enough to be seen as a major problem back in the early 1990s. In 1991, as communism collapsed, Forbes Magazine assessed the total wealth of the world’s five richest people as less than $US70 billion.

And the most prominent billionaires at the time were relatively appealing figures like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.

But since then, while US prices have doubled, the wealth of the top five has climbed tenfold. And they have become less interested in the idea that others should benefit from the system that has benefited them.

A case in point is Jeff Bezos who is number three on the rich list with net wealth of US$114 billion and runs Amazon whose brutal working conditions and anti-union stance are detailed in the Oxfam report.

Another is Elon Musk, number two on the rich list with US$180 billion, who could once have been seen as merely eccentric, but his recent embrace of neo-Nazis goes further.

And, appropriately for what Oxfam calls the gilded age of division, another is the very richest man in the world, Bernard Arnault, whose family owns luxury goods brands including Louis Vuitton and Sephora.

Arnault embodies the resurgence of what Thomas Piketty has called patrimonial society.

He took over the management of his father’s business and intends to pass his business on to his sons.

All have benefited from what is sometimes called neoliberalism: the mix of ideas including privatisation, financial deregulation and tax cuts that was meant to deliver stakeholder capitalism.

What neoliberalism has given us instead is greater division – something the billionaires gathered at Davos ought to consider this week as they reminisce about forums past.

A reasonable set of fresh ideas would be that put forward by Oxfam: direct government intervention to reduce inequality including but not limited to reasserting the roles of governments as regulators and service providers abdicated on the advice of gatherings such as the one in Davos.

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

– ref. As the billionaires gather at Davos, it’s worth examining what’s become of their dreams – https://theconversation.com/as-the-billionaires-gather-at-davos-its-worth-examining-whats-become-of-their-dreams-220876

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scarlett Howard, Lecturer, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University

If you’ve ever been tricked by a visual illusion, you know the feeling of disconnect between what your eyes perceive and what is actually there. Visual illusions occur due to errors in our perception, causing us to misperceive certain characteristics of objects or scenes.

As it turns out, many non-human animals also experience these effects, including illusions of item size, brightness, colour, shape, orientation, motion or quantity. We study these illusions and the differences between animals as it can tell us how visual systems evolved.

Our latest study, published in iScience, shows that European honeybees and European wasps see illusions of quantity in a similar way to humans.

An illusion perceived by several species

The study of visual illusions provides interesting windows into how brains operate. Visual illusions are perceptual errors, which likely enable us to process complex natural information efficiently.

The Solitaire illusion causes a misperception of quantity based on the configuration of dots in an image. Those who perceive the illusion will overestimate the quantity of dots when they are clustered together and/or underestimate the number of dots when unclustered.

We know the Solitaire illusion is perceived by humans, capuchin monkeys, guppies and bumblebees. Chimpanzees, rhesus monkeys and domestic dogs do not appear to perceive the illusion. Interestingly, in humans age appears to impact the perception of the Solitaire illusion – younger children are less susceptible than older children.

A possible evolutionary reason humans and other species may experience this misperception of quantities is it may allow us to process and compare large numbers of items more efficiently and quickly.

For quantities greater than about five, fast decisions may be more important than absolute accuracy, which would require manual, sequential counting.

Read more:
One, then some: how to count like a bee

Testing honeybees

Some insects, including bees and wasps, are very “motivated” to participate in behavioural experiments. European honeybees and wasps are central-place foragers: they will return to the location of a high-quality food source.

We provided freely flying bees and wasps with a reward of sugar water for participating in experiments. This allows us to train and test individually colour-marked insects throughout a day, with them returning by their own choice.

We have used this method to show honeybees can perform a variety of numerical tasks such as understanding the concept of zero, discriminating between quantities, performing simple addition and subtraction, matching symbols with quantities, and categorising quantities as odd or even.

Honeybees are also known to perceive some spatial, movement and colour illusions. These past skills make them an ideal candidate to study and see if they are fooled by illusions of quantity.

Wasps are far less tested than honeybees for their behaviour and cognition, but recent studies show they are also capable of advanced learning.

Bees, wasps and the Solitaire illusion

We tested the European honeybee (Apis mellifera) and the European wasp (Vespula vulgaris) using an identical method for both species.

We presented each insect with images containing blue and yellow dots. For 70 trials, the insects were trained with a sugar reward to visit an image with a higher quantity of yellow dots versus blue.

We then presented them with the Solitaire illusion – one image with the yellow dots clustered in the middle and the blue dots unclustered, versus one image of the opposite.

The images actually contained an identical number of blue and yellow dots. So, if the insects perceived the illusion, they would choose the option with the yellow dots clustered in the centre, revealing an overestimation of the quantity of yellow dots.

We found both honeybees and wasps perceived the illusion in a similar way to humans, capuchin monkeys and guppies.

Is there an evolutionary clue here?

We now know the perception of the Solitaire illusion occurs across a range of species including humans, non-human primates, fish and insects. There are also primates and other mammals that appear not to perceive the illusion.

This could suggest two potential evolutionary pathways of experiencing the illusion.

One is convergent evolution, where different species separately developed the ability to perceive this illusion due to the requirements of their environment.

The other pathway is that the perception occurred through conserved evolution, where a common ancestor perceived the illusion, and subsequently some species either retained or lost the illusion perception.

One important consideration is that while the Solitaire illusion is considered an illusion of quantity, it could also be perceived as an illusion of colour area, size, line length, or perimeter. More research will be needed to determine whether the illusion induces the misperception of quantity or other cues that correlate with quantity.

Read more:
Which square is bigger? Honeybees see visual illusions like humans do

Scarlett Howard receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Monash University, Australian Academy of Sciences, and the Hermon Slade Foundation. She is affiliated with Triple R.

Adrian Dyer receives funding from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Do they see what we see? Bees and wasps join humans in being tricked by illusions of quantity – https://theconversation.com/do-they-see-what-we-see-bees-and-wasps-join-humans-in-being-tricked-by-illusions-of-quantity-219577

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Reece, Principal Fellow, Melbourne School of Government, The University of Melbourne

2024 is going to be democracy’s biggest year ever. In a remarkable milestone in human history, over four billion people – more than half of the world’s population across more than 40 countries – will go to the polls.

National elections will be held in the United States, India, Indonesia, Russia, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Taiwan, Mexico, and South Africa to name just a few. The European Union will also go to the polls. This busy calendar of elections is as extraordinary for the diversity of nations and peoples participating as it is for its huge scale.

It’s tempting to see this record as a triumph for democracy as the dominant organising principle for governing people in the modern world.
But a closer examination shows democracy is at risk on many fronts. While these challenges take different forms in different jurisdictions, some clear patterns emerge. 2024 is going to be a rugged year for democracy, but there is still cause for cautious optimism about its future.

Here’s a rundown of just some of the significant elections that will shape the world in 2024.

Read more:
There will be more elections in 2024 than ever before – here’s how it could affect financial markets

United States

The most high-stakes election of 2024 will be the US general election for the president, house of representatives and senate in November. For decades America has stood as the world’s most powerful democracy and a guarantor (if a flawed one) of democratic governments the world over.

Donald Trump is the likely Republican nominee. In his previous term as President he did more than any previous chief executive to undermine democracy according to a Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) analysis.

Now he is promising to punish his political opponents, override the independence of the Department of Justice and extend presidential power into non-political areas of government administration.

This prompted President Joe Biden to warn that “Democracy is on the ballot” in the 2024 Presidential vote.

At this stage, US voters do not seem to care too much, with Trump ahead in many key opinion polls.

India and Indonesia

The rise of democracy in India and Indonesia, the world’s second and fourth most populous nations, has been a game changer for the global advancement of human freedoms. The sheer scale of the elections in these developing nations, with a combined population of 1.7 billion, is also a miracle in modern administration.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi seems almost certain to be returned for a third term in an election to be likely held between April and May.

While Indonesian Defence Minister, Prabowo Subianto, is the clear frontrunner to become the next president of the world’s largest Muslim nation in February.

In both cases, there is the risk these “strongman” leaders will win power in free and fair elections but then oversee illiberal policies that put democratic institutions under strain.

