Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Craig Stanbury, PhD Candidate, Monash University

Do you want to have a baby? But, on a planet rocked by the climate crisis, ecosystem collapse, famine and poverty, is having one just adding to the problem – and therefore unethical?

I am a PhD Candidate at Monash Bioethics Centre, and I research the ethics of procreation in a time of climate change. I’ve found there’s no simple “yes” or “no” answer to whether we should produce more children when Earth is in such dire straits.

People who want to have children are faced with a dilemma. Creating a child who will be responsible for high emissions over their lifetime requires others to stay in poverty (if the planet is to operate within its physical limits). This, it can easily be argued, furthers injustice and inequality.

But many of us want to have children – doing so can be one of the most meaningful things we do with our life.

What should we do? Ethics can provide an answer. It shows there is a moral obligation to consider the effects of child-bearing without obliging people to not have children as a result.

What is overpopulation?

Many people argue the world has an overpopulation problem. Overpopulation has been defined as the state where there are more people than can live on Earth in comfort, happiness, and health and still leave the world a fit place for future generations.

But this definition is open to interpretation. Overpopulation is not just about numbers, but also values. If people in affluent countries value their lifestyles – and the opportunity for others to have the same lifestyle – then the world is overpopulated.

I live in inner-city Melbourne. When I calculate my ecological footprint, it’s confronting to discover we would need about four Earths for everyone to live like me. If everyone lived like the average American, we would need more than five Earths.

Indeed, estimates by ecologists and philosophers show a person born in the developed world can enjoy their lifestyle only if there are no more than two or three billion people on the planet. There are now more than eight billion.

Read more:
Why we should be wary of blaming ‘overpopulation’ for the climate crisis

So what do we do?

We could address the dilemma by decreasing per capita emissions of greenhouse gases. However, this on its own won’t be sufficient.

Why? First, it’s difficult to reduce emissions at the speed required to mitigate catastrophic climate change. The goal of the Paris Agreement is to prevent the world from warming by 2℃ from pre-industrial levels. To achieve this goal, we must halve emissions by 2030, halve them again by 2040, and again by 2050.

Unfortunately, we are not on track to achieve the Paris goals. This failure will cause significant suffering and millions of deaths. And the most disadvantaged people will be affected first and most severely. This is unjust.

Second, developing countries must be allowed to increase their emissions to escape poverty. People in poverty consume very few resources. To stay at this low-level of consumption is dehumanising. We should be advocating for many people to consume more.

Third, having fewer children helps solve the injustices caused by climate damage. If global fertility rates dropped by only 0.5 births per woman, about 5.1 billion tonnes of carbon would be saved each year by the end of the century. This would contribute to between 16% and 29% of the emissions savings needed to avoid catastrophic climate change.

Fourth, even if the world’s average per capita emissions decrease, a growing population multiplies emissions.

Emissions tend to grow on a one-to-one ratio with rising populations. Between 1975 and 2009, for example, both population and emissions rose by 43% in the United States. Not addressing population growth means we may undo good work achieved by reducing per capita emissions.

And finally, we cannot address per capita emissions without addressing reproduction. The decision to not bring someone into the world is about 20 times more effective at reducing individual emissions than the sum total of many other “green” acts we can do, such as recycling and driving less.

For instance, in a developed nation, having one fewer children saves about 58 tonnes of emissions per year. The next best decision someone can make to limit their emissions is to live car-free. But, this will only save about 2.4 tonnes of emissions per year.

As ethicists have recently pointed out, if there is any duty to reduce our per capita emissions, there is a duty to limit the amount of children we have.

Read more:
Bob Brown is right – it’s time environmentalists talked about the population problem

Resolving the dilemma

I should acknowledge here that I don’t have the lived experience of being a woman or person who can carry a child, nor do I have children yet.

However, I do believe the world must address overpopulation. I say this knowing it is not an easy or comfortable topic to broach. It involves sexuality and contraception, personal rights and religion.

And I realise there is no way forward that can solve all injustices.

If people in affluent nations keep bringing children into the world, there will not be enough resources for many current and future people to live and flourish.

But it would also be unjust to demand an individual give up reproducing. The freedom to decide whether to bring someone into the world is central to many people’s dignity and life’s meaning.

And the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights recognises that every man and woman has the fight to found a family.

So the most appropriate answer is not one that seeks to eliminate injustices altogether. Rather, it should minimise injustice as much as possible.

Telling people not to have children, or to have fewer children, is too strong. The solution must tread a finer line. But how? By placing a moral obligation on people to consider the environmental and justice issues of bringing someone into the world.

For a person wanting children, this means it’s no longer enough to only ask questions such as: can I be a good parent? Do I have the means to support a child?

Anyone with the means to control their fertility now has an obligation to also ask themselves the following five questions:

1. Will my child have a high-emissions lifestyle and will this mean others must live in poverty? If so, is this justifiable?

2. Do I have biological parenting desires – that is, the desire to parent someone who has my genes? Or do I simply have parenting desires – that is, the desire to raise someone in a loving environment according to my values, regardless of their genes?

3. Even if I might discover a strong biological connection once I have a child, could I be fulfilled in my life if I raised someone who is not biologically connected to me?

4. If I have only parenting desires, can this be satisfied in other ways such as through fostering, teaching, mentoring or, if possible, adopting?

5. Does satisfying my parenting desires in other ways particularly apply to me if I already have one biological child?

Often people who choose not to have children feel the need to explain the decision to others. The above approach would mean the reverse: requiring that people who wish to ethically bring someone into the world must themselves address difficult questions.

A just society values everyone being able to pursue having a child if they wish to. Yet, it also demands that everyone consider the ramifications of doing so.

Craig Stanbury 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. Thinking of having a baby as the planet collapses? First, ask yourself 5 big ethical questions – https://theconversation.com/thinking-of-having-a-baby-as-the-planet-collapses-first-ask-yourself-5-big-ethical-questions-196388

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Breunig, Professor of Economics and Director, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised a Tax Expenditures Statement by the end of February – and he delivered this week, just in time, on Tuesday February 28.

The statement contains many headline-grabbing figures about the cost of various tax breaks, including claims made against income from rental properties (A$24.4 billion), the concessional or zero tax on employer superannuation contributions ($23.3 billion), concessional or zero tax on super earnings ($21.5 billion), and the tax-free treatment of the family home ($22 billion).

For some years under the Coalition, the statement was given the less-attractive title of Tax Benchmarks and Variations Statement, which was surprising given the statement was mandated in 1998 by Treasurer Peter Costello as part of the Charter of Budget Honesty.

The refurbished 200-page document has its old name back, plus a bit more. It is now called the Tax Expenditures and Insights Statement. The “insights” in the title relate to who the expenditures go to.

As to whether these additional insights are really that insightful, the answer is yes in some areas – but we need to be careful about others.

Spending by another name

The idea of the statement is to record those government expenditures delivered via tax breaks, so their costs can be compared with the cost of direct expenditures.

As an example, support for Australians who take out private health insurance can either be delivered via a tax rebate or a cash payment.

A tax rebate, effectively paid out of government funds but delivered through the tax system, might be called a “tax expenditure”, while a cash payment might be called a direct expenditure.

Either way, the cost to the government, and the amount paid to the recipient, is the same. Only the method of delivery, and how it’s recorded, is different.

Tax expenditures are usually invisible, because there’s no line item for them in the budget papers.

That’s why Costello initiated the publication of tax expenditures.

It’s also why the institute I run at the Australian National University is called the Tax and Transfer Policy Institute – because considering direct payments, but not payments made through the tax system, would be to consider only half the issue.

Support for high earners

The “insights” now included in the statement, along with the totals for each tax expenditure, are about who gets them, usually broken down by income and gender.

These are interesting, but not that insightful.

Guess who gets the biggest tax expenditures. Yes, you got it on one! The highest earners in the highest tax brackets.

Because they pay higher marginal tax rates, tax breaks benefit them the most.

And guess whether men or women get the biggest tax expenditures.

Again, you got it! There are more men in the highest tax brackets than women, so men get the lion’s share of tax expenditures.

All of which points to three dangers in interpreting the tax expenditures statement.

Big expenditures needn’t mean unfairness

The first danger is to conclude the large tax expenditures show “the rich do not pay enough tax”.

The statement says nothing about how much tax people actually pay.

In fact, Australia has one of the world’s most progressive tax systems. The top 10% pay roughly half of all the income tax collected.

The second (related) danger is assuming an uneven distribution of tax expenditures means an uneven distribution of government support.

Read more:
How to camouflage $150 billion in spending: call it ‘tax expenditure’

Tax expenditures tell us nothing about other forms of government support.

Australia also does pretty well in fairness. Most government spending goes to those at the bottom of the income distribution. This is true if you look at cash transfers, and also for in-kind benefits such as education and health care.

Using data from the World Inequality Database, I calculate Australia’s after-tax Gini coefficient – the standard a measure of inequality – is about 30% fairer than its before-tax coefficient. This suggests the Australian system moves money from the more well-off to the less well-off.

It may not do it enough for some and it may do it too much for others, but there is no evidence of gross unfairness.

Abolition might raise less than imagined

The third danger is assuming that abolishing a tax expenditure would raise as much as it notionally costs.

In many cases it won’t, because people will change their behaviour and look for tax breaks elsewhere.

Even where this is not the case, abolishing two tax expenditures together might raise much less than the cost of the two added together. How? Removing one tax expenditure can mean less money for the other expenditure to give away.

The best example of this is in superannuation. If the $23.3 billion tax discount on super contributions was abolished, there would be less super in the funds to apply the discount on earnings. The earnings discount would be less than quoted.

The total of the tax expenditures set out in the statement exceeds $250 billion. Previous statements have warned about adding them together. This one does not.

Expenditures compared to what?

Each tax expenditure needs to be calculated against a benchmark – a standard tax rate that would otherwise be imposed. It isn’t always clear what the benchmark should be.

For income tax, it is assumed to be the standard set of income tax rates. But they may not be the right rates to apply to the taxation of income from savings.

A respectable case can be made for a dual-income tax system, with a progressive income-tax scale (as now) alongside a flat 10% rate on earnings from savings.

Read more:
Yes, some millionaires pay no tax, but crimping deductions mightn’t help

The 2017 tax expenditure statement took this idea up and produced an alternative estimate of superannuation tax expenditures using a different benchmark. The cost of the superannuation tax expenditures fell 80%!

One more thing. The use of trusts to avoid taxes isn’t really captured in the tax expenditures statement, in part because it is hard to work out how much tax minimisation takes place through trusts.

Often we do not know who the ultimate owners are. Loans made within trusts are not well-documented or regulated. Nor are property transfers and usage. There’s a case for a Trusts Investment and Insights Statement.

So bravo for the new Tax Expenditure (and Insights) Statement. And bravo for the new information on distributions. But please, use with care.

Robert Breunig 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. Tax breaks cost a reported $250 billion, but handle these new figures with care – https://theconversation.com/tax-breaks-cost-a-reported-250-billion-but-handle-these-new-figures-with-care-200819

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

If you were being really cynical, you might say the government should have hacked into those stage 3 tax cuts, while leaving super alone. That would have received much the same political angst, but saved a heap more revenue.

If we shed the cloak of cynicism, where has this week’s “tweak” of one of the superannuation tax breaks left policy and politics?

As a policy change, the government’s decision is well-based but has been poorly executed. It is fair – people with very large balances certainly don’t need the level of taxpayer generosity they receive. It is also a (very modest) move to address the budget challenge.

But the haste in announcing it – the government had little choice because the debate was becoming a firestorm – meant details are still being worked out, for example for people in defined benefit schemes.

So the government hasn’t been able to say how those politicians, including the prime minister, who are entitled to very large amounts (under now-scrapped arrangements) would be affected.

Nor is there official modelling on how many people in future years will be drawn into the higher super tax rate, given the $3 million threshold is not indexed.

In superannuation, the detail matters, although Treasurer Jim Chalmers would argue there are always points to be nailed down with such changes.

It’s premature to say confidently how the politics of this decision will fall out. Many people will see it as reasonable and/or not affecting them. Others will be nervous it could be the first step in changes that might hit their own retirement nest eggs. Some will condemn it as a “broken promise”, because Anthony Albanese said before the election he intended to make no changes.