United Kingdom and Europe

The UK is likely to go to a general election in the second half of 2024. Current polling suggests it will result in the first change of government in 14 years with victory for the Labour Party led by Keir Starmer.

If that happens, it will be a reminder of democracy’s ability to enable the transfer of political power between opposing interests without widespread bloodshed – something humankind has failed at for most of history.

Other elections in Europe will be a barometer of the standing of the populist far right.

The success of anti-Islam extremist Geert Wilders in elections in the Netherlands in November means many analysts are now predicting the far right will enjoy a surge in support in European parliament elections in June, as well as national elections in Austria, Belgium, Croatia and Finland.

Read more:
Why the 2024 election cycle could result in more threats to US democracy

Africa

National elections are occurring in a dozen countries in Africa this year including Rwanda, Ghana, Tunisia, South Sudan and Algeria. But most attention will be on the mid-year election in South Africa which will be the most important since the end of apartheid in 1994.

Current polls suggest that after three decades in power the African National Congress (ANC) will not be able to garner the necessary 50% of votes needed to govern in its own right, bringing to an end 30 years of one-party rule.

Bogus elections

Special mention must be made of the 2024 elections which will not be free and will not be fair.

Russia, Rwanda and Belarus are governed by tyrannical rulers who jail opponents and run bogus elections that deliver 90% majorities or higher.

Then there is the charade elections occurring in Bangladesh, Iran and Tunisia where leaders allow the opposition to compete, but not to win.

Will democracy pass these tests?

Elections are taking place against a backdrop of spreading illiberalism around the world, the weakening of independent institutions in some of the big democracies, and a creeping disillusionment in advanced democracies, especially among younger people, about the benefits of a democratic system.

But there is also reason for cautious optimism that the long arc of history continues to steer determinedly towards a more democratic world.

Read more:
How religion and politics will mix in 2024 – three trends to track

Democracy remains the model that most developing nations strive for. According to Freedom House, there were 69 electoral democracies in 1990 rising to 122 by 2014. It is telling that even dictators and despots feel the need to give themselves the appearance of a democratic mandate. And surveys of citizens in advanced democracies continue to show high levels of support for the ideals of democratic government.

“Government of the people, for the people, by the people” still holds significant advantages over all the other alternatives currently being tried. But in 2024 it will be tested mightily.

Nicholas Reece 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. More than 4 billion people are eligible to vote in an election in 2024. Is this democracy’s biggest test? – https://theconversation.com/more-than-4-billion-people-are-eligible-to-vote-in-an-election-in-2024-is-this-democracys-biggest-test-220837

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Megan Lim, Head of Young People’s Health Research, Burnet Institute

Unlike in previous generations, you’re unlikely to discover your adolescent’s first exposure to adult sexual content from finding a scrunched-up Playboy magazine under their mattress.

With easy access to the internet and the use of tablets and mobile phones, it’s more likely to be from free, mainstream online porn. And it can be a very shocking introduction to sex.

But it’s common and has become normalised among young people. The median age for boys to first view pornography is 13, while for girls it’s 16.

OK, so your child or adolescent has watched a porn video. First, stay calm.

Read more:
TikTok has a startling amount of sexual content – and it’s way too easy for children to access

Start a discussion about what porn is – and isn’t

How much detail you go into and what’s appropriate for them to know will depend on their age and level of maturity.

Many parents let their adolescents know porn is not real – it’s a fantasy. But it’s not enough to just say, “that’s not real”. They also need to know what reality is.

Explain that porn is not what sex is like – and what’s wrong with depictions of sex in porn: everyone who’s involved should be enjoying it, not just the man.

In porn, you don’t see all the normal things that happen around sex, like discussions on how to ask about consent, or even the bloopers of sex, such as when people change positions, negotiate, and move around.

Porn is not designed to show sex the way it would be experienced as pleasurable, or show what positive relationships are meant to look like. People don’t tend to ask, “do you want to do that?” And if they do, you won’t see what happens if someone says “no”. The performers aren’t doing it in a way that feels good, but instead focus on what is deemed to “look good”.

Porn doesn’t present sex in a real way, and it can change young people’s ideas and expectations about what sex is.

How are adolescents accessing porn?

Adolescents are used to discovering things on their own using the internet and are naturally curious about sex. Their exposure to porn can come from something as simple as googling a term they’ve never heard of before, or their friends sending them a link.

They’re most likely to come across mainstream porn. With lots of flesh, quick movements and closeups, it can be very graphic and can come across as violent to someone seeing it for the first time.

This becomes how adolescents, who don’t have personal experiences of sex, or have the information they need, learn about sex. Just as they go to YouTube to learn how to cook a meal or fix the tap, they are used to watching and following.

And for something private and stigmatised like sex, there are limited good alternatives for them to learn how it really works.

When should we have ‘the talk’?

An open conversation about safety, sex, consent and relationships and gender roles is important throughout their whole life. Introduce the topic of sex gradually, depending on your child’s age. It doesn’t have to be a big sit down, to have a big talk.

It’s best to bring it up in relevant situations, particularly on seeking ongoing consent, because that applies to all aspects of life. Everyone has the right to make decisions about their own body, and it’s up to them if they want to be touched, hugged, kissed or have sex. It’s also important to reinforce that women and girls have feelings and needs, and they’re not just there to look pretty.

Read more:
How do you teach a primary school child about consent? You can start with these books

If they’re asking questions, then they’re old enough to talk about it. Ideally, you won’t wait for them to ask. You should be having conversations about consent, positive relationships, and sex from an early age. But it’s important to talk about it earlier rather than later, even if you don’t think they’ve watched porn.

Instead of saying “have you heard about porn?”, let them know from a young age they can trust you if they see something online that they don’t like or confuses them. Assure them you can’t believe everything you see online and you’re a safe person to go to with any questions.

Let them know it’s not their fault if they see something they don’t like, make sure they are OK and ask how it made them feel. Remind them to simply close the browser or turn off the screen if they see something that upsets them or makes them feel yuck.

Can I prevent my child accessing porn?

Your children will probably see porn at some point, but the older they are when they first see it, the better.

Data shows watching porn is associated with poor mental health, riskier sexual behaviours, and attitudes supporting violence against women.

Unlike with adolescents where conversations are paramount, restrictions can prevent and protect young children from seeing porn. These include parental controls on devices, apps or browsers, or establishing rules about when, where and with whom they can access their phones, computers or tablets. Yes, older teenagers can probably get past them, but younger kids can’t.

Read more:
Why we need to talk about porn when we talk about Andrew Tate

Be open and honest with your kids about using internet restrictions – don’t spy on them. Let them know why you’re doing it, explaining there are bad things online you need to protect them from – it’s about building trust.

If you find your child showing unusual behaviour or acting out towards other children, or your teen shows signs of addiction (where their viewing activities interfere with their day-to-day lives), seek professional help.

The GIST is a great resource for parents and older teens about how to approach difficult topics like this. If you’re a child or adolescent and need support, you can call the Kids Help Line on 1800 55 1800.

Megan Lim receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, VicHealth, Westpac Foundation, and the Office of the eSafety Commissioner.

– ref. Help, I’ve just discovered my teen has watched porn! What should I do? – https://theconversation.com/help-ive-just-discovered-my-teen-has-watched-porn-what-should-i-do-215892

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robyn McCormack, Marketing and Finance Academic, Bond University

Giving kids pocket money can be a really challenging decision for families. It raises questions about when to start it, how much to give and whether it should be tied to chores.

As a finance researcher and parent, it’s also important to view pocket money as an educational opportunity. You can use it to teach children how to make informed financial decisions, set meaningful goals and develop responsible spending habits.

Here’s how you can approach it.

When should you start?

There is no one “right age” but you could reasonably consider pocket money when children start school and begin learning to add and subtract.

This means your child will be old enough to start grasping concepts like saving and spending.

As your child grows, you can move on from basic arithmetic and tailor your discussions to what your child is learning in maths.

How much should it be?

How much you give will depend on your family situation and finances.