Albanese is sensitive about promises. Hence he plans to legislate the change but not have it take effect until after the 2025 election.

That makes it an issue in the next campaign, just as the legislated stage 3 tax plan was one for the last.

Peter Dutton has already loaded himself with a promise to repeal the measure. Just as Albanese loaded himself with a promise to keep stage 3.

Much has been said recently about the evils of “rule-in-rule-out” politics and journalism, and indeed this brand of formulaic questioning often makes for vacuous campaign news conferences.

Read more:
Word from The Hill: Chalmers learns hard lesson in ‘rule-in-rule-out’ game

On the other hand, it is not clear how it can be avoided. If we want to know what a party intends to do on superannuation, surely journalists have to ask its plans and try to get some precision about what is, and is not, on the table.

And on other issues too. If the Voice referendum is carried, do we not want a question asking Dutton to rule out making big changes to the implementation legislation that would probably have already passed parliament?

The alternative is for election campaigns to avoid specific undertakings, with parties running on broad intentions. Such as: “The taxation system/superannuation arrangements are unsatisfactory – we will examine them and decide in office what needs to be done.”

That approach would have many advantages, but it is hard to see any leader being in a strong enough position to risk it.

It’s understandable Chalmers wants to avoid the rule-in-rule-out trap, but on Wednesday he took his aversion to extremes when he refused to rule out a capital gains tax on the family home. Some things have to be killed instantly (as Albanese did) or a non-story blows into a damaging one.

The super issue has raised speculation about relations between Chalmers and Albanese. The evidence suggests these are developing along familiar lines.

Treasurers (John Howard, Paul Keating, Peter Costello, Scott Morrison) want to expand boundaries. Their prime ministers at times apply the brakes, as Albanese did last year to Chalmers’ desire to alter the stage 3 tax cuts.

More interesting than how the Chalmers-Albanese relationship is now – Chalmers pushes back against a report of tension – is how it will develop. Often the ambitious treasurer becomes increasingly impatient with the leader.

One factor that might encourage Chalmers’ patience is that he is 15 years younger than Albanese (Chalmers is 45, Albanese is 60 – they both had birthdays on Thursday). But treasurers come to worry about a government’s time running out.

Read more:
Albanese government to hike tax on earnings from big super balances – but not until 2025-26

The super row is a gift for the opposition – especially for next week in parliament. Nevertheless, it is risky for Dutton.

Apart from being on what many experts see as the wrong side of the policy debate, Dutton won’t know for a while whether he is on the wrong side of the political argument, seen as just standing up for the rich.

Polling will provide some indication, but the byelection in the Liberal seat of Aston will be the sharper test for Dutton. Given how hard the Liberals will campaign on super, he needs to obtain a substantial swing (not just to retain the seat by a whisker).

Arguably, the super decision would have been easier for the government to handle if it had been part of the May budget, placed in a wider context with more of its details finalised.

Now it is out there, it raises questions about its implications for that budget. Will the government be more cautious as a result of this fight?

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Defining superannuation’s ‘objective’ should leave room for debate about its use for housing

The government has a dilemma. This is the budget in which to do difficult things (although we do know there won’t be further changes to super tax breaks). But even with solid electoral standing and a weak opposition, political capital quickly erodes. Tony Abbott had plenty of capital in the bank after the 2013 election, did tough things in the 2014 Hockey budget (involving some broken promises) and never recovered.

Context is important too. The budget is being put together as the economy is deteriorating and rising interest rates are putting more people under financial stress.

Whether Chalmers and the PM will be in accord about just where to pitch the budget will emerge over the next few weeks. The reception to that budget will colour how the Albanese government is judged on its first anniversary, later in May.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Trimming the tail of the superannuation tax tiger is no easy task – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-trimming-the-tail-of-the-superannuation-tax-tiger-is-no-easy-task-200996

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ritesh Shah, Senior Lecturer in Education, University of Auckland

With the war in Ukraine now in its second year, nearly a third of the country’s population has been displaced, including 8 million people who have sought refuge beyond its borders.

International support for the plight of these refugees has been heartening. Nearly 4.5 million Ukrainians having been granted temporary protection status across the European Union (EU).

But we also need to ask: how does this response compare to the countless other humanitarian crises around the world right now?

Last year, the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) reported there were ten “forgotten crises” in the world, all in Africa. The suffering of people in these countries or regions rarely makes international headlines. And there is seemingly little political interest or will from the international community to address the situation.

Furthermore, the war in Ukraine has redirected humanitarian assistance and resources away from these other crises. While children in Ukraine have been supported, millions of young people in countries like Sudan and Yemen have lost access to vital food aid. They are now at heightened risk of malnutrition and starvation.

NRC Secretary-General Jan Egeland put it like this:

The war in Ukraine has demonstrated the immense gap between what is possible when the international community rallies behind a crisis, and the daily reality for millions of people suffering in silence [from crises] that the world has chosen to ignore. [This is] not only unjust […] but comes with a tremendous cost.

A recent report from Save the Children compared the EU’s response to Ukrainians seeking temporary protection and asylum to those from elsewhere. Syrian refugees, for example, described being detained in inhumane or substandard conditions until their asylum claims were considered.

They certainly weren’t granted the temporary protection status afforded Ukrainian refugees. The report called this “dysfunctional at best and cruel at worst”, part of a policy designed to “contain those who arrived and deter others from coming”.

Us and them

As Oxford University researcher Hugo Slim has argued, humanitarian principles are “ethically simplistic and routinely fall victim to bias”. Decisions on allocations of humanitarian funding are increasingly politicised and driven by the interests of the “powerful West”.

This was particularly apparent in 2016, when the EU committed €6 billion to supporting Turkey’s response to the Syrian crisis, in return for Turkey stopping irregular migration of those refugees into Europe. Why the open-door policy to Ukrainian refugees as opposed to a containment approach for others?

Read more:
Why has New Zealand welcomed Ukrainians fleeing war and not others trying to do the same?

Some argue it is because of the economic and geopolitical implications of Russia’s invasion, not only for Europe, but the entire world. But the idea that some crises have bigger implications for the West than for others (and hence “we” should respond differently) signals an inability to impartially identify and address the most acute needs.

For example, only months after starting construction of a steel wall along its border with Belarus to keep out asylum seekers from the Middle East and Africa, Poland opened its borders to Ukrainian refugees. There have also been numerous accounts of people of colour fleeing Ukraine but being turned around at the border by Polish nationalists or border officials.

Media reporting has sometimes played into such prejudice, referring to Ukrainian refugees as “civilised” and “so much like us”.

White saviour complex

As has been argued elsewhere, the global humanitarian apparatus is underpinned by often unspoken racial distinctions and hierarchies based on notions of expertise and competency. The majority of those in high-paid, decision-making positions are from developed nations and mostly white. Field workers tend to come from the developing world and are often brown or black.

The Nigerian-American writer Teju Cole has called this the “white-saviour industrial complex”, not unlike the attitudes of missionaries and early colonisers. The American-Iranian scholar Reza Aslan defined this as the “all-too-familiar pattern of white people of privilege seeking personal catharsis by attempting to liberate, rescue or otherwise uplift underprivileged people of colour.”

Read more:
Ukraine: survey shows British people, and especially Tory voters, feel very differently about some refugees than others

Cynical perhaps, but most humanitarian organisations make very little mention of race. The “commitments to action” from the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit are notably silent on the topic. Humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality, which erase race as a concern and shut off dissent, perpetuate “global white ignorance”, as philosopher Charles Mills labels it.

Perhaps we should not be surprised. Acknowledging structural racism within humanitarianism would require ceding power and authority to those who have been marginalised.

Read more:
Ukraine refugee crisis exposes racism and contradictions in the definition of human

What can be done?

The first step towards changing this would be an acknowledgement by the UN, other agencies, media and politicians that racial and cultural bias within humanitarian structures exists. Much greater care needs to be taken with the language used to describe and depict those living through crises.

Practically, there needs to be a greater representation, in all decision making within large humanitarian organisations, of voices and perspectives from the Global South, especially those directly affected by crisis.

Humanitarian aid would also need to be depoliticised. Money should be channelled through pooled funds like the UN’s Central Emergency Response Fund, which directly responds to the most acute and underfunded humanitarian needs globally.

These are not quick fixes. But to do nothing will leave millions largely invisible. As one Palestinian refugee described their feelings to me recently: “The entire world has forgotten about us and has left us to fight our struggles alone.”

Ritesh Shah 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. Race and erasure: why the world’s other humanitarian crises don’t see the same response as Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/race-and-erasure-why-the-worlds-other-humanitarian-crises-dont-see-the-same-response-as-ukraine-200987

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cathy Hope, Associate Professor, Faculty of Arts and Design; Coordinator, Play, Creativity and Wellbeing Project, Centre for Creative and Cultural Research, University of Canberra

Why don’t grown ups play like us kids do? Annie, aged 7, Canberra

Hi Annie, this is such a clever question.

What led you to ask this? Did you notice this at a playground, where kids seem to do all the playing – the climbing, swinging and sliding, while grown-ups just hang around, pushing swings or texting on their phones?

In fact most grown-ups don’t play in playgrounds, which is weird because playgrounds are so much fun.

Read more:
Curious Kids: why do people get old?

Play is so important, but why?

Most kids are experts at play. This is because play is one of the best ways to learn about yourself and the world around you.

Play helps you move better, think better, imagine, solve problems and play with others.

This leads back to your great question. If play is so good for us and so fun, why don’t grown-ups play like kids?

There are lots of answers, but I will share two of the big ones.

Read more:
Curious Kids: if our bodies are happy at 37℃, why do we feel so unhappy when it’s too hot outside?

Grown-ups have a lot to take care of

First, grown-ups have to pay for lots of things, like food, transport and somewhere to live. This means they have to go to work to earn money. And if they have kids, they have to look after them.

So grown-up life can be stressful and busy. And one thing about play is they have to feel like playing to have fun. If grown-ups are tired or have too much serious stuff on their minds, it makes it hard to feel like playing.

Yet, grown-ups need to play too, and for many of the same reasons as kids. But grown-ups also need to play to let go of stress and worry.

Read more:
Curious Kids: Why do tears come out of our eyes when we cry?

Grown-ups play too

So – and this is the second answer to your awesome question – adults have found grown-up ways to play. This gets them moving, thinking and problem solving, while also hanging out with others.

Once they can no longer squeeze onto the slide or swing at the park, grown-ups may take up a hobby like sewing or skydiving. They might also like playing games with friends, like sport or board games. They can even play with their friends online with a computer or phone.

In fact, grown-ups like playing so much they have games and parties where they dress up and play with lots of other grown-ups. Older grown-ups also have their own playgrounds.

So the answer to your question is adults don’t always play like kids do because they can be busy and have lots of other things to do. But they do actually play, even if that’s sometimes in a different way.

Keep playing and being curious Annie.

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au

Cathy Hope has received research funding from government and industry to identify community aspirations for play and playful spaces, and to design and deliver playful activations in public spaces.

– ref. Curious Kids: why don’t grown-ups play like kids? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-dont-grown-ups-play-like-kids-199176

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ran Porat, Affiliate Researcher, The Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation, Monash University

Israel is facing one of the most serious crises in its history. And it could be the biggest test yet for Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu, just months after he resurrected his political career by returning to the prime minister’s office.

Netanyahu, the country’s longest-serving prime minister, had been ousted from power in 2021, but launched a political comeback last year and scraped together enough support to form a coalition government following November elections. The coalition is made up of Netanyahu’s center-right Likud party, along with a group of far-right and ultra-orthodox religious parties.

It is considered the most right-wing government in Israel’s history. Moreover, these politicians are highly motivated to use their time in power to make swift and dramatic changes within Israel and to its policy on the Palestinians.

Initially, Netanyahu successfully rebranded himself as the “responsible adult” who would keep the radicals in his government in check. But his government is now exacerbating deep divisions in Israeli society and threatening the very essence of Israel as a liberal democracy.

At the same time, the conflict with the Palestinians may be heading towards an eruption.