A useful starting point is working out what the pocket money will be used for. Is it simply to give your child a bit of autonomy over spending (for example, buying an ice block from the canteen)?. Is it to try to save for something special? Or is it to be used for all entertainment, clothes and on-trend desires like fancy water bottles?

A long-held rule of thumb is giving $1 per week relating to your child’s age (so $5 for a five-year-old). But of course amounts tying pocket money to a child’s raw age may not work with today’s economic conditions. Three years ago, $10 bought a lot more than it does today.

Of course you will also need to consider pocket money within the context of your wider household budget. Down the track, there’s nothing wrong with talking to your child about adjusting their pocket money if your household budget needs changing.

Read more:
How do I tell my kids we are currently short on money – without freaking them out?

Cash or direct debit?

When your child is little, giving them pocket money in cash is a good way to help them start to understand money. It’s something they can see and hold in their hands.

As they get older and the amounts get larger, direct debits will become more convenient and can teach them about handling their money online.

Since getting your hands on cash is difficult these days, when they’re young you can also give your kids pocket money electronically but give them monopoly money or a similar representative of what they have earned. You can then progress to a spreadsheet as they get older.

What about tying it to chores?

Many parents like to provide pocket money in exchange for chores as they feel it might instil a work ethic in their kids and the idea you don’t get money for nothing.

If you are tying pocket money to chores, be very clear about what will be done for what money and when chores need to be reviewed. Follow-through is important for this structure to be effective, so if they don’t do the work, they don’t get paid. You can also give them bonuses for jobs that are particularly well done.

Personally, I find this process to be more work for parents than it’s worth. I prefer the children to simply help around the house because it’s a core family value rather than tying it to finances.

The bigger picture

However you structure pocket money in your family, it’s important to consider it an opportunity to learn about finances.

You might start with simple discussions around “do I have enough money to buy this packet of textas and that toy car?” or “how many weeks until I can afford that book?”. Then as your child develops, you can introduce concepts such as cash flow, interest rates and banking products.

For example, cash flow lessons can start with talking about the importance of spending less than you earn.

Teaching kids about goals

Pocket money is also a fantastic way to help kids learn how to save. Help them set a realistic goal to save up for something that matters to them. A pair of sneakers they want or a particular video game is likely to be more achievable than a new bike. This will help motivate and challenge your child, without overwhelming them.

As your child gets older, you can introduce more sophisticated notions of saving and funds.

For example, when my child started high school we talked about setting up an emergency fund. As she was going to catch buses, we worked out the fund should be $50 (based on missing the bus and needing a taxi home). This became her new “baseline” before spending on non-essential items such as food from the school canteen.

Barefoot Investor author Scott Pape recommends starting with physical buckets with “splurge” for every day little things, “save” for big goals, “give” for acts of kindness and “grow” for investing.

Shopping skills

Once your child has their own money to spend, a trip to the shops takes on a whole new significance.

Smart shopping is not just about comparing prices or where to find the best bargains. It is also learning what is worth spending your money on and when.

You can talk to your child about what they value and their emotional responses around buying decisions. For example, “how long was it before the excitement of your new T-shirt wore off?” Or “Did you feel differently when you spent your money on going to that movie (an experience) versus that box of Lego (a tangible product)?”

Read more:
We don’t need banks teaching kids about money. Schools have it covered

There are lots of things to consider (and no perfect formula) when it comes to pocket money. But if it means you can integrate financial skills into everyday life, it’s a fantastic investment in your kids’ education.

Robyn McCormack 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. When should you start? How much should you give? How to make sure pocket money teaches your kids financial skills – https://theconversation.com/when-should-you-start-how-much-should-you-give-how-to-make-sure-pocket-money-teaches-your-kids-financial-skills-220279

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Hook, Senior Lecturer in Law, Western Sydney University

The earliest versions of Mickey and Minnie Mouse entered the public domain in the United States at the start of this year, 95 years since they were introduced to the public in the film Steamboat Willie.

Many characters come into the public domain on New Year’s Day (Public Domain Day) every year. For works “made for hire”, including films, copyright in the United States lasts 95 years; for other works it is the life of an author plus 70 years.

Prior to 1998, copyright for works of corporate ownership lasted 75 years, but the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, often nicknamed the Mickey Mouse Protection Act due to the lobbying by Disney, expanded copyright protections to 95 years.

Only this first iteration of Mickey is in the public domain, but it didn’t take long for creators to seize the opportunity – limited though it might be.

Already two horror films are on the horizon, albeit with the lawyers on hand to make sure there will be no cease and desist letters!

Read more:
Happy birthday Mickey Mouse – animation’s greatest showman is 90

What can people do with Mickey?

The earlier iterations of Mickey and other characters from Steamboat Willie can be used in any adaptation.

Before this they could only be used in a transformative way under the United States’ fair use exception. Fair use in the US allows creators to transform other existing works as long as they create something new and different from them.

This feature of the US copyright system in a recent case reiterated that it would only work where works were not in competition with each other.

From January 1, this factor is irrelevant for early Mickey. As long as creators are not misleading consumers as to Disney endorsement or connection, do not use Mickey’s later likeness, and don’t use the Mickey or characters of Steamboat Willie as a trademark, they are free to go nuts.

Can I use Mickey in Australia?

Many jurisdictions have different terms for copyright, so it may be that early Mickey is still not free in some places.

In Australia, films made in Australia get 70 years of copyright protection once made public, so all Australian films made public before 1955 are now in the public domain.

Australia’s protection for cinematography works is shorter than the US, but due to a number of treaty obligations, member states give the same treatment to foreign works that they do national ones. This means the law that applies will depend on where you are sued, and if an Australian was sued in the US for their usage of early Mickey Mouse before this year you could be liable under US copyright laws.

As of 2024, if Disney sued you in Australia or the US you are likely to win but other jurisdictions may still have some protection, so it will depend on where you publish or show the work. Online, where a work can be “shown” anywhere, the suing company can not just choose any country: there must be some connection for the parties to the country they are being sued in.

Additionally, while Australia does not have a broad fair use exception to copyright, our creators could always use Mickey in a parody or satire or for review or criticism. I may even have used a likeness or two in a law exam question (exams have a special exception under the act).

With the early Mickey in the public domain, you no longer need to be satisfied that one of those categories applies. A movie, artwork or literary work that shows the early version of Mickey can be whatever you want.

The issue will then be making sure your creative work is restricted to the early Mickey. For example, when Winnie the Pooh came into the public domain in 2022 only the A.A Milne version was free to use so the horror movie made shortly after did not include the famous red t-shirt used in the Disney version.

Read more:
Life plus 70: who really benefits from copyright’s long life?

A trademark is very different to copyright. Trademarks can last forever as long as registration is renewed, but there is no restriction on using logos and names that are trademarked as long as you are not using it as your own brand identity or mark, and not misleading or confusing consumers as to the origin of products. That means you can’t call your business “Mickey Mouse” or “Steamboat Willie” but you can use the likeness of those early characters in your marketing (as long as it’s not being used as your logo or brand recognition).

A number of fan fiction and perhaps even some more risqué adaptations using Mickey Mouse already exist online. Fan fiction will often also be a copyright infringement but the risk of being sued is slightly smaller. Companies tend to go after those who are making commercial dealings and those that they see as hurting their brand image. Even Banksy has incorporated Mickey in a work (likely being seen as a parody and as such non-infringing).

On the other hand, commercial publishers are incredibly risk averse and so if you do want to use Mickey be warned there may be an issue getting a publisher to bite. Additionally, merchandising of your creative work may be an issue depending on trademarks in different categories and where you market these. You also will only get copyright protection on original elements you add to the work.

So yes, upload and share the original movie, paint those early Mickeys, sing a song about Steamboat Willie, and enjoy the horror comedies coming out. Next year Popeye will become public domain so don’t be surprised if a slasher horror remake of him is coming soon!

Read more:
TikTokkers are writing Ratatouille, the musical. But who owns the copyright?

Sarah Hook 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 first Mickey Mouse is now in the public domain. How can I use the Disney character? – https://theconversation.com/the-first-mickey-mouse-is-now-in-the-public-domain-how-can-i-use-the-disney-character-220656

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kai-Ping Huang, Associate Professor, National Taiwan University

After months of intense campaigning, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) emerged victorious in the 2024 Taiwan presidential election, securing an historic third consecutive term. However, the party’s dominance has gone from absolute to relative; it secured only 40% of the presidential votes, and fell short of retaining the majority of legislative seats.

Meanwhile, the Kuomintang (KMT) failed to retake the presidency as well as the majority of legislative seats. The remaining seats are held by Taiwan People’s Party (TPP).

The Taiwan People’s Party, despite occupying third place in the Legislative Yuan with eight seats, achieved a remarkable 26% in the presidential race, punching above its weight considering its limited resources and recent formation.

These results signify a shift in Taiwan’s political landscape. The long-standing two-party system appears to be transitioning into a messy three-party dynamic.

Read more:
Taiwanese election may determine whether Beijing opts to force the issue of reunification

Why is there a third-party rise?

While the Democratic Progressive Party’s third consecutive presidential term may seem like a victory, cracks in the foundation of Taiwan’s political landscape are widening.

The roots of this instability stretch back to 2020, where anti-establishment sentiment simmered beneath the surface, even as the China factor dominated headlines. This time, the discontent is boiling over.

The Democratic Progressive government, once riding a wave of youthful support, now faces accusations of power abuse and, crucially, a failure to address the very issues that propelled them to power in 2016; skyrocketing housing prices, stagnant wages, and widening inequality. These woes fuelled the rise of the Taiwan People’s Party.

The Kuomintang, the other pillar of the old order, struggles to offer solutions. Their proposed subsidised interest rates risk further inflating the housing bubble, alienating the young generation they desperately need to win.

Meanwhile, the Taiwan People’s Party proposes alternatives – public
housing, rent subsidies, and even property tax hikes – aimed at making housing truly affordable.

For decades, power has swayed between the Kuomintang and Democratic Progressive Party, yet voter satisfaction with
Taiwanese democracy languishes below 50%.

This stark statistic betrays a profound representation crisis, an outcry against the established parties, often due to a perceived failure to tackle core issues.

The Taiwan People’s Party, riding this wave of disillusionment, attracts those who yearn for a political shift, focusing on domestic woes. It emerges as a beacon of hope for those who have lost faith in the two-party system.

Why did the DPP win again?

Pre-election polls painted a clear picture: more than 60% craved a change, a break from the Democratic Progressive Party’s grip on power.

But the tide of discontent splintered, dividing voters between the established Kuomintang and the rising force of the Taiwan People’s Party.

Youth flocked to the newcomer, while the Kuomintang found favour among older
demographics.

Read more:
With Taiwan’s election just a month away, the China threat looms large

To unseat the government, a united front seemed logical. Yet, cooperation crumbled, replaced by escalating animosity between the opposition parties. This fractured landscape handed the ruling party an advantage: a divided opposition meant their own victory was practically guaranteed.

The Kuomintang, desperate to tip the scales, resorted to strategic voting, aiming to marginalise the Taiwan People’s Party.

Negative campaigns against the Taiwan People’s Party intensified after failed negotiation attempts on November 23. With Taiwan’s traditional media heavily aligned with either the Kuomintang or the government, the Taiwan People’s Party faced an uphill battle for airtime.

Instead of ceding the stage, they went digital. They launched their own YouTube channel, and their supporters spearheaded online and offline campaigns and created alternative news channels. This counteroffensive transformed the fight into a three-pronged clash.

The battle became more than just a contest between the establishment and the anti-establishment. It morphed into a clash between traditional media and
the burgeoning power of social media.

The Taiwan People’s Party’s digital insurgency challenged the long-held dominance of traditional media and carved out a space for their voices to be heard.

While the outcome of the election may be set, the digital battleground shows a new force has emerged in Taiwan’s political landscape.

The future of the cross-strait relations

On the international front, continuity seems to be the watchword.

The established relationship with the US, nurtured by President Tsai Ing-wen, is likely to continue under the guidance of Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao. Her esteemed record as former ambassador to the US inspires confidence in maintaining strong ties.

However, cross-strait relations with China face a potential storm.

With both the President and Vice President openly supporting Taiwan’s independence in the past, China perceives them as a united “independence duo”. This stance may trigger harsh responses, from further curtailing trade via terminating the free trade agreement to heightened military tensions.

The path forward requires navigating a delicate balance of upholding Taiwan’s democratic values while recognising the complex geopolitical realities. The future of Taiwan’s cross-strait relationship hinges on how well this balance is upheld. The governing Democratic Progressive Party will be judged on how they walk the tightrope.

The Taiwan People’s Party’s emergence may seem to add another layer of complexity, with its potentially divergent views on cross-strait policy. The party believes demonstrating goodwill can lower the temperature and avoid harsher measures like trade restrictions or military escalation.

Read more:
Is China preparing for a war over Taiwan, or has the west got it wrong? Here are the indicators

Yet, unlike the Kuomintang’s focus on appeasement, the Taiwan People’s Party advocates for strengthening national defence to deter aggression and ensure peaceful coexistence with China.

Therefore, while the immediate outlook for cross-strait relations may be turbulent, the robust growth of Taiwan’s democracy offers a glimmer of hope for a future where pragmatism holds sway.

Taiwan’s election has presented a paradox: a familiar victory yet a
fundamental shift in the political landscape.

While the immediate future may be uncertain, the rise of the Taiwan People’s Party and the continued US support offer hope for a more open and responsive
democracy.

Kai-Ping Huang receives funding from National Sceince and Technology Council, Taiwan for a research proposal on negative campaigns.

– ref. In re-electing its government, Taiwan has kept the status quo, but the victory hides a transformed political landscape – https://theconversation.com/in-re-electing-its-government-taiwan-has-kept-the-status-quo-but-the-victory-hides-a-transformed-political-landscape-219810

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

A man was airlifted to hospital last weekend after falling ten metres from a waterfall in Queensland’s
Tamborine National Park, which was closed to due to storms. And last month, a major safety operation was launched to rescue nine bushwalkers in Wollemi National Park near Sydney after one walker fell from a cliff and suffered a head injury.

These are just the latest in a string of recent incidents that underscore the potential dangers of visiting Australia’s national parks. Visitor numbers to national parks are increasing. This is partly due to the provision of roads, boardwalks and other infrastructure which have greatly improved accessibility. People can now reach locations that, in many cases, would previously have required more competence, care, and skill to get to.

It means masses of people are being funnelled into potentially dangerous locations for which they may be unprepared. This poses risks to human life and safety, and places a heavy burden on already stretched emergency services called to conduct rescues and retrieve bodies.

An urgent rethink is needed into how we invite and prepare visitors to interact responsibly with these natural environments.

Visit, but be prepared

National parks need people. Visitors to national parks are vital to maintaining community, political and financial support for their existence. And increasing visitor numbers in national parks means more people can experience the physical and mental health benefits of spending time in nature.

Australia’s national parks are generally very accessible. In some popular locations, visitors can drive right up to a site and explore it via a highly engineered boardwalk. At lookouts, visitors are often protected by barriers and warning signs.

Social media platforms such as Instagram and TikTok play a role in promoting national parks as accessible destinations. In Victoria, national parks authorities have suggested unprepared visitors are taking unnecessary risks in a bid to capture social media images, forcing emergency services to undertake dangerous rescues.

Parks authorities themselves use social media to promote access to picturesque places, but increasingly do so with safety in mind.

Read more:
Using social media for your holiday ‘inspo’ can be risky and even dangerous – here’s why

Safety first? Not always

As visitor numbers to national parks increases, so too do the numbers of safety incidents.

In Western Australia, an average of 77 incidents per year occurred between 2011 and 2017. Most were falls or water-related, such as drowning.

And in Victoria in the five years to 2020, the State Emergency Service reportedly conducted 365 “high-angle rescues” – complex operations in high, steep locations.

Many incidents in national parks happen repeatedly at the same place. The latest incident at Cedar Creek Falls comes after a teenager drowned there in 2021. At the Babinda Boulders in Far North Queensland, 21 drownings have reportedly been recorded. This suggests current mechanisms for enhancing safety or communicating risk at known hazardous locations aren’t working.