Stripping the judiciary of power

One of the main issues driving public anger is the government’s proposed overhaul of the judicial system.

At the heart of this plan is a recalibration of the power balance between the judiciary (with the Supreme Court as its flagship) and the executive and legislature.

Key aspects of the reform include:

• giving politicians almost complete power over the selection process for judges

• dramatically reducing judicial review powers over laws and administrative decisions

• allowing the Knesset (parliament) to overrule court decisions with a simple majority

• turning the attorney-general and other government legal advisers into powerless consultants.

A massive backlash erupted immediately. For weeks now, hundreds of thousands of Israelis have taken to the streets to protest against what they view as a constitutional revolution that would diminish Israel’s democracy.

Absent a basic document protecting human rights (Israel has no written Constitution), the Supreme Court is considered by many as the last bastion protecting the civil rights of citizens (and non-citizens, including Palestinians) against government actions and laws.

In addition, Netanyahu’s rivals see the proposed reforms as a tool the prime minister is using to try to undermine his upcoming corruption trial on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

Read more:
Israel enters a dangerous period – public protests swell over Netanyahu’s plan to limit the power of the Israeli Supreme Court

The domestic crisis is hurting Israel’s economy. The Israeli shekel is weakening as investors and leading high-tech entrepreneurs pull their funds out of Israel, fearing a compromised court system and rule of law.

Top US officials have expressed deep reservations about the scope and speed of the reform proposals.

Meanwhile, a divided, demoralised opposition has been reinvigorated by the huge wave of protests. Calls for civil disobedience and clashes with the police have been met with stark warnings from both sides, urging the government to compromise before public anger leads to more serious unrest.

Protesters and the police clashed this week on what the demonstrators called a “day of disruption”. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, leader of the far-right, extremist Jewish Power Party, has told police there should be “zero tolerance towards anarchists”.

Violence in the West Bank

In the West Bank, increasing lawlessness is causing explosive instability and terror.

On the Palestinian side, the weak and corrupt Palestinian Authority is increasingly unable to govern, especially in the northern Shomron area, from Jenin to Nablus.

The vacuum is being filled by armed local militant groups (such as the notorious “Lion’s den”) backed by the Gaza-based militant organisations Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

These groups and other militants are supported by the local population, fuelled by hateful incitement against Jews, especially on social media, and by Palestinian Authority payments to prisoners and families of “martyrs” that critics say reward attacks on Israelis.

Facing a rise in terror attacks and the failure of the Palestinian Authority to stop it, the Israeli army has been increasingly entering West Bank cities itself.

The tally is gloomy for both sides – 30 Israelis and 146 Palestinians (most of them militants, according to the army) died in terror attacks, military raids and clashes between the sides in 2022. Two months into 2023, more than 60 Palestinians and 14 Israelis have lost their lives.

On the Israeli side, a small number of Jewish settlers in the West Bank are increasingly wreaking havoc.

The ideologically charged “hilltop youth” – a fringe group of violent vigilantes among the estimated 700,000 total settlers – are attacking Palestinians, vandalising Palestinian property and destroying crops.

These rampages have been going on for years, but Israel has not made a serious attempt to stop them.

The violence has surged again in recent days in response to the killings of three Israelis by Palestinian gunmen. Right-wing politicians stood idly by and some even cheered on the violent vigilantes.

Illegal outposts in the West Bank are often, though not always, retroactively approved by right-wing governments. And the current tensions have certainly been exacerbated by the current government, with the hilltop youth potentially feeling more emboldened by its ideological makeup.

Can Netanyahu return Israel to stability?

Despair and anger are rife, yet compromise looks like a non-starter on both fronts.

Setting the tone are Ben Gvir and his ally, Treasurer Bezalel Smotrich. Both advocate for tougher measures against the anti-reform protesters and Palestinian militants, including the passage of a new bill that would allow courts to impose the death penalty for terror attacks against Israeli citizens.

Netanyahu is currently facing his most serious leadership challenge ever. It is unclear if he is able, or even willing, to find a way to return Israel to the stability that was once a hallmark of his previous terms in office.

After another day of protests, he tried to appeal for calm this week, calling on Israelis to “stop the violence.” But even this was met with outrage from his opponents, after he of drew parallels between the protest movement and settler violence.

At this stage, Netanyahu is committed to keeping his government alive more than standing up to Ben Gvir or Smotrich. However, the peaking violence in recent days may finally be starting to bring new initiatives to reach a compromise within the government.

Israeli democracy is strong, but this is a big test for its vitality.

Read more:
Israel’s new hard-line government has made headlines – the bigger demographic changes that caused it, not so much

Ran Porat is a Research Associate for the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) and receives funding from this organisation.

– ref. Israel is facing twin existential crises – what is Benjamin Netanyahu doing to solve them? – https://theconversation.com/israel-is-facing-twin-existential-crises-what-is-benjamin-netanyahu-doing-to-solve-them-200820

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eleanor K. Sansom, Research Associate, Curtin University

What would we do if we spotted a hazardous asteroid on a collision course with Earth? Could we deflect it safely to prevent the impact?

Last year, NASA’s Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) mission tried to find out whether a “kinetic impactor” could do the job: smashing a 600kg spacecraft the size of a fridge into an asteroid the size of an Aussie Rules football field.

Early results from this first real-world test of our potential planetary defence systems looked promising. However, it’s only now that the first scientific results are being published: five papers in Nature have recreated the impact, and analysed how it changed the asteroid’s momentum and orbit, while two studies investigate the debris knocked off by the impact.

The conclusion: “kinetic impactor technology is a viable technique to potentially defend Earth if necessary”.

Small asteroids could be dangerous, but hard to spot

Our Solar System is full of debris, left over from the early days of planet formation. Today, some 31,360 asteroids are known to loiter around Earth’s neighbourhood.

Although we have tabs on most of the big, kilometre-sized ones that could wipe out humanity if they hit Earth, most of the smaller ones go undetected.

Just over ten years ago, an 18-metre asteroid exploded in our atmosphere over Chelyabinsk, Russia. The shockwave smashed thousands of windows, wreaking havoc and injuring some 1,500 people.

A 150-metre asteroid like Dimorphos wouldn’t wipe out civilisation, but it could cause mass casualties and regional devastation. However, these smaller space rocks are harder to find: we think we have only spotted around 40% of them so far.

The DART mission

Suppose we did spy an asteroid of this scale on a collision course with Earth. Could we nudge it in a different direction, steering it away from disaster?

Hitting an asteroid with enough force to change its orbit is theoretically possible, but can it actually be done? That’s what the DART mission set out to determine.

Specifically, it tested the “kinetic impactor” technique, which is a fancy way of saying “hitting the asteroid with a fast-moving object”.

Read more:
NASA’s asteroid deflection mission was more successful than expected. An expert explains how

The asteroid Dimorphos was a perfect target. It was in orbit around its larger cousin, Didymos, in a loop that took just under 12 hours to complete.

The impact from the DART spacecraft was designed to slightly change this orbit, slowing it down just a little so that the loop would shrink, shaving an estimated seven minutes off its round trip.

A self-steering spacecraft

For DART to show the kinetic impactor technique is a possible tool for planetary defence, it needed to demonstrate two things:

• that its navigation system could autonomously manoeuvre and target an asteroid during a high-speed encounter

• that such an impact could change the asteroid’s orbit.

In the words of Cristina Thomas of Northern Arizona University and colleagues, who analysed the changes to Dimorphos’ orbit as a result of the impact, “DART has successfully done both”.

Read more:
An asteroid impact could wipe out an entire city – a space security expert explains NASA’s plans to prevent a potential catastrophe

The DART spacecraft steered itself into the path of Dimorphos with a new system called Small-body Manoeuvring Autonomous Real Time Navigation (SMART Nav), which used the onboard camera to get into a position for maximum impact.

More advanced versions of this system could enable future missions to choose their own landing sites on distant asteroids where we can’t image the rubble-pile terrain well from Earth. This would save the trouble of a scouting trip first!

Dimorphos itself was one such asteroid before DART. A team led by Terik Daly of Johns Hopkins University has used high-resolution images from the mission to make a detailed shape model. This gives a better estimate of its mass, improving our understanding of how these types of asteroids will react to impacts.

Dangerous debris

The impact itself produced an incredible plume of material. Jian-Yang Li of the Planetary Science Institute and colleagues have described in detail how the ejected material was kicked up by the impact and streamed out into a 1,500km tail of debris that could be seen for almost a month.

Streams of material from comets are well known and documented. They are mainly dust and ice, and are seen as harmless meteor showers if they cross paths with Earth.

Asteroids are made of rockier, stronger stuff, so their streams could pose a greater hazard if we encounter them. Recording a real example of the creation and evolution of debris trails in the wake of an asteroid is very exciting. Identifying and monitoring such asteroid streams is a key objective of planetary defence efforts such as the Desert Fireball Network we operate from Curtin University.

Read more:
Where do meteorites come from? We tracked hundreds of fireballs streaking through the sky to find out

A bigger than expected result

So how much did the impact change Dimorphous’ orbit? By much more than the expected amount. Rather than changing by seven minutes, it had become 33 minutes shorter!

This larger-than-expected result shows the change in Dimorphos’ orbit was not just from the impact of the DART spacecraft. The larger part of the change was due to a recoil effect from all the ejected material flying off into space, which Ariel Graykowski of the SETI Institute and colleagues estimated as between 0.3% and 0.5% of the asteroid’s total mass.

A first success

The success of NASA’s DART mission is the first demonstration of our ability to protect Earth from the threat of hazardous asteroids.

At this stage, we still need quite a bit of warning to use this kinetic impactor technique. The earlier we intervene in an asteroid’s orbit, the smaller the change we need to make to push it away from hitting Earth. (To see how it all works, you can have a play with NASA’s NEO Deflection app.)

But should we? This is a question that will need answering if we ever do have to redirect a hazardous asteroid. In changing the orbit, we’d have to be sure we weren’t going to push it in a direction that would hit us in future too.

Read more:
How satellites, radar and drones are tracking meteorites and aiding Earth’s asteroid defence

However, we are getting better at detecting asteroids before they reach us. We have seen two in the past few months alone: 2022WJ1, which impacted over Canada in November, and Sar2667, which came in over France in February.

We can expect to detect a lot more in future, with the opening of the Vera Rubin Observatory in Chile at the end of this year.

Eleanor K. Sansom receives funding from the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research while the Desert Fireball Network receives institutional support through the Space Science and Technology Centre at Curtin University and the Australian Research Council as part of the Australian Discovery Project scheme (DP230100301).

– ref. New results from NASA’s DART planetary defence mission confirm we could deflect deadly asteroids – https://theconversation.com/new-results-from-nasas-dart-planetary-defence-mission-confirm-we-could-deflect-deadly-asteroids-200835

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam "Ben" Rohrlach, Mathematics Lecturer and Archaeogeneticist, University of Adelaide

Hunter-gatherers took shelter from the ice age in Southwestern Europe, but were replaced on the Italian Peninsula according to two new studies, published in Nature and Nature Ecology & Evolution today.

Modern humans first began to spread across Eurasia approximately 45,000 years ago, arriving from the near east. Previous research claimed these people disappeared when massive ice sheets covered much of Europe around 25,000–19,000 years ago. By comparing the DNA of various ancient humans, we show this was not the case for all hunter-gatherer groups.

Our new results show the hunter-gatherers of Central and Southern Europe did disappear during the last ice age. However, their cousins in what is now France and Spain survived, leaving genetic traces still visible in the DNA of Western European peoples nearly 30,000 years later.

Two studies with one intertwining story

In our first study in Nature, we analysed the genomes – the complete set of DNA a person carries – of 356 prehistoric hunter-gatherers. In fact, our study compared every available ancient hunter-gatherer genome.

In our second study in Nature Ecology & Evolution, we analysed the oldest hunter-gatherer genome recovered from the southern tip of Spain, belonging to someone who lived approximately 23,000 years ago. We also analysed three early farmers who lived roughly 6,000 years ago in southern Spain. This allowed us to fill an important sampling gap for this region.

By combining results from these two studies, we can now describe the most complete story of human history in Europe to date. This story includes migration events, human retreat from the effects of the ice age, long-lasting genetic lineages and lost populations.