It also stands to reason that the infrastructure we build to attract people to national parks, and to guide them and keep them safe, may be propelling them into risky situations.

Read more:
Stick to the path, and stay alive in national parks this summer

Rethinking access to the wild

So how best do we prevent deaths and injuries in national parks, while still encouraging people to venture into the outdoors?

Many people do not believe national parks are inherently dangerous places to visit. But erecting warning signs to alert them to the risks is not necessarily the answer.

One study focused on beaches in Victoria showed less than half of visitors even saw the signs. The answer is not to plaster an area with signs, either: an overabundance of safety messages can create “information overload” and means people are likely to ignore them.

However, there is research to suggest signs warning people of legal consequences or fines, rather than risks to their personal safety, may be more effective at ensuring safe behaviour.

Well-designed infrastructure in national parks can enhance the visitor experience, and protect the environment by directing people away from sensitive areas. But parks authorities should consider whether some infrastructure is encouraging people into dangerous situations, and whether certain areas should be closed off to the the public entirely.

Authorities could devise online training programs that teach people key outdoors skills, such as basic first aid and what to do if they get lost.

Finally, all this raises important questions around personal responsibility. Research conducted at four national parks in Western Australia showed many people viewed safety as a shared responsibility between visitors and parks management – but when things go wrong, place the blame on parks management. The same research showed parks visitors can be reluctant to accept the shift of responsibility back onto themselves.

Studies are needed to determine if encouraging visitors to take more responsibility for their actions would lead to fewer safety incidents – and if so, how best to get people to adopt this attitude shift.

Recent tragedies in our national parks highlight the crucial need to reevaluate visitor management strategies. National parks are a public good – and we need to make sure they stay that way.

Read more:
Trampling plants, damaging rock art, risking your life: taking selfies in nature has a cost

Samuel Cornell receives funding from Meta Platforms, Inc. His research is also supported by a UNSW University Postgraduate Award, as well as project funding from the Royal Life Saving Society – Australia. He is affiliated with Surf Life Saving Australia and Surf Life Saving NSW. He is currently conducting work with Queensland National Parks and Wildlife Service in a research capacity.

Amy Peden receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Meta Platforms, Royal Life Saving Society – Australia and Surf Life Saving Australia. She holds an honorary affiliation with Royal Life Saving Society – Australia.

– ref. Thousands of visitors flock to Australia’s national parks each year – and many take silly risks. How do we keep people safe? – https://theconversation.com/thousands-of-visitors-flock-to-australias-national-parks-each-year-and-many-take-silly-risks-how-do-we-keep-people-safe-220659

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Theresa Larkin, Associate professor of Medical Sciences, University of Wollongong

Head hair comes in many colours, shapes and sizes, and hairstyles are often an expression of personal style or cultural identity.

Many different genes determine our hair texture, thickness and colour. But some people’s hair changes around the time of puberty, pregnancy or after chemotherapy.

So, what can cause hair to become curlier, thicker, thinner or grey?

Read more:
Big hair? Bald? How much difference your hair really makes to keep you cool or warm

Curly or straight? How hair follicle shape plays a role

Hair is made of keratin, a strong and insoluble protein. Each hair strand grows from its own hair follicle that extends deep into the skin.

Curly hair forms due to asymmetry of both the hair follicle and the keratin in the hair.

Follicles that produce curly hair are asymmetrical and curved and lie at an angle to the surface of the skin. This kinks the hair as it first grows.

The asymmetry of the hair follicle also causes the keratin to bunch up on one side of the hair strand. This pulls parts of the hair strand closer together into a curl, which maintains the curl as the hair continues to grow.

Follicles that are symmetrical, round and perpendicular to the skin surface produce straight hair.

Read more:
What is dandruff? How do I get rid of it? Why does it keep coming back?

Life changes, hair changes

Our hair undergoes repeated cycles throughout life, with different stages of growth and loss.

Each hair follicle contains stem cells, which multiply and grow into a hair strand.

Head hairs spend most of their time in the growth phase, which can last for several years. This is why head hair can grow so long.

Let’s look at the life of a single hair strand. After the growth phase is a transitional phase of about two weeks, where the hair strand stops growing. This is followed by a resting phase where the hair remains in the follicle for a few months before it naturally falls out.

The hair follicle remains in the skin and the stems cells grow a new hair to repeat the cycle.

Each hair on the scalp is replaced every three to five years.

Hormone changes during and after pregnancy alter the usual hair cycle

Many women notice their hair is thicker during pregnancy.

During pregnancy, high levels of oestrogen, progesterone and prolactin prolong the resting phase of the hair cycle. This means the hair stays in the hair follicle for longer, with less hair loss.

A drop in hormones a few months after delivery causes increased hair loss. This is due to all the hairs that remained in the resting phase during pregnancy falling out in a fairly synchronised way.

Hair can change around puberty, pregnancy or after chemotherapy

This is related to the genetics of hair shape, which is an example of incomplete dominance.

Incomplete dominance is when there is a middle version of a trait. For hair, we have curly hair and straight hair genes. But when someone has one curly hair gene and one straight hair gene, they can have wavy hair.

Hormonal changes that occur around puberty and pregnancy can affect the function of genes. This can cause the curly hair gene of someone with wavy hair to become more active. This can change their hair from wavy to curly.

Researchers have identified that activating specific genes can change hair in pigs from straight to curly.

Chemotherapy has very visible effects on hair. Chemotherapy kills rapidly dividing cells, including hair follicles, which causes hair loss. Chemotherapy can also have genetic effects that influence hair follicle shape. This can cause hair to regrow with a different shape for the first few cycles of hair regrowth.

Hormonal changes as we age also affect our hair

Throughout life, thyroid hormones are essential for production of keratin. Low levels of thyroid hormones can cause dry and brittle hair.

Oestrogen and androgens also regulate hair growth and loss, particularly as we age.

Balding in males is due to higher levels of androgens. In particular, high dihydrotestosterone (sometimes shortened to DHT), which is produced in the body from testosterone, has a role in male pattern baldness.

Some women experience female pattern hair loss. This is caused by a combination of genetic factors plus lower levels of oestrogen and higher androgens after menopause. The hair follicles become smaller and smaller until they no longer produce hairs.

Reduced function of the cells that produce melanin (the pigment that gives our hair colour) is what causes greying.

Read more:
Curious Kids: why don’t burns bleed?

Theresa Larkin 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. From straight to curly, thick to thin: here’s how hormones and chemotherapy can change your hair – https://theconversation.com/from-straight-to-curly-thick-to-thin-heres-how-hormones-and-chemotherapy-can-change-your-hair-219329

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bruno Alves Buzatto, Lecturer, Flinders University

Scorpions are among the most ancient of land animals. Fossils indicate they were roaming the Earth more than 400 million years ago. For perspective, the non-bird dinosaurs became extinct about 65 million years ago.

Scorpions trivialise the 100-million-year reign of the dinosaurs — they saw them come and go and are still here today. In fact, the external anatomy of scorpions has changed little, based on what we’ve seen from 400 million-year-old fossils.

While formally describing a new scorpion species from the Pilbara region of Western Australia, we discovered another species with identical external morphology (shape and structure). The only way to tell the two species apart was by looking at the morphology of the male reproductive organs.

You’d think that is a very small difference, but it’s not uncommon for telling apart species in other groups, like spiders and millipedes. But these are the first scorpion species distinguished solely by male reproductive anatomy.

Our find, published in the Australian Journal of Zoology, hints significantly more scorpion species await discovery in Australia than previously suspected.

A widespread and popular group

Most Australians think of scorpions as exotic desert animals. But they are fairly widespread, ranging from salt lakes in central Australia to ancient rain forests in Tasmania.

Surprisingly, our estimates (based largely on unpublished DNA sequence data we have access to), indicate that less than 10% of Australia’s scorpion species have been scientifically described or named. Describing them means scientifically documenting and applying a unique scientific name to a new species while following the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.

The scorpion genus Urodacus is endemic to mainland Australia and represents one of the largest radiations (increases in diversity) of scorpion species on the continent. Most Urodacus species live in deep spiralling burrows, enabling them to survive in arid ecosystems. In some habitats, these scorpions are a significant part of the ecosystem and comprise much of its biomass.

Despite their reclusive habits, Urodacus are popular exotic “pets” and are among the most popular invertebrates offered by online stores in Australia. There’s also a large community of scorpion enthusiasts.

Trading of scorpions is dependent on an unknown level of harvesting from natural populations. Some Urodacus species are known to live for 15–20 years, but in captivity, their longevity is usually less than a year.

With minimal knowledge about the diversity and distributions of Australian scorpions, the potential for serious impacts to their conservation is high. Traded scorpion species are often unnamed, and some may also live in very small areas.

For example, the two new species we described, Urodacus uncinus and Urodacus lunatus, are restricted to creeks and drainage lines, with a known area of as little as 50 square kilometres. Such small distributions make species particularly vulnerable to habitat loss, which is a growing threat in Australia.

Surprisingly, there is no regulation for scorpion ownership in most Australian states, although you need a permit to keep them as pets in the Northern Territory and Queensland. Collecting them from the wild is only regulated in conservation areas.

Read more:
Buying bugs and beetles, or shopping for scorpions and snails? Australia’s pet trade includes hundreds of spineless species

We don’t know enough about our scorpions

The two new species we just described are large (more than 7cm long) yellow scorpions. Males of both species have a striking enlargement in the tip of their “tails”, with a swollen venom gland and a sting that is more strongly curved than in any other known species of the genus.

The task to fully document and understand the diversity of Australian scorpions is colossal. Approximately 3,000 scorpion species are known worldwide, but in Australia only 47 species are currently described and named. Based on our estimates, we think there could be at least 500 scorpion species here.

Only 13 new Australian scorpion species have been described in the last 45 years. At this rate, many are likely to become extinct before they are even named.

Further research on Australian scorpions will also reveal more of these animals’ incredible biology. One example is their curious reproduction. Scorpion mating rituals include a dance during which males of some species even sting the females as part of the courtship.

Sperm transfer occurs via what could be described as a “detachable penis”, placed on the ground by the male. During mating, part of this organ breaks off in the female reproductive tract and functions as a “mating plug” that prevents the female from remating until the babies from the last mating are born.

Burrowing scorpions give birth to live young that are gestated for up to 18 months within an organ somewhat like a uterus. After birth, mother scorpions carry their babies on their back until they disperse to live a largely solitary life.

Undiscovered secrets

These fascinating behaviours are only a small portion of scorpion natural history discovered to date and they are likely to harbour many more as yet undiscovered secrets.

Next to nothing is known about Australian scorpions, which is surprising given their diversity and ecological importance. More research on Australia’s scorpions is urgently needed to help recognise and protect threatened species and their habitats.

Expanding our knowledge about native scorpions would also help with the regulation of wild collections and allow captive breeding to further develop more responsible pet ownership as a force for conservation, rather than a risk.

Read more:
Ever wondered who’d win in a fight between a scorpion and tarantula? A venom scientist explains

Bruno Alves Buzatto currently works for Flinders University. He has previously been funded by the University of Western Australia, Macquarie University, the Australian Research Council, Australian Geographic and National Geographic. Bruno has also previously worked as a principal biologist for Bennelongia Environmental Consultants in Western Australia.

Erich S. Volschenk owns Alacran Environmental Science, an environmental consultancy business specialising in the diagnoses of terrestrial invertebrates. He has previously received funding from Australian Biological Resources Study.

– ref. Less than 10% of Australian scorpions are known to science. We’ve added two new species to the list – https://theconversation.com/less-than-10-of-australian-scorpions-are-known-to-science-weve-added-two-new-species-to-the-list-220330

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hunter Fujak, Lecturer in Sport Management, Deakin University

From relatively humble beginnings, the Australian Open has emerged as a centrepiece in both the global tennis and Australian sporting calendar. With the 2024 tournament approaching, the event is now a centurion – it’s been 101 years since it became a designated grand slam, and 119 years since the very first edition.

While the Australian Open is now firmly known as a Melbourne event, the tournament used to rotate across Australasia until 1972. Between 1905 and 1971, it was most often hosted in Sydney (17 times), Melbourne (16), Adelaide (15), Brisbane (seven), Perth (three), and across the ditch in New Zealand (once in Christchurch, once in Hastings).

These early tournaments were a far cry from the economic enterprise of the modern grand slam; the 1909 edition, for instance, was held in the Perth Zoo.

And even after the International Lawn Tennis Federation designated the Australian Open as one of the four grand slam tournaments in 1923, it lagged behind the others for quite some time. This was mainly due to Australia’s remoteness, the inconvenient timing of the tournament in December or January, the comparatively poor facilities and the low prize money.

In fact, the tournament did not really flourish until the 1980s – well into the “open era” of professional tennis.

The growth of the Australian Open since the 1980s has occurred in parallel to the development of Melbourne as a cosmopolitan city. Australia’s deindustrialisation and financial deregulation in the early 1970s saw Sydney rise as the commercial capital of the country, while Melbourne languished.

In response, Melbourne turned to sport and culture as a form of economic salvation, moving away from manufacturing and towards tourism, leisure and spectacle.

This resulted in significant infrastructure investment, including new grandstand capacity at Flemington racecourse and the installation of lights at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. Perhaps most significant was the building of Melbourne Park as a permanent facility for the Australian Open in 1988.

Despite controversy around the necessary rezoning of public lands to create Melbourne Park, the relocation from the grass courts of Kooyong tennis club was an immediate success. Total attendance increased from 140,000 to 266,436 in the first year.

The tournament has progressed by leaps and bounds since then. The 2023 tournament broke attendance records, with 839,192 people coming through the gates.

Read more:
The retirement of Roger Federer is the abdication of tennis royalty

By the numbers

The modern Australian Open is a major contributor to the Australian economy, as well as a mammoth operational undertaking.

The 2023 tournament featured a total of 817 players from 68 nations and was reported on by more than 800 journalists and photographers from 52 nations. Incredibly, more than 12,000 staff from Tennis Australia, Melbourne & Olympic Parks and other related agencies helped stage the tournament.

Economically, over six million people have attended the Australian Open in the past decade, contributing an estimated A$2.71 billion (US$1.76 billion) to the Victorian state economy. In 2020, the last tournament before COVID, visitors booked 574,970 hotel night stays and spent on average A$209 per day.

The inherent cultural value of the Australian Open is apparent in annual surveying of local sentiment, with 99% of Victorians agreeing in 2022 “it is important for Victoria to host the Australian Open each year”.

Strong local support is important given the Victorian government invested A$972 million (US$629 million) of taxpayer funds to redevelop Melbourne Park between 2010 and 2019 to secure the Australian Open hosting rights through 2046.

Future challenges

The length of this deal is significant, given Saudi Arabia and other nations have become increasingly aggressive in attempting to rebrand themselves as global sporting powers by making bids to host prestigious events.

Notably, it has emerged in recent weeks that Saudi Arabia is exploring an investment in professional tennis that could, at minimum, jeopardise Australian Open lead–up events that are held across the country in early January.

The tennis tour has also entered a period of talent renewal following the retirements of generational players Roger Federer, Serena Williams and soon Rafael Nadal. As a result, the tournament is having to market new, less familiar faces to an Australian public. Hence, the focus on rising stars Coco Gauff, Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner on this year’s tournament website.

Read more:
The 2023 Australian Open pauses a year of profound political tensions in tennis

Perhaps the tournament’s biggest challenge, however, will be its longer-term adaption to climate change. Players have frequently cited the Australian Open as particularly taxing due to the heat, which can at times be extreme. The first heat policy was only introduced in 1998.

In response to this growing challenge, a more extensive, research-based extreme heat policy was introduced in 2019. The new heat stress measure, which can result in the suspension of play, considers four climate factors: air temperature, radiant heat, humidity and wind speed. It also takes into account the physiological differences between the adult players, wheelchair participants and junior athletes.

Severe heat is not just a risk for athletes, but attendees. During the 2014 tournament for instance, 970 attendees were treated for heat exhaustion on a single day when the temperatures hit 42 degrees. A ball kid also fainted.