Post-ice-age genetic replacement

Between 32,000 and 24,000 years ago, hunter-gatherer individuals (associated with what’s known as Gravettian culture) were widespread across the European continent. This critical time period ends at the Last Glacial Maximum. This was the coldest period of the last ice age in Europe, and took place 24,000 to 19,000 years ago.

Our data show that populations from Southwestern Europe (today’s France and Iberia), and Central and Southern Europe (today’s Italy and Czechia), were not closely genetically related. These two distinct groups were instead linked by similar weapons and art.

We could see that Central and Southern European Gravettian populations left no genetic signal after the Last Glacial Maximum – in other words, they simply disappeared. The individuals associated with a later culture (known as the Epigravettian) were not descendants of the Gravettian. According to one of my Nature co-authors, He Yu, they were

genetically distinct from the area’s previous inhabitants. Presumably, these people came from the Balkans, arrived first in northern Italy around the time of the Last Glacial Maximum, and spread all the way south to Sicily.

In Central and Southern Europe, our data indicate people associated with the Epigravettian populations of the Italian peninsula later spread across Europe. This occurred approximately 14,000 years ago, following the end of the ice age.

Climate refuge

While the Gravettian populations of Central and Southern Europe disappeared, the fate of the Southwestern populations was not the same.

We detected the genetic profile of Southwestern Gravettian populations again and again for the next 20,000 years in Western Europe. We saw this first in their direct descendants (known as Solutrean and Magdalenian cultures). These were the people who took refuge and flourished in Southwestern Europe during the ice age. Once the ice age ended, the Magdalenians spread northeastward, back into Europe.

Remarkably, the 23,000-year-old remains of a Solutrean individual from Cueva de Malalmuerzo in Spain allowed us to make a direct link to the first modern humans that settled Europe. We could connect them to a 35,000-year-old individual from Belgium, and then to hunter-gatherers who lived in Western Europe long after the Last Glacial Maximum.

Sea levels during the ice age were lower, making it only 13 kilometres from the tip of Spain to Northern Africa. However, we observed no genetic links between individuals in southern Spain and northern Morocco from 14,000 years ago. This showed that while European populations retreated south during the ice age, they surprisingly stopped before reaching Northern Africa.

Our results show the special role the Iberian peninsula played as a safe haven for humans during the ice age. The genetic legacy of hunter-gatherers would survive in the region after more than 30,000 years, unlike their distant relatives further east.

Post ice-age interaction

Some 2,000 years after the end of the ice age, there were again two genetically distinct hunter-gatherer groups. There was the “old” group in Western and Central Europe, and the “more recent” group in Eastern Europe.

These groups showed no evidence of genetic exchange with southwestern hunter-gatherer populations for approximately 6,000 years, until roughly 8,000 years ago.

At this time, agriculture and a sedentary lifestyle had begun to spread with new peoples from Anatolia into Europe, forcing hunter-gatherers to retreat to the northern fringes of Europe.

Adam “Ben” Rohrlach was a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology until January 2023, and still holds an affiliation there.

– ref. We thought the first hunter-gatherers in Europe went missing during the last ice age. Now, ancient DNA analysis says otherwise – https://theconversation.com/we-thought-the-first-hunter-gatherers-in-europe-went-missing-during-the-last-ice-age-now-ancient-dna-analysis-says-otherwise-200899

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Ware, Associate Professor in International & Community Development, Deakin University

Nearly one million stateless Rohingya people who fled brutal ethnic cleansing in Myanmar have been languishing in extremely congested refugee camps in Bangladesh for the past five and a half years.

While the United States recently announced a resettlement program for Rohingya refugees and the UK resettled around 300 Rohingya from the camps prior to 2020 under a now-defunct scheme, this hasn’t caused even a dent in the number of people living in the world’s largest refugee camp.

No other countries have accepted refugee applications from the camps, but the Bangladeshi Foreign Minister AK Abdul Momen has expressed optimism that a good number of Rohingya may eventually be resettled by the US and others.

Since 2008, Australia has granted visas to just 470 Rohingya under its special humanitarian program – a very small number considering the extreme need.

All of these refugees were accepted into the program from Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and other countries in the region. This creates a perverse incentive for Rohingya from the Bangladesh camps to get on rickety boats and make the dangerous sea journey to those countries.

UN figures show a more than 360% surge in the number of Rohingya who boarded boats to try to get to Malaysia and Indonesia last year, with 3,500 making the journey, compared to just 700 in 2021.

In early February, Momen called on Australia to do more to resettle the Rohingya stranded in his country.

Australia is relatively more resourceful, so I think it’s high time Australia come forward and resettle some more of those distressed people. […] Australia has the capacity, it has the resources — there’s only a need for a political mindset.

According to our new research, there is public support for this to happen. In surveys conducted last year, a majority of Australians and New Zealanders said they have positive views about the Rohingya and support the resettlement of more Rohingya refugees in their countries.

Increasingly dire conditions

The UN high commissioner for human rights has called the violence the Rohingya suffered at the hands of the Myanmar military a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. And a major UN investigation confirmed the mass killings and rapes were committed with “genocidal intent”.

There is clearly no hope of the Rohingya returning to their homes for the foreseeable future. A military coup in Myanmar two years ago brought to power the very army that perpetrated the crimes against the Rohingya.

Read more:
Explainer: why the UN has found Myanmar’s military committed genocide against the Rohingya

And they have a very limited future in Bangladesh, where the authorities have recently been restricting their livelihoods, movement and access to education.

A UN humanitarian appeal to support the Rohingya refugees received only half the funding required in 2022, leaving many needs unmet and Bangladesh to shoulder much of the burden.

The situation became so dire last November, the UN Central Emergency Response Fund had to release US$9 million (A$13.4 million) in emergency funding just to make sure the refugees had enough food, water and sanitation items.

So, in the absence of a repatriation plan, can the world be persuaded to accept more refugees?

What our research found

Our research shows a majority of the public would support this in Australia and New Zealand.

We recently reviewed data from a large-scale online survey as part of the Sinophone Borderlands project investigating global attitudes towards China and other issues. The survey collected responses from over 1,200 people in 56 different countries between 2020 and 2022 – more than 80,000 altogether. Several questions asked about the Rohingya people specifically.

When asked how positively or negatively respondents felt about the Rohingya people on a scale of zero to 100, the average Australian response was 53.6, while in New Zealand it was 60.8.

There was minimal variation by gender or when comparing urban versus rural, but we saw more positive responses among those who were educated, younger and satisfied with their country’s political situation and/or their own economic wellbeing.

When asked specifically about their level of support for the resettlement of displaced Rohingya in their country, responses were actually more positive.

Asked to represent their support on a scale of one (definitely no) to seven (definitely yes), the average (mean) response in Australia was 4.20 and in New Zealand it was 4.54. Again, there was minimal variation by gender, but more highly educated respondents were more positive.

Interestingly, we didn’t notice much variation when it came to political party, either. Unsurprisingly, those on the left responded with higher levels of support for Rohingya resettlement in both countries. However, the average level of support was still more positive than negative for voters of all main parties.

What Australia and New Zealand are doing

Australia’s response to the Rohingya crisis has been to provide humanitarian aid, but it has resisted calls to resettle any of the Rohingya from the camps.

When we contacted the Home Affairs department about this, a spokesperson responded by saying the government is “committed to generous and flexible humanitarian and settlement programs that meets Australia’s international protection obligations”.

The UNHCR and the international community continue to work on creating conditions for a safe return of Rohingya people to Myanmar. Australia’s response continues to focus on humanitarian aid to Bangladesh and Myanmar.

Any persons, including Rohingya, who believe they meet the requirements for a humanitarian visa and wish to seek Australia’s assistance can make an application.

Indeed, Australia has been generous in its humanitarian response to the Rohingya. It was the second-largest country donor in 2022, giving about $A20.4 million (plus another $A16.7 million from private donors in Australia).

New Zealand’s response has been largely the same, committing about NZ$1 million (A$918,000) last year, but offering no refugee resettlement places specifically from the camps.

Our research suggests there is solid support for policy changes in both Australia and New Zealand, including among even conservative voters in both countries.

On the basis of this data, we strongly urge the Australian and New Zealand governments to reconsider their refugee intake policies and create a special Rohingya category to resettle refugees from Bangladesh.

Read more:
Generous aid to Ukraine is diverting resources away from other refugee crises around the world

Kristina Kironska’s research was supported by the European Regional Development Fund – Project “Sinophone Borderlands – Interaction at the Edges” CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000791. Besides the Palacky University Olomouc she is affiliated with the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) and with Amnesty International Slovakia.

Anthony Ware 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. Amid a worsening refugee crisis, public support is high in both Australia and NZ to accept more Rohingya – https://theconversation.com/amid-a-worsening-refugee-crisis-public-support-is-high-in-both-australia-and-nz-to-accept-more-rohingya-199504

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniella McCahey, Assistant Professor of History, Texas Tech University

When the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition ended on March 2, 1958, it marked what many called the last great adventure possible on Earth: an overland crossing of the Antarctic continent.

Sixty-five years later, it’s remembered in New Zealand chiefly for Sir Edmund Hillary’s unplanned and controversial “dash” to the South Pole in a convoy of modified Massey Ferguson tractors.

But as a historian of Antarctic science, I believe the expedition tells us about more than just Kiwi ingenuity and attitude. It was also about national competition and prestige, disputed sovereignty, and competing versions of masculinity.

Perhaps most significantly, an exercise designed to showcase Commonwealth unity ended up demonstrating the opposite. And it helped cement New Zealand’s independent relationship with Antarctica, specifically the Ross Dependency and Scott Base, as quite separate from its ties to Britain.

Science and nationalism

The expedition’s origins go back to 1953, when Vivian Fuchs, a geologist with the Falkland Islands Dependency Survey, began circulating a proposal for the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition (TAE). This would be the first overland crossing of the frozen continent.

Although Fuchs later stressed the scientific potential of his plan – which he said took initial shape as he sheltered from a blizzard, huddled in a tent on Antarctica’s Stonington Island – the proposal also had geopolitical motivations.

Read more:
200 years of exploring Antarctica – the world’s coldest, most forbidding and most peaceful continent

At the time, the United Kingdom’s claims in Antarctica were under increasing threat from Argentina and Chile. Even the American expedition to the Weddell Sea in 1947-48 did not acknowledge British sovereignty. In Fuchs’ words:

A trans-continental journey made wholly within territory claimed by the British Commonwealth […] would gain prestige and at the same time contribute to the solidarity of Commonwealth interests.

Fuchs tied the Trans-Antarctic Expedition to the scientific programme of the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957-1958. This was an international collaborative scientific project that focused on gathering new observations on the oceans, weather systems, outer space and the poles.

Even though the expedition remained officially separate, it could be seen as supporting the IGY’s wide-ranging scientific research efforts. While Fuchs soon won the support of many in the Commonwealth polar and scientific communities, some derided what appeared to be a geopolitical exercise using the supposedly apolitical, science-focused IGY.

The Hillary factor

For Fuchs to succeed in journeying from the Weddell Sea to the Ross Sea via the South Pole, his plan – like that of Ernest Shackleton’s ill-fated attempt 40 years earlier – depended on a supporting party from New Zealand.

Led by Edmund Hillary, an international celebrity since his 1953 ascent of Mt Everest, this party would lay depots of food and fuel to support the second part of Fuchs’ journey, from the South Pole to the Ross Sea.

Read more:
The wreck of Endurance is a bridge to a bygone age, and a reminder of Antarctica’s uncertain future

Hillary’s expedition, intended to be largely privately funded, initially lacked widespread support from New Zealanders, many of whom believed their government should cover the entire cost.

But the Ross Sea Committee, which organised the expedition, worked to imbue the public with a sense that their country had a stake in the Antarctic territory they claimed: the New Zealand Antarctic Expedition, as it was often called domestically, would be a triumph for their nation.

At the head of a major public relations campaign, Hillary’s attachment to the expedition was a big factor in growing support for the expedition. In the end, New Zealanders donated more to the TAE per capita than the British public did. Nonetheless, the New Zealand government still had to heavily subsidise the enterprise.

To the Pole by tractor

The newly established Scott Base was intended to serve the interests of both New Zealand’s IGY and TAE parties, and was placed under Hillary’s command. In fact, it was Hillary who selected, in a last-minute change, the base’s location on Ross Island, as it was more convenient for the TAE’s priority of travelling over the Polar Plateau.

This was to the chagrin of many scientists in both parties, including the IGY scientific leader Trevor Hatherton, who decried the site’s poor conditions for geologic, geomagnetic and seismic research.

Read more:
Fighting boredom with banjos and Russian grammar – tips from polar explorers for surviving months of isolation

Hillary began his depot-laying journey on October 14, 1957. To reduce costs and reflect New Zealand’s agricultural strengths, he travelled with three TE20 Massey Ferguson tractors, modified with a full tracking system for use in the snowy conditions. His team made good time and established Depot 700, the last one scheduled, in late December.

In the meantime, Fuchs’ team had encountered rough conditions and crossed the continent much more slowly than expected. Deviating from the expedition’s initial plans and disobeying orders from the Ross Sea Committee, Hillary continued to the South Pole and arrived at the US Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station on January 3, 1958, becoming the first to make this journey using overland vehicles.

Between 1992 and 2015, an image of a modified Massey Ferguson tractor graced the New Zealand $5 note, commemorating the achievement.

End of empire

Shortly after his arrival at the Pole, Hillary sent a message to Fuchs suggesting he abandon his plans for completing a crossing, given the difficult conditions. This telegram was accidentally released to the New Zealand press.

By the time Fuchs arrived at the Pole on January 19, a media firestorm had exploded. The expedition was now characterised as a “race to the Pole” by two national parties headed by the “adventurer” Hillary and the “scientist” Fuchs. Like the first race to the Pole between Roald Amundsen and Robert Falcon Scott in 1911-12, this one was framed as yet another loss by Britain.

Read more:
Finding Shackleton’s ship: why our fascination with Antarctica endures

The remainder of the expedition was an exercise in damage control, with the organising committees in New Zealand and the UK stressing there was indeed only one expedition, and there had been no race to the Pole. Fuchs’ party arrived, rather anticlimactically, at Scott Base on March 2, 1958, completing the historic 3,473 kilometre journey.

Yet the drama was still not over. Three years after Fuchs and Hillary’s official account of the expedition was published, Hillary published his own tell-all version which played up the masculinity and daring of the New Zealand party in opposition to the British.

What had begun as a show of Commonwealth unity with Britain at the head became an international incident, reinforcing perceptions of a fracturing British Empire. Hillary’s dash to the Pole was far more memorable than the actual crossing.

Moreover, it marked the beginning of modern New Zealand’s close identification with Antarctica and its own Scott Base, and the end of old colonial hierarchies on the ice. Indeed, by the end of the Trans-Antarctic Expedition, New Zealand’s biggest partner in Antarctic science was not the United Kingdom, but the United States.

Daniella McCahey has received funding from the Royal Society of New Zealand and the National Science Foundation

– ref. Empires of ice: how Edmund Hillary’s Antarctic adventure 65 years ago helped loosen NZ’s colonial ties to Britain – https://theconversation.com/empires-of-ice-how-edmund-hillarys-antarctic-adventure-65-years-ago-helped-loosen-nzs-colonial-ties-to-britain-199597

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

Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible. He is a kind of confidence man, preying on people’s vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust, and betraying them without remorse.

So begins Janet Malcolm’s renowned book, The Journalist and the Murderer. It was written more than 30 years ago, yet this negative notion has endured.

Journalists are still frequently condemned for how they interact with the people they interview. Indeed, with the advent of televised press conferences, journalists are facing more scrutiny and criticism than ever about their interviewing techniques.

It’s a perception that’s rarely challenged, even by journalists. But our new research suggests giving news interviews is generally a positive experience.

What we found

With colleagues from the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at ANU, we surveyed 220 Australian adults who had given news interviews or who have the potential to do so.

Some were subject experts. Others were spokespeople for organisations or communities. We asked them about their willingness to speak to the news media and what may influence that decision. We also asked open-ended questions about what makes for a positive or negative interview.

More than 80% of participants reported their overall experience of giving news interviews was positive. Only 6% reported an overall negative experience. A female university expert said

I’ve had a really positive experience with news media, which is not something I would have expected as someone who is actually quite shy and introverted.

And a male community spokesperson said

99% of my media experiences have been very positive and rewarding.

While most people also reported some issues such as rude journalists or rushed interviews, these tended to be the exception rather than the norm.

There’s little research about the attitudes of “sources” or “talents” who are approached by journalists to provide news interviews. Most of it has focused on people who frequently engage with the media, such as politicians.

The limited other research that considers subject experts and “ordinary people” who engage with the news media aligns with our findings. Even though they may have found inaccuracies in the reporting, the sources considered the overall experience to be positive and beneficial.

Read more:
Albanese wants to change the way politics is done. This means the way politics is reported will have to change too

Women are just as willing

When I interviewed 30 female academics about their attitudes towards engaging with the media a few years ago, 90% described their overall experience as positive. All but one said they were willing to give news interviews.

This finding was replicated in our new research. More than 80% of people surveyed were willing to give news interviews. Women were just as willing as men.

This is significant because numerous studies from around the world have found news coverage is dominated by the voices of men. Around 75% of people quoted, heard or seen in the news are men, according to research by the Global Media Monitoring Project.

Some argue this is because women are less willing to do media interviews. Our research refutes this argument, but it does highlight some notable gender differences in experiences and attitudes.

Women reported significantly lower confidence than men. Only 5% were “very confident”, compared to 20% of men. Women were more likely to refuse an interview request due to concerns about their appearance, a perceived lack of expertise, and fear of online harassment.

Concerns about online harassment were legitimate, with 38% of participants saying they had experienced trolling in response to giving a media interview. Men and women were both targeted, but women were more likely to receive sexist abuse.

Generally a valuable experience

Despite these issues and reservations, the participants were generally willing to speak to the media, which makes sense – people usually welcome the opportunity to talk about their area of expertise or share their experience. Inclusion in the news signals credibility and authority. Yes, there are risks to speaking out, but there are significant benefits too.

And there are certain ways journalists can approach a prospective source and carry out interviews to make them feel more comfortable and confident. Our research outlines some of these strategies and techniques, based on feedback from our participants. For example, when you approach a source for an interview:

• be clear about what you are seeking from the source and why you want to speak to them

• demonstrate that you’ve done your research

• provide a quick run-through of what to expect

• be courteous and flexible regarding timing

• and provide a few questions beforehand.

Read more:
Is it ever okay for journalists to lie to get a story?

I’m looking forward to sharing these findings with my journalism students, who tend to believe that asking someone to give an interview is always a major imposition. This research is good news for established journalists too, who rarely get direct feedback about the interview experience.

But perhaps more importantly, it’s encouraging for people who engage with the media or have the potential to do so. The way journalists interact with politicians (who, they would argue, typically avoid answering questions) during press conferences is not reflective of the usual interview experience.

It might be intimidating to speak to the news media but our research suggests it’s generally a good and valuable experience.

Kathryn Shine 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. Interviews with journalists can seem daunting – but new research shows 80% of subjects report a positive experience – https://theconversation.com/interviews-with-journalists-can-seem-daunting-but-new-research-shows-80-of-subjects-report-a-positive-experience-200821

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Singh, Research fellow, University of South Australia

The world is currently grappling with a mental health crisis, with millions of people reporting depression, anxiety, and other mental health conditions. According to recent estimates, nearly half of all Australians will experience a mental health disorder at some point in their lifetime.

Mental health disorders come at great cost to both the individual and society, with depression and anxiety being among the leading causes of health-related disease burden. The COVID pandemic is exacerbating the situation, with a significant rise in rates of psychological distress affecting one third of people.

While traditional treatments such as therapy and medication can be effective, our new research highlights the importance of exercise in managing these conditions.

Our recent study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine reviewed more than 1,000 research trials examining the effects of physical activity on depression, anxiety, and psychological distress. It showed exercise is an effective way to treat mental health issues – and can be even more effective than medication or counselling.

Read more:
Considering going off antidepressants? Here’s what to think about first

Harder, faster, stronger

We reviewed 97 review papers, which involved 1,039 trials and 128,119 participants. We found doing 150 minutes each week of various types of physical activity (such as brisk walking, lifting weights and yoga) significantly reduces depression, anxiety, and psychological distress, compared to usual care (such as medications).

The largest improvements (as self-reported by the participants) were seen in people with depression, HIV, kidney disease, in pregnant and postpartum women, and in healthy individuals, though clear benefits were seen for all populations.

We found the higher the intensity of exercise, the more beneficial it is. For example, walking at a brisk pace, instead of walking at usual pace. And exercising for six to 12 weeks has the greatest benefits, rather than shorter periods. Longer-term exercise is important for maintaining mental health improvements.

Read more:
When it’s easier to get meds than therapy: how poverty makes it hard to escape mental illness

How much more effective?

When comparing the size of the benefits of exercise to other common treatments for mental health conditions from previous systematic reviews, our findings suggest exercise is around 1.5 times more effective than either medication or cognitive behaviour therapy.

Furthermore, exercise has additional benefits compared to medications, such as reduced cost, fewer side effects and offering bonus gains for physical health, such as healthier body weight, improved cardiovascular and bone health, and cognitive benefits.

Why it works

Exercise is believed to impact mental health through multiple pathways, and with short and long-term effects. Immediately after exercise, endorphins and dopamine are released in the brain.

In the short term, this helps boost mood and buffer stress. Long term, the release of neurotransmitters in response to exercise promotes changes in the brain that help with mood and cognition, decrease inflammation, and boost immune function, which all influence our brain function and mental health.

Regular exercise can lead to improved sleep, which plays a critical role in depression and anxiety. It also has psychological benefits, such as increased self-esteem and a sense of accomplishment, all of which are beneficial for people struggling with depression.

Read more:
Let’s dance! How dance classes can lift your mood and help boost your social life

Not such an ‘alternative’ treatment

The findings underscore the crucial role of exercise for managing depression, anxiety and psychological distress.

Some clinical guidelines already acknowledge the role of exercise – for example, the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Guidelines, suggest medication, psychotherapy and lifestyle changes such as exercise.

However, other leading bodies, such as the American Psychological Association Clinical Practice Guidelines, emphasise medication and psychotherapy alone, and list exercise as an “alternative” treatment – in the same category as treatments such as acupuncture.
While the label “alternative” can mean many things when it comes to treatment, it tends to suggest it sits outside conventional medicine, or does not have a clear evidence base. Neither of these things are true in the case of exercise for mental health.

Even in Australia, medication and psychotherapy tend to be more commonly prescribed than exercise. This may be because exercise is hard to prescribe and monitor in clinical settings. And patients may be resistant because they feel low in energy or motivation.

Read more:
Netflix psychiatrist Phil Stutz says 85% of early therapy gains are down to lifestyle changes. Is he right?

But don’t ‘go it alone’

It is important to note that while exercise can be an effective tool for managing mental health conditions, people with a mental health condition should work with a health professional to develop a comprehensive treatment plan – rather than going it alone with a new exercise regime.

A treatment plan may include a combination of lifestyle approaches, such as exercising regularly, eating a balanced diet, and socialising, alongside treatments such as psychotherapy and medication.

But exercise shouldn’t be viewed as a “nice to have” option. It is a powerful and accessible tool for managing mental health conditions – and the best part is, it’s free and comes with plenty of additional health benefits.

Ben Singh receives funding from the International Society of Behaviour Nutrition and Physical Activity.

Carol Maher receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the National Heart Foundation, the SA Department for Education, the SA Department for Innovation and Skills, Healthway, Hunter New England Local Health District, the Central Adelaide Local Health Network, and LeapForward.

Jacinta Brinsley 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. Exercise is even more effective than counselling or medication for depression. But how much do you need? – https://theconversation.com/exercise-is-even-more-effective-than-counselling-or-medication-for-depression-but-how-much-do-you-need-200717

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Murray Shearer, Professor of Hydrogen and Alternative Energy, CQUniversity Australia

Think about oil and gas companies and climate change and chances are you’ll think dark thoughts. It’s true Exxon Mobil had remarkably detailed knowledge of global warming in the 1970s. Some seeded doubt by funding climate denier organisations and scientists and invented greenwashing. The current energy crisis has handed them windfall profits. In fact, BP hit profits of A$40 billion last year, while scaling back its green ambitions.

But these companies are not just going to disappear. Even after we stop burning oil in engines, we will need oil and gas as raw materials for plastics, glues, solvents, industrial chemicals and fertilisers. Eventually, we’ll find greener alternatives. But that will take decades.

Are they the enemy? They’ve certainly done a lot to slow down the shift to clean energy. But this will – and is – changing. Inside some of these companies, people know change will have to come. The companies which embrace their role as broader energy and chemical companies will make the transition first.

We’ll also need their expertise and ability to handle uncertainty, risk and large projects to make green hydrogen and green chemicals a reality.

Oil and gas over coal?

If you’ve been following climate change discussion, you’ll have noticed plans to phase out coal crop up a lot more often than plans to phase out oil and gas.

That’s because – for now – we’re much more reliant on these hydrocarbons. Firmed solar and wind can now take up the slack as ageing coal plants retire. But we’re still a way off being able to avoid burning oil or gas for transport or in industrial processes.

That means these companies will be with us for decades yet. But over time, they will think of themselves less as fossil fuel extractors and more as energy and chemical conglomerates, where oil and gas is a smaller part of what they do.

You’re right to be sceptical. But there are legitimate signs of change.

Shell just bought into a green hydrogen megaproject in Oman, for instance, where it will be the lead operator. Late last year, BP bought a controlling stake in Australia’s largest renewable project, the Asian Renewable Energy Hub. If built in its entirety, this project would generate the equivalent of a third of Australia’s 2020 electricity production.

Oil and gas majors are well placed to make green hydrogen and green chemicals

Hydrogen is tricky. The lightest element can diffuse through many materials and escape. That makes storage and transport difficult.

But oil and gas companies are experienced in handling hydrogen. That’s because it’s widely used in oil refineries to scrub sulphur out of oil and to help crack heavy oil into lighter grades. In fact, it’s so useful that most of the world’s hydrogen is used in oil production. At present, hydrogen is usually made by breaking up natural gas, which means it contributes to global heating.

But if we can figure out how to cheaply extract hydrogen from seawater, this green hydrogen could sub in for fossil gas. For this to happen, we’ll need oil and gas majors on board. The realities of green hydrogen would be daunting for most companies. Pipelines to transport it. Ways of storing it. Tankers to ship it across the sea. Heavy engineering projects with a high capital expenditure.

Oil and gas companies have had to pioneer a great deal of new technology to keep the fuel coming, given how much oil and gas has already been tapped, shipped and burned. Take fracking, which was invented out of necessity. Or the ability to drill for oil underneath kilometres of seawater in places like the North Sea.

To have a chance of getting to net zero by 2050, we’ll need scale. If green hydrogen or ammonia is to actually be useful, we need lots of it.

How could oil and gas companies reinvent themselves?

Not all oil companies are the same. Some will keep drilling for oil as long as there is demand. And state-owned oil companies such as Saudi Arabia’s Aramco are the main source of their country’s wealth. It’s hard to see them changing.

But some will move to grasp the future. Many people inside these companies can see very clearly where the world is going – and the risk of going extinct if they do not reinvent themselves. The first movers are likely to benefit the most, if they use their advantages to help the transition.

At present, oil and gas companies make money by drilling, processing and selling oil and gas to burn in engines. But as the clean energy transition gathers pace, there will be new opportunities.

If one major oil company figures out how to do green hydrogen at scale, they could take advantage of their integrated corporate network, from production to transport to service stations or other consumer points. Others might move into synthetic aviation fuel, or specialise in swapping LNG tankers for hydrogen vessels.

Even after you displace dirty fuels from transport and power sectors, there are many areas left over, such as chemical manufacturing.

Without fertilisers, we would have much lower yields from our farms. It’s estimated the equivalent of half the world’s population relies on food made possible by synthetic fertilisers. These come from natural (fossil) gas.

Similarly, paints, varnishes, glues and plastics currently need hydrocarbons as a feedstock. To replace these means changing the whole chain.

Oil and gas don’t exist in a vacuum

Just last week, the European Union hit the symbolic target of EU€100 (A$157) per tonne of carbon.

As carbon prices rise, it makes fossil fuel projects less attractive – and will make the economics of many marginal projects in renewables, green chemicals and hydrogen work.

You and I and most people alive have benefited from the intense energy stored in fossil fuels. They’ve underpinned the huge advances in our economies and technologies for over a century. But now the costs are plain. So let’s use all the tools we have available – even those wielded by climate villains like oil and gas companies.

Murray Shearer spent 20 years at BP, working in both hydrogen projects and oil

– ref. Oil and gas companies are seen as climate villains. Truth is, we’ll need their expertise to make green hydrogen a reality – https://theconversation.com/oil-and-gas-companies-are-seen-as-climate-villains-truth-is-well-need-their-expertise-to-make-green-hydrogen-a-reality-188598

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bhavna Middha, Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University

The harsh realities of managing the waste we produce are in the news: councils shunning new glass bins, more plastic being produced per person in the world and Sydney bins overflowing. And the growth in apartment living in Australia threatens to add to these problems. Apartments worldwide have lower recycling rates than standalone houses.

Our research on apartments and plastic use in four cities – Melbourne, London, Barcelona and Perth – found apartments present extra challenges for waste production, collection, sorting and disposal. Our ongoing research project is exploring ways to minimise kerbside waste and maximise recycling. The problems with apartments arise from issues of space, design, infrastructure (such as bins, chutes and pick-ups of bins and hard waste) and the resources put into managing their waste.

However, there are examples in cities in Australia and overseas of schemes that have improved apartment waste recycling so it matches, if not exceeds, that of standalone houses.

Read more:
Households find low-waste living challenging. Here’s what needs to change

What is being done about these problems?

In Victoria, the state government has mandated a new, separate bin to collect waste glass from households. Glass is a high-impact packaging material, due to the energy and water used in both its production and recycling.

Broken glass is also a major contaminant for paper and cardboard in current mixed waste streams. The container deposit scheme being introduced in Victoria, along with glass bins, will help separate glass from this recycling stream.

However, challenges lie ahead. Some local councils are showing signs of refusing to provide bins for glass. Lack of space for multiple bins is one key reason. Multi-unit developments and apartments are just not designed for such infrastructure.

COVID-19 led to an explosion in the quantity of packaging waste because of online orders and deliveries. Plastic waste in particular appears to be largely out of control, despite growing angst and even bans on the use of some plastics.

Read more:
REDcycle’s collapse is more proof that plastic recycling is a broken system

But waste management has been a problem for apartment buildings around the world since long before the pandemic.

For example, 30 apartment buildings in Seattle are exempted from providing recycling bins due to a lack of space. And in Sydney, residents of the Waterloo public housing estate have been surprised to be entirely excluded from the city’s recycling scheme due to contamination of recycled waste streams.

Research in the United States found a gap in recycling between apartments of different socioeconomic status was due to lower service levels (caretaking and janitorial) in low-income buildings.

It’s not just an individual responsibility

Thus far, action on waste production and prevention is limited to voluntary covenants for producers of packaging, and programs promoting changes in individual behaviour.

Households bear the brunt of responsibility – especially in apartments, where space to manage different bins, their smells and aesthetics is at a premium. Yet it is manufacturers and retailers who design and make highly packaged and non-recyclable materials.

While the rubbish keeps piling up, producers’ mostly ineffectual voluntary agreements lie on virtual shelves. A case in point is Sydney council blaming worker shortages and COVID-19 overflow for the rubbish piling up, rather than the original producers of waste.

Read more:
If the UN wants to slash plastic waste, it must tackle soaring plastic production – and why we use so much of it

Our continuing research is exploring the issues associated with apartments. These issues include how waste is produced – for example, through the demand created for packaging – and available space, as well as how policymakers, architects, builders and householders conceive of everyday apartment living.

In the shared spaces of apartments, waste production, collection, sorting and disposal depend on the design of these spaces and the organisation of infrastructure for collection and disposal.

Read more:
Four bins might help, but to solve our waste crisis we need a strong market for recycled products

What more can be done?

We are exploring examples that try to break free of blaming individual choices and behaviours. The latter approach might produce short-term gains but fails to embed long-term changes – as this project in London showed. It’s possible, though, to design circular economy systems for apartments that match or even exceed waste recycling for detached suburban houses.

For example, in the City of Melbourne’s trial of dehydrators in apartment buildings food waste is collected and processed on the premises. It recognises that individual apartments often lack space for composting.

In South Korea, apartments are an integral part of the recycling regime. Some have recycling bin space, including food waste bins, on every floor.

Read more:
Despite government delays, food waste recycling bins are coming to your kitchen sooner than you think

The city of New York has developed “zero waste” guidelines based on case studies in organic waste management and disposal in apartment buildings. The program includes retrofitting buildings.

To improve the recycling of waste from apartments, research points to the need to take into account all relevant factors, including the chemical properties of the waste, household practices and business models. We can apply what we know about apartment living to design better apartments and retrofit existing ones to reduce the waste they produce and manage it better.

With millions of Australians now living in apartments, we can’t keep putting their waste in the too hard basket.

Bhavna Middha receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) Industrial Transformation Research Hub for Transformation of Reclaimed Waste Resources to Engineered Materials and Solutions for a Circular Economy (TREMS)

Ralph Horne receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) Industrial Transformation Research Hub for Transformation of Reclaimed Waste Resources to Engineered Materials and Solutions for a Circular Economy (TREMS)

– ref. We can’t keep putting apartment residents’ waste in the too hard basket – https://theconversation.com/we-cant-keep-putting-apartment-residents-waste-in-the-too-hard-basket-200545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Jefferson, Senior Lecturer in Education, Edith Cowan University

I knew assessment season was upon us when my son frantically asked me one morning before school if I had any spare pens in my bag. Despite the fact most tests have moved online, it appears the fear of ink in a pen running out remains a timeless stress factor.

This will likely be a familiar scenario. With NAPLAN moving to March and Year 11 and 12 students already in the throes of multiple assessments, exams are looming for many households with school-aged children.

This is likely to be stressful for parents as well as students, as families cope with pre-test anxieties and perhaps, different approaches to study and learning.

Exams are not the most important thing in life or in school. There is a valid ongoing debate among education researchers about the use of standardised testing. This comes on top of a welcome shift towards developing lifelong creative learners, rather than kids who focus on tests.

In the meantime, how can we help our children manage this testing time?

Kids will likely do things their way

As parents, it is important to be aware of how your own school experiences may impact how you respond to your children sitting exams and preparing for them.

Perhaps studying came easily to you or it was very important to your identity growing up. Perhaps you have regrets about your involvement or engagement (or lack thereof) in school. Your natural instinct may be to try too hard to ensure your child does not replicate that experience.

Additionally we all have different ways of studying or revising information. Multiple systematic reviews have debunked the notion of “preferred learning styles” or the idea that students prefer learning through seeing, listening, or physically engaging with a subject. But children may still approach learning differently to us. So we need to ensure our support is tailored to their needs, rather than our preferences.

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

How to really annoy your kids

In a recent TEDx talk I gave on the teenage brain and testing, I noted that, in my experience, one question annoys children more than any other:

Why aren’t you studying?

Interestingly, the word “assessment” can act as a great guiding point for parents wanting to help their children during tests and exams. The word “assess” in Latin is the combination of two words meaning “to sit by or sit beside”.

How to ‘sit by’ your children

When it comes to assessment time, instead of getting what I call “stressed by proxy”, it’s important to remain calm because your child will take your cues from you. Some steps to help your child during this time include:

1. Leave them alone after school

When they get home, give them some much needed decompression time, rather than diving straight into study. We know students manage multiple transitions and interactions during the day.

Just as adults need breathing space when they get home from work, so do young people. Even half an hour will help.

2. Have supplies ready

Years of experience have taught me that for some reason, a black pen and a lead pencil are like gold in my household. I have no scientific explanation for the nebula they continually disappear into, but I have a secret stash to be proffered when needed.

I also have a spare charger and highlighter pens because they also become hot button items ahead of exams.

3. This includes snacks and water

A good way to help rather than impose yourself on your kids is to bring them snacks and water first before starting a conversation. Kids will often be hungry, tired and overwhelmed at the end of a long day at school. When we meet this simple need, it is often a great basis for a deeper chat.

4. Show them you love them anyway

Finally, it’s important to make it clear to young people that assessments are the equivalent of a Snapchat streak. They capture a brief moment in time and that is all.

Maintaining close and loving connections with our kids during these times of stress is far more important for their longer term wellbeing.

A great measure of success is children being able to disclose their results with us, knowing they are emotionally safe to do so. Sometimes that may mean putting on our best poker face, or taking some very deep silent breaths.

Either way, it’s important we remain a safe space that is available any time they need.

Read more:
Back-to-school blues are normal, so how can you tell if it’s something more serious?

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

– ref. How to avoid annoying your kids and getting ‘stressed by proxy’ during exam season – https://theconversation.com/how-to-avoid-annoying-your-kids-and-getting-stressed-by-proxy-during-exam-season-200719

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tanya Latty, Associate professor, University of Sydney

Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania is the latest film in the ever-expanding Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The ant-filled film follows the adventures of Scott Lang (AKA Ant-Man), Hope Van Dyne (AKA The Wasp) and Cassie Lang (AKA The Stinger), who all use science-derived technology to give them ant-like powers. In the Ant-Man films, Ant-Man also has the ability to direct the actions of several ant species, each with its own unique set of characteristics.

Tiny ants might seem like unlikely inspirations and sidekicks for a superhero, but real-life ants have astonishing superpowers that make them formidable allies.

Super strength

Ant-Man and The Wasp both wear suits that allow them to shrink and also give them the proportionate strength of an ant.

Ants are well known for their super-strength, with some workers being able to carry up to 50 times their own body weight. Since ants – like other insects – have their skeletons on the outside, their muscles do not have to support much of their body weight, leaving them free to apply more strength to lifting.

In addition, smaller animals tend to have greater strength relative to their body weight. Even ants’ joints are strong: the neck joints of the common field ant Formica exsectoides can withstand 5,000 times the ant’s body weight.

Read more:
How do Olympic athletes stack up against invertebrates? Not very well

Super speed

Ant-Man and The Wasp don’t have super speed – but real-life ants certainly do!

Saharan silver ants (Cataglyphis bombycina) can travel 100 times their body length in a second, making them one of the fastest animals on the planet. That’s like a 180-centimetre human running at 200 metres per second (or 720km per hour)! Usain Bolt, the all-time fastest person in the world, could only hit a maximum speed of 47km per hour.

Ants are not just fast runners – they can move other parts of their bodies with mind-boggling speed. Trap jaw ants (Odontomachus bauri) can slam their jaws shut at an incredible 137km per hour, one of the fastest movements in the animal kingdom. Trap jaw ants use their super-fast mandibles to catch their favourite prey: termites.

The jaws of trap jaw ants are also impressive defensive weapons and can be used to stun attacking predators such as spiders. These ants can even make a rapid retreat by striking their jaws against the ground. This “bouncer defence” throws the ant an astonishing 8cm into the air, the equivalent of an average-sized human jumping 40 metres.

Strength in numbers

What ants lack in size, they make up for in sheer numbers. A recent study estimated that there are more than 20 quadrillion ants alive at any one time – there are many more ants on Earth than stars in the Milky Way galaxy.

Argentine ants (Linepithema humile) build some of the largest supercolonies on Earth, containing billions of workers spread over 6,000 square kilometres.

By working together in overwhelming numbers, ants can successfully attack animals many times bigger than themselves. Army ant swarms can take down large prey such as lizards, frogs and even scorpions. Like the Ant-Man comic character Cassie Lang, some ant species possess a stinger capable of delivering painful venom. South American bullet ants (Paraponera clavata) have one of the world’s most painful stings. It’s no wonder they were featured as “attack ants” in the first Ant-Man movie.

No leaders necessary

Throughout the Ant-Man films, the heroes use communication devices to lead colonies of ants. However, there are no leaders in a real ant colony.

Worker ants are responsible for tasks such as hunting, cleaning and rearing larvae, while queens lay eggs to keep the colony stocked with workers. You might think a society containing millions of tiny-brained animals with no leader would be chaos, but by working together, ants can achieve feats that far exceed the brain power of any individual – this is called “swarm intelligence”.

Argentine ants, for example, can find the shortest path between nests, while fire ants escape flooding by linking their bodies together to form enormous living life rafts. In the First Ant-Man movie, Scott Lang uses the coordinated skills of fire ants to break into Pym Headquarters.

Super sized societies

In the latest movie, a colony of ants accidentally enters the mysterious quantum realm where they undergo 1,000 years of evolution, resulting in a society of highly intelligent ants living in a futuristic society.

But modern-day ants have already evolved exceptionally complex societies. Some ant species have even evolved forms of agriculture by tending to and protecting herds of sap-sucking aphids. Aphids respond to their ant farmers by producing droplets of a sugary substance called “honeydew” which the ants harvest as food.

Read more:
Tiny Game of Thrones: the workers of yellow crazy ants can act like lazy wannabe queens. So we watched them fight

Amazingly, leaf cutter ants in South America care for immense underground fungi gardens which they grow for food. The ants feed the fungus leaves and are able to select the leaf species that maximise fungal growth. Ants weed the garden by removing weedy fungi species, and can even use antibiotics to protect the fungi from disease.

Given their super strength, incredible speeds and amazing swarm intelligence, Ant-Man is lucky to have ants on his side!

Tanya Latty receives funding from The Australian Research Council and AgrifFutures Australia. She is affiliated with Invertebrates Australia, a conservation organization dedicated to the conservation of insects and other invertebrates.

Caitlyn Forster receives funding from The Australian Research Council.

– ref. From deadly jaws and enormous strength to mushroom farming, Ant-Man is only tapping into a portion of the real superpowers of ants – https://theconversation.com/from-deadly-jaws-and-enormous-strength-to-mushroom-farming-ant-man-is-only-tapping-into-a-portion-of-the-real-superpowers-of-ants-200530

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

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

In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss the government’s decision to double the tax on big super account earnings, Jim Chalmers’ blunder when quizzed about taxing family homes, and the announcement of a new cyber-security Coordinator in the wake of the Medibank and Optus hacks.

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

– ref. Word from The Hill: Chalmers learns hard lesson in ‘rule-in-rule-out’ game – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-chalmers-learns-hard-lesson-in-rule-in-rule-out-game-200919

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

Australia has recovered better than most from the COVID pandemic. As measured by gross domestic product (GDP), the economy is now 7% larger than it was before the pandemic.

Over 2022, the economy expanded by 2.7% – more than any of the seven largest advanced economies, and more than twice the average growth rate in the OECD.

That’s the good news from the latest national accounts data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, covering the last quarter of 2022. Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers dutifully noted these things in his press conference following the release of the accounts. But he was far from exuberant.

The economic story of 2022 was complete, he said, but the unfolding story of 2023 was unpredictable.

He was “cautiously optimistic” inflation had peaked. But he warned that rising prices remained “the defining challenge” amid a global economic slowdown and geopolitical uncertainty. In particular, he noted concerns about rising interest rates and wages not keeping pace with increases in the cost of living.

Growth is slowing

The December quarter accounts provided the the first set of annual accounts since 2019 unaffected by COVID-related measures such as lockdowns and border closures.

GDP growth was 0.6% in the first quarter of 2022, 0.9% in the second, and 0.7% in the third. The 0.5% growth in the December quarter therefore indicates economic activity is slowing (or “moderating”, as Chalmers put it).

In the December quarter, exports rose by 1.1% as the tourism and the international education markets rebounded. Imports fell by 4.3%, implying some spending on foreign goods and services was replaced by domestic goods and services.

Partly offsetting this was that companies invested less – an indication of lower confidence about the future. Dwelling investment also declined. The Australian Bureau of Statistics attributed this to the completion of renovations that had been subsidised by the Morrison Government’s HomeBuilder scheme.

Read more:
Scott Morrison’s HomeBuilder scheme is classic retail politics but lousy economics

Per capita performance

So what does this mean for the average person?

The best indicator of this in the national accounts is real net national disposable income per capita. This removes the effects of population growth and inflation.

Some of the recent increase, however, is attributable to higher commodity prices benefiting our miners and farmers, which may not be flowing through to the “average” Australian.

(There are also other aspects of wellbeing not captured by this measure. It still provides a useful proxy for the standard of living.)

Wages aren’t growing much

What’s clear is that inflation is not being driven by wage increases. The share of national income going to labour (workers) remains near a 60-year low. Conversely, the share going to capital (as profits to owners and investors) is near a 60-year high.

Household saving falling

Household savings surged during COVID, as opportunities to spend on entertainment, leisure and travel were curtailed. The household saving ratio has now returned to its pre-COVID level.

This is partly due to higher spending on things like dining out, but it also reflects tightening budgets as cost-of-living pressure and interest rate increases weigh on family budgets. Overall, consumer spending in the December quarter rose just 0.3%, the weakest quarterly rise since the September 2021 quarter, which was affected by lockdowns in Melbourne and Sydney.

There is more pain to come. Despite Chalmers’ cautious optimism that inflation has peaked, the Reserve Bank of Australia is still likely to increase interest rates further, in its mission to return inflation to its 2-3% target range while not dampening economic activity so much that a recession ensues.

Read more:
The Lowe road – the RBA is treading a ‘narrow path’ between inflation and recession

RBA governor Philip Lowe has described it as a “narrow path”. He’s right.

John Hawkins previously worked as a macroeconomic analyst and forecaster in the Reserve Bank and the Australian Treasury.

– ref. Inflation still the ‘defining challenge’ as Australia’s economic activity slows – https://theconversation.com/inflation-still-the-defining-challenge-as-australias-economic-activity-slows-200631

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tobias Ide, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, Murdoch University

For many Australians, the impacts of climate change on wellbeing are distressingly clear.

Floods have recently caused massive damage in many parts of the country, while the 2019/2020 Black Summer bushfires are still seared in our memories.

Climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of such floods and fires, along with droughts, heatwaves and coastal erosion.

Read more:
Farm floods will hit food supplies and drive up prices. Farmers need help to adapt as weather extremes worsen

Climate change isn’t only a threat to our unique environment, but also a threat to Australia’s national security.

The federal government is already concerned about this issue. When coming into office last year, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said “The security implications of climate change are clear and cannot be ignored”. He subsequently ordered the Office of National Intelligence to analyse the security implications of climate change. However, the results of this assessment remain classified.

My latest study provides the most comprehensive scientific (and publicly available) assessment of whether climate change affects national security in Australia. The answer to this question is a clear “yes”, even though some qualifications apply.

The biggest risks are damage to critical infrastructure, strained defence force capacity, and the possibility of increased political instability in our region.

Risks to infrastructure

Climate change poses considerable risks to critical infrastructure.

Australia has long road, rail and grid networks, large parts of which are threatened by sea-level rise or located in disaster risk areas.

If you live in Western Australia, you may remember empty supermarket shells in early 2022 when floods washed away a major supply rail line.

Likewise, climate change means more heatwaves. During hot days, demand for energy peaks to keep buildings cool. Simultaneously, high fire risks complicate repair works and bushfires may destroy energy infrastructure. As a result, the likelihood of power outages grows.

Read more:
Rising seas threaten Australia’s major airports – and it may be happening faster than we think

Stretching the capacity of the defence force

But climate change doesn’t only threaten civil infrastructure. It also affects the capabilities of the Australian Defence Force (ADF). When it comes to roads or power, the military often depends on the same infrastructure as civilians do, so is affected by similar risks.

The Tanami Road connecting Alice Springs to the Kimberley, for instance, is considered of high strategic importance in case of a larger international conflict. Yet it’s vulnerable to disruptions by floods and extreme heat.

Many military bases are also located close to the ocean and hence threatened by rising sea levels.

The ADF also plays a key role as a provider of disaster relief, both domestically (such as after the Kimberley floods this year) and internationally (such as after Cyclone Winston in Fiji 2016).

The ADF is quite well resourced, but its capacities could be stretched thin if several relevant incidents occur at the same time.

Imagine, for example, several major disasters requiring military responses at a time when ADF infrastructure is affected by climate change, and geopolitical tensions with China are growing.

Political instability

Climate change will also increase the risk of political instability in the Asia-Pacific region.

Research has established that disasters like droughts, floods or storms make violent internal political conflict more likely, particularly in countries with pre-existing risk factors. This is because armed groups have an easier time recruiting impoverished and aggrieved disaster survivors.

Also, states are often weakened after disasters because their military is busy with the disaster response.

Read more:
Climate change poses a ‘direct threat’ to Australia’s national security. It must be a political priority

In the past, we have observed this link in several countries in Australia’s immediate neighbourhood. In Fiji, for instance, more and more residents are fleeing from coastal floods and storms to larger islands and urban areas. This frequently causes tensions between the newcomers and established residents.

Likewise, Maoist insurgents in India often recruit desperate farmers. Droughts and tropical storms deepen poverty in these rural areas.

In the worst case, Australia’s foreign policy will need to deal with twin challenges: climate-related disasters causing political instability in the region and simultaneously undermining the capabilities of core regional partner countries like Indonesia, which are highly vulnerable to extreme climate events.

Some risks exaggerated

However, my study also finds some climate-related risks are exaggerated.

On the one hand, climate change isn’t a deterministic force of nature, but a result of human action (and inaction). Ambitious CO2-reduction policies and smart adaptation measures could go a long way in reducing the worst impacts of climate change. Decentralised solar energy projects, for instance, help to avoid greenhouse gas emissions and can act as a buffer against disruptions of the power grid.

On the other hand, depictions of climate change as a trigger of international wars and mass migration are misleading.

We have only seen a relatively small number of large-scale violent disputes between states since World War Two, and in none of them was the environment a major cause of contestation. As long as it’s many times cheaper to build a desalination plant than to invade a country, water wars remain unlikely.

What’s more, international migration is enormously costly for the majority of people living in poorer countries. If their livelihoods are further devastated by storms and droughts, they’re even less likely to be able to pay to move long distances.

Despite these qualifications, the message of recent research is unequivocal: climate change is not “just” an environmental concern. It’s an important national security issue for Australia. Efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change should, consequentially, remain high on the political agenda.

Tobias Ide receives funding from the Australian Research Council for the project ‘Disasters and Armed Conflict Dynamics’.

– ref. Political instability and damage to infrastructure: how climate change could undermine Australia’s national security – https://theconversation.com/political-instability-and-damage-to-infrastructure-how-climate-change-could-undermine-australias-national-security-199308

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nial Wheate, Associate Professor of the Sydney Pharmacy School, University of Sydney

Cough medicines containing the active ingredient pholcodine are being withdrawn from sale due to safety concerns highlighted for years both in Australia and internationally.

Yesterday, Australia’s medicines regulator announced the immediate registration cancellation and recall of dozens of these over-the-counter cough medicines and lozenges.

This is because of the risk of a sudden, severe and life-threatening allergic reaction if people are also given specific muscle relaxant drugs while under a general anaesthetic.

That risk of anaphylaxis can remain weeks and months after taking the cough medicine.

Read more:
Still coughing after COVID? Here’s why it happens and what to do about it

What is pholcodine?

Pholcodine (pronounced pho-co-dean) is an opioid-based medicine, which means it’s related to morphine and codeine. It works by binding to various opioid receptors in a part of the brain responsible for triggering the cough reflex.

As such, it is a common ingredient in many over-the-counter medicines used to treat a dry cough. These include cough syrups and lozenges. Every product that contains pholcodine will list it prominently on the bottle or cardboard packaging.

Common brands that contain this ingredient include Benadryl, Bisolvon, Codral, Difflam, Difflam Plus and Duro-Tuss.

Read more:
Sore throats suck. Do throat lozenges help at all?

Why the recall?

The most common side effects of pholcodine are dizziness, nausea and sedation. But the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has recalled products containing it, as pholcodine can trigger anaphylaxis around the time of surgery.

The issue arises when pholcodine medicines are combined with types of muscle relaxants given during surgery known as neuromuscular blocking agents.

This type of anaphylaxis can occur in people who have had a muscle relaxant before and been previously fine, or in people who receive a muscle relaxant drug for the first time.

Being obese also places people at higher risk of this type of anaphylaxis.

Read more:
Cough syrup can harm children: experts warn of contamination risks

We’ve known about the risk for years

We have actually known about the risks of pholcodine and muscle relaxants for some time, including in Scandinavian studies in 2005.

In fact, it was because of these studies that pholcodine was withdrawn from the market in Norway in 2007.

The European Medicines Agency recommended the withdrawal of pholcodine in Europe in December 2022.

In Australia, the PatientSafe Network has been calling for its ban since at least 2017.

Over the past 12 months, there were nine reported cases of serious adverse effects to pholcodine reported to the TGA, including three deaths. The most recent case was in January this year. In three of the nine, pholcodine was the only suspected medicine involved.

Why now?

The TGA’s decision may come from a recent (but not yet peer reviewed) French study. This found that when patients had taken pholcodine at any time in the 12 months before surgery that used a muscle relaxant, they were at much higher risk of anaphylaxis.

The French research is consistent with an earlier Western Australian study which found analphylaxis is 14 times more likely to occur when the two types of drugs are combined.

This is because pholcodine can linger in the body for long periods. After you swallow the medicine, the drug reaches its highest concentration in the blood stream one to two hours later. But both the drug and its metabolites can still be detected in the body up to seven weeks later.

I have some at home. What now?

As pholcodine can linger in the body, the TGA has warned that if you have taken a medicine containing pholcodine in the past 12 months you need to tell your doctor before you have surgery.

If you are taking one of these medicines you should stop immediately, even if you don’t think you’re going to have a medical procedure soon.

Take it to your local pharmacy for disposal. At that time, the pharmacist will be able to recommend a different medicine for your cough.

Read more:
Health Check: do cough medicines work?

Associate Professor Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a Fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association, and a member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vairea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd a medical device company, and a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents.

Associate Professor Tina Hinton has previously received funding from the Schizophrenia Research Institute (formerly Neuroscience Institute of Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders). She is currently a Board member of the Australasian Society of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacologists and Toxicologists.

– ref. Why cough medicines containing pholcodine can be deadly even if you took them months before surgery – https://theconversation.com/why-cough-medicines-containing-pholcodine-can-be-deadly-even-if-you-took-them-months-before-surgery-200895

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Clemens Altaner, Associate Professor in Wood Science, University of Canterbury

Timber with a green-grey hue – treated with copper chromium arsenic (CCA) – is a common sight in New Zealand. But how many people are aware that it pollutes the environment, is associated with health risks and is a toxic waste complicating the transition to a circular bioeconomy?

Other countries, including Australia, the US and the EU, have stopped or restricted the use of CCA, moved to safer alternatives and established viable end-of-life disposal options.

The ingredients of CCA are the heavy metals copper, chromium and arsenic. They don’t decompose and can’t be destroyed like organic compounds by incineration.

The heavy metals leach from the timber, polluting soil and water. When CCA-treated timber is burned, most arsenic becomes volatile and pollutes the air, while chromium and copper contaminate the ash.

The World Health Organization (WHO) lists arsenic among the top ten chemicals of major public health concern. It is a confirmed carcinogen. Chromium and copper are not without health risks either.

Banned or restricted elsewhere

In the early 2000s, the US Environmental Protection Agency and the timber industry agreed to restrict CCA-treated timber to industrial uses. This was driven by concerns about human exposure to arsenic from playground equipment, decks, picnic tables and other uses.

Most other developed countries followed with similar restrictions. CCA is no longer registered as a wood preservative in the EU.

But New Zealand’s treated-timber market is still dominated by CCA. It is used abundantly in playgrounds and residential buildings with a high risk of human exposure. This is despite Standards New Zealand having approved more benign alternatives.

New Zealand’s Environmental Protection Authority also recommends building playgrounds from alternative materials, providing consumer information at point of sale and greater dissemination of precautionary health advice. But these recommendations have been ignored in New Zealand for two decades.

Stakeholders have not adopted the standard developed jointly by Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand. The standard contains a consumer safety information sheet, which states CCA-treated timber cannot be used for products in direct contact with foodstuffs, garden furniture, exterior seating, children’s play equipment, patio and domestic decking and handrails.

It also details appropriate disposal and outlines precautions during handling:

• avoid sawing

• wear dust masks, gloves and eye protection

• wash hands and face after working with CCA-treated timber.

Environmental and health risks

New Zealand excluded environmental risks from its CCA safety assessment. Yet environmental risks were leading reasons to phase out CCA overseas.

There are several domestic examples of environmental pollution by CCA.

Arsenic concentration in the air during winter exceeds New Zealand’s ambient air-quality guidelines. This is caused by inappropriate burning of CCA-treated timber in log fires and burn-offs by the agricultural sector.

Read more:
‘Like having a truck idling in your living room’: the toxic cost of wood-fired heaters

Arsenic concentration was predicted to exceed the drinking water standard in slow-flowing Marlborough aquifers.

While soil contamination is localised around CCA-treated timber, these hotspots can be frequent. Vineyards, for example, feature 500-600 posts per hectare. Land-use change for urban development will require significant remediation.

Improper disposal of ash from log burners in green bins causes arsenic contamination of compost. Deliberate composting of treated timber has also been uncovered.

In a study of 35 countries, New Zealand was the only one where arsenic contamination of residential indoor dust exceeded the non-carcinogenic hazard index for children.

No safe disposal

CCA is also an obstacle in the transition to a circular bioeconomy. Reuse of timber is a well established procedure. It prioritises reuse over thermal utilisation (using it as fuel to harness its energy).

However, there is no viable reuse for CCA-treated timber waste. The problem is even bigger. CCA-treated timber cannot be separated from untreated timber in demolition waste.

Read more:
We create 20m tons of construction industry waste each year. Here’s how to stop it going to landfill

In New Zealand, CCA-treated timber is to be disposed in secure landfills, forcing future generations to manage the toxic CCA leachate. Burning in appropriate facilities is the only viable disposal method for CCA-treated timber – it is the mandatory disposal option in Germany. However, no sizeable waste incineration plant has been commissioned in New Zealand.

A brief visit to any school, playground, picnic area, domestic garden or DIY shop demonstrates New Zealand’s comparatively relaxed attitude towards CCA. Government and industry state to never burn CCA-treated timber, but this is not communicated to the public effectively.

Recent advice at my local DIY stores included, “yes, it’s standard for playground equipment” and “it can be burned or recycled”. Preservative-treated wood is frequently sold as firewood. At my last check, three out of the top 50 firewood listings on the auction site TradeMe were CCA-treated timber waste.

New Zealand’s industry-led approach has failed. The first step to tackle the CCA liability is easy, as alternative preservatives are approved. Restricting the use of CCA-treated timber or introducing a product stewardship scheme will ensure nothing is added to New Zealand’s CCA legacy.

Ensuring our children do not have to inherit the existing CCA legacy is more difficult. We need to commission a suitable incineration facility.

CCA-treated timber is cheaper than safer alternatives but only if disposal costs are outsourced to future generations.

Clemens Altaner is Science Team Leader of the New Zealand Dryland Forests Initiative (NZDFI). He has received funding from industry and government for work on naturally durable timber.

– ref. Despite restrictions elsewhere, NZ still uses a wood preservative linked to arsenic pollution – https://theconversation.com/despite-restrictions-elsewhere-nz-still-uses-a-wood-preservative-linked-to-arsenic-pollution-199865

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By AJ Wood, Professor of law, Australian National University

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

Since Prime Minister Anthony Albanese released the draft wording for a referendum on an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament, there has been some misinformation and disingenuous arguments put forward by those in the “no” camp. Let us examine some of their claims.

The first is that there is not enough detail. The necessary information is in fact out there – certainly in sufficient detail for the Coalition junior partner