Climate change poses challenges beyond heat. The Black Summer bushfires of 2019, for instance, brought several days of smoke that caused breathing problems among some players. In 2023, the tournament was suspended twice on a single day, first due to heat and then torrential rain.

Tournament organisers have added an extra day to this year’s tournament to become a 15-day event. This will not only help mitigate any weather-induced scheduling congestion, but will also reduce the number of late-night finishes, which have drawn the ire from players and fans.

This will no doubt help the tournament deal with short-term challenges, but further adaptation may be necessary to ensure its long-term success. If history is any indication, the Australian Open has proven itself open to change.

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

– ref. A short history of the Australian Open – from a Perth Zoo sideshow to economic juggernaut – https://theconversation.com/a-short-history-of-the-australian-open-from-a-perth-zoo-sideshow-to-economic-juggernaut-217443

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cher McGillivray, Assistant Professor Psychology Department, Bond University

Problems with focus and impulse control can be common developmental stages through which children and adolescents naturally progress. But they can also be symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a chronic condition.

ADHD is a pattern of inattention or hyperactivity and impulsivity (or both) that interferes with functioning or development, and persists into adulthood. ADHD affects around 7.6% of children aged three to 12 years and 5.6% of teens.

ADHD can significantly influence family dynamics and can affect a child’s ability to learn and interact socially. Raising children with behavioural, developmental or learning difficulties can also make parenting more challenging, with parents navigating feelings of frustration, grief and guilt.

While medication is most effective at minimising core ADHD symptoms, non-drug interventions can also reduce the daily impacts of ADHD symptoms. Parenting/family training is one such intervention. So what does it involve and is it effective?

Read more:
ADHD medications have doubled in the last decade – but other treatments can help too

Positive praise and natural consequences

Parenting training is widely used and can take different forms. Sometimes a psychologist works with one or both parents to give them skills specific to their family and situation. It’s sometimes a structured in-person program for groups of parents. It can also be delivered online, at parents’ own pace or in virtual classrooms.

Most parent/family training will teach parents forms of:

• positive praise. Notice when your child is behaving in a desirable way and give them positive feedback. For example,“Wow, you’re playing so nicely. I really like the way you’re keeping all the blocks on the table.” Praise nurtures self esteem and their sense of self. Praise teens for starting homework without being reminded or coming home at the agreed time

• effective limit-setting. Establish ground rules in a quiet moment of family time, where everyone has a say and understands the boundaries, consequences, and expectations

• natural consequences, such as missing out on watching a TV show because packing up took too long. This allows the child to experience failure or loss, but empowers them with what they can focus on or improve the next time round

• planned ignoring of annoying but not serious behaviours such as making faces or messy rooms. Make a decision to ignore it and breathe. Model desirable behaviours, such as looking after your possessions and fitting in with family life

• positive parent-child interactions. “Connection before correction” helps a parent shape their child’s behaviour and can reduce disruptions.
  Emotionally connect by, for example, establishing eye contact, using a gentle tone and getting down on their level. This attunement allows the child to be able to regulate their behaviour and better manage their emotions.

Parents aren’t to blame for their child’s symptoms; the aim of training is to teach parents skills to meet the above-average parenting needs of children with ADHD.

Take inattention, for example. If a task is boring to a child with ADHD, their brain will struggle to pay attention – even if they want to. ADHD clinical neuropsychologist Russell Barkley explains ADHD like this: the back part of the brain is where you learn, the front part is what you do, and ADHD splits them apart. You can know things but you won’t do them – it’s a performance disorder.

Having a few household rules, schedules, opportunities to problem-solve, effectively using instructions and, most importantly, expressions of love can give children positive environments that will help their mental health over time.

How effective is parent training?

The Australian evidence-based ADHD treatment guidelines reviewed the evidence and found medication treatment was more effective than non-pharmacological treatment in reducing core ADHD symptoms. But combined therapies were better than either treatment alone.

The United Kingdom’s National Institute of Clinical Excellence recommends ADHD management plans include treatments to address the child’s psychological, behavioural and educational or occupational needs.

There is evidence to support parenting training for children aged five to 17, and greater evidence for its use in children under five and families of children who also have oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder, who require more intensive support.

But more research is needed about the duration and form of the parent training.

The World Health Organization also recommends parenting interventions because they strengthen the parent-child relationship, assist with alternatives to violent discipline and reduce emotional problem behaviours in children.

Read more:
1 in 4 adults think smacking is necessary to ‘properly raise’ kids. But attitudes are changing

How do you access parent training?

Most psychologists offer family training and will charge you the same fee as a normal session.

You can also upskill with the free Triple P Parenting Program online.

Happy Families also has an online parenting ADHD course.

Bond University researchers are also conducting a free, online group parenting program, which includes positive parenting skills. This will be part of a randomised control trial to develop an evidenced-based parenting intervention.

The aim with all of these programs is to better understand the child’s life and have compassionate responses to their ADHD and behavioural symptoms. So rather than just focusing on their behaviour – which is an outward expression of an inward emotion – it encourages parents to embrace their uniqueness and help them in their struggles.

How else can you support your child with ADHD?

Set boundaries and be clear about your expectations, but also be compassionate to your child and pick your battles.

Break instructions into simple tasks and allow them to choose and focus on one thing they’re struggling with at a time. Brainstorm what they need to improve, or an area that frustrates them. This will often be organisation, time management and planning. Ask how you can help and stay calm. Celebrate the small wins along the way.

Read more:
My kid is biting, hitting and kicking. I’m at my wit’s end, what can I do?

Be curious and seek to understand and connect with your child. Even though your relationship may feel strained or disconnected at times, remember disagreement need not destabilise the relationship. Children express their full emotions, without restraint, among people they feel most safe with.

Finally, ensure you look after yourself, connect with other parents who can support you. Try not to place your anxiety, stress and fears onto your child. Talk to a friend or psychologist so your child feels safe and able to share anything with you and knows you will cope.

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

– ref. What is ‘parent training’ for families of children with ADHD? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-parent-training-for-families-of-children-with-adhd-217381

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ehsan Noroozinejad, Senior Researcher, Urban Transformations Research Centre, Western Sydney University

The world faces an increasing shortage of housing and an escalating climate emergency. These urgent global issues call for quick action and innovative solutions.

The numbers show us how stark things are. Construction activities and building operations produce more than 40% of the carbon emissions driving global warming.

At the same time, 1.6 billion people live in subpar housing. An alarming 100 million have no house at all. In both Australia and globally, the housing crisis is a pressing and unresolved issue.

Prefabricated building technology offers promising alternative solutions to this dual crisis. Prefab housing modules are made offsite in a factory. The finished components/modules can then be transported and assembled swiftly at the site of the building.

This approach could transform the housing scene. Affordable dwellings could be produced on a massive scale, while greatly reducing the environmental impacts.

This is not merely about building homes. A shift to prefab construction would be a strategic move in line with the Paris Agreement to mitigate climate change.

Read more:
The world needs to build more than two billion new homes over the next 80 years

Cost-efficient and eco-friendly

Prefab modular construction could be considered a greener alternative in the construction sector. By greatly reducing construction waste (which accounts for 40% of landfill) and carbon emissions, it tackles these major environmental concerns head-on. A 2022 study showed modular construction can slash carbon emissions by up to 45% compared to conventional techniques.

The controlled factory-based environment of prefab construction makes it more efficient. This includes integrated reclamation and recycling of construction waste.

This approach is highly cost-effective. It’s about being resource-savvy and reducing waste to the bare minimum.

Read more:
Turning the housing crisis around: how a circular economy can give us affordable, sustainable homes

Using standardised designs and components on a large scale also cuts the cost of incorporating energy-efficient elements such as better insulation and renewable energy. Building in this way creates structures that are effective, efficient, resilient and help us combat climate change.

Among many possible construction materials, wood or timber is among the most preferred for prefab modular buildings. Timber is renewable and an efficient carbon sink. The timber in buildings locks away the CO₂ the trees absorbed from the atmosphere when they were growing.

One creative and sustainable solution to housing shortages is to build modular, adjustable prefab dwelling units. These units are robust and can be adapted to various climates and housing needs with ease.

In a world where cities are growing fast and housing needs are pressing, prefab construction can deliver quality, affordable homes at an impressive pace. It’s an efficient solution for a budget-conscious, carbon-constrained world.

Prefab buildings take many forms

The beauty of prefab construction lies in its adaptability, making it the building industry’s chameleon.

It can look good almost anywhere, from bustling cityscapes to serene countryside. Imagine a building technique that can seamlessly transition from a cozy mountain cabin to a stylish metropolitan apartment building.

Read more:
Not just daggy dongas: time to embrace prefabricated buildings

Modular homes can be enlarged, modified or even disassembled and moved as communities grow and needs change.

This approach promotes long-term resilience by being adaptable to changes in the climate and housing needs. These buildings are constructed not only for the present, but also for the high-performance requirements of the future.

Read more:
Prefab revolution? Factory houses are the secret to green building

Leading examples from overseas

We can learn from success stories overseas.

A community-focused project in England: the prefab modular homes in Cambridge are more than just buildings; they are community cornerstones. As well as providing roofs over heads, the project is about creating a sense of belonging. These units, meticulously designed and sustainably built, are shaping the narrative of affordable housing.

Scandinavian eco-friendly living: Scandinavians have taken modular construction to heart. In this region, known for its design prowess and environmental stewardship, many modular homes are architectural marvels that embody sustainability. Cozy, energy-efficient homes with sleek designs prove that eco-friendly living can be both stylish and functional.

Versatile modular solutions in the Netherlands: Finch Buildings offers a kaleidoscope of sustainable housing. Here, modular construction is about flexibility and diversity, catering to a range of needs and styles. These timber modular solutions can adapt to different lifestyles and preferences. Housing can be as diverse as the people it shelters.

Singapore’s urban blueprint: the city-state is a showcase for the incredible possibilities of prefab modular construction. It’s seamlessly woven into urban planning. Imagine a city where buildings are not just structures, but pieces of a larger, sustainable puzzle. It is a model of how urban development can co-exist with environmental consciousness.

So what’s stopping Australia?

Australia has been slower than many countries to adopt prefab modular construction. The challenges include:

• limited government support and incentives compared to other countries

• a need for more training and expertise in designing and implementing prefab modular construction

• the traditional procurement process in construction is not well suited for prefab methods, so a shift in thinking and approach from construction managers and suppliers is required

• the Australian regulatory environment needs to evolve to promote productivity and support modern construction methods like prefabrication

• a cultural shift within the industry is also needed, so owners and developers demand more sustainable and efficient construction methods.

The situation is changing in Australia as the housing crisis has intensified. Recognition of the need for more sustainable, efficient construction methods is growing, leading to a gradual shift in government support and industry adoption.

Read more:
Building in the same old ways won’t end the housing crisis. We need innovation to boost productivity

Making development sustainable

The potential role of prefab modular construction in tackling the challenges of climate change and housing shortages cannot be overstated.

Prefab building is charming not just because it is flexible but also because the architectural features have been thoughtfully considered. Every module can be carefully crafted to complement its surroundings.

Adopting this strategy demonstrates a dedication to development that is ecologically conscious, promotes resilience and sustainability and, by meeting house needs, improves community wellbeing.

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

– ref. A prefab building revolution can help resolve both the climate and housing crises – https://theconversation.com/a-prefab-building-revolution-can-help-resolve-both-the-climate-and-housing-crises-220290

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Esterman, Professor of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of South Australia

Do you have family members or friends sick with a respiratory infection? If so, there’s a good chance it’s COVID, caused by the JN.1 variant currently circulating in Australia.

In particular, New South Wales is reportedly experiencing its highest levels of COVID infections in a year, while Victoria is said to be facing a “double wave” after a surge late last year.

But nearly four years into the pandemic, data collection is less comprehensive than it was, and of course, fewer people are testing. So what do we know about the extent of this wave? And importantly, are we adequately protected?

Read more:
I have COVID. How likely am I to get long COVID?

Difficulties with data

Tracking COVID numbers was easier in the first half of last year, when each state and territory provided a weekly update, giving us data on case notifications, hospitalisations, ICU numbers and deaths.

In the second half of the year some states and territories switched to less frequent reporting while others stopped their regular updates. As a result, different jurisdictions now report at different intervals and provide varying statistics.

For example, Victoria still provides weekly reports, while NSW publishes fortnightly updates.

While each offer different metrics, we can gather – particularly from data on hospitalisations – that both states are experiencing a wave. We’re also seeing high levels of COVID in wastewater.

Meanwhile, Northern Territory Health simply tell you to go to the Australian government’s Department of Health website for COVID data. This houses the only national COVID data collection. Unfortunately, it’s not up to date, difficult to use, and, depending on the statistic, often provides no state and territory breakdowns.

Actual case notifications are provided on a separate website, although given the lack of testing, these are likely to be highly inaccurate.

The Department of Health website does provide some other data that gives us clues as to what’s happening. For example, as of one month ago, there were 317 active outbreaks of COVID in aged care homes. This figure has been generally rising since September.

Monthly prescriptions for antivirals on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme were increasing rapidly in November, but we are not given more recent data on this.

Read more:
We’re in a new COVID wave. What can we expect this time?

It’s also difficult to obtain information about currently circulating strains. Data expert Mike Honey provides a regularly updated snapshot for Australia based on data from GISAID (the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data) that shows JN.1 rising in prevalence and accounting for about 40% of samples two weeks ago. The proportion is presumably higher now.

What’s happening elsewhere?

Many other countries are currently going through a COVID wave, probably driven to a large extent by JN.1. These include New Zealand, Spain, Greece and the United States.

According to cardiologist and scientist Eric Topol, the US is currently experiencing its second biggest wave since the start of the pandemic, linked to JN.1.

Are vaccines still effective?

It’s expected the current COVID vaccines, which target the omicron variant XBB.1.5, are still effective at reducing hospitalisations and deaths from JN.1 (also an omicron offshoot).

The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) updated their advice on booster shots in September last year. They recommended adults aged over 75 should receive an additional COVID vaccine dose in 2023 if six months had passed since their last dose.

They also suggest all adults aged 65 to 74 (plus adults of any age who are severely immunocompromised) should consider getting an updated booster. They say younger people or older adults who are not severely immunocompromised and have already had a dose in 2023 don’t need further doses.

This advice is very confusing. For example, although ATAGI does not recommend additional booster shots for younger age groups, does this mean they’re not allowed to have one?

Read more:
What are the new COVID booster vaccines? Can I get one? Do they work? Are they safe?

In any case, as of December 6, only 19% of people aged 65 and over had received a booster shot in the last six months. For those aged 75 and over, this figure is 23%. Where is the messaging to these at-risk groups explaining why updating their boosters is so important?

Should we be concerned by this wave?

That depends on who we mean by “we”. For those who are vulnerable, absolutely. Mainly because so few have received an updated booster shot and very few people, including the elderly, are wearing masks.

For the majority of people, a COVID infection is unlikely to be serious. The biggest concern for younger people is the risk of long COVID, which research suggests increases with each reinfection.

What should we expect in 2024?

It’s highly likely we will see repeated waves of infections over the next 12 months and beyond, mainly caused by waning immunity from previous infection, vaccination or both, and new subvariants.

Unless a new subvariant causes more severe disease (and at this stage, there’s no evidence JN.1 does), we should be able to manage quite well, without our hospitals becoming overwhelmed. However, we should be doing more to protect our vulnerable population. Having only one in five older people up to date with a booster and more than 300 outbreaks in aged care homes is not acceptable.

For those who are vulnerable, the usual advice applies. Make sure you’re up to date with your booster shots, wear a P2/N95 mask when out and about, and if you do get infected, take antivirals as soon as possible.

Adrian Esterman 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. COVID is surging in Australia – and only 1 in 5 older adults are up to date with their boosters – https://theconversation.com/covid-is-surging-in-australia-and-only-1-in-5-older-adults-are-up-to-date-with-their-boosters-220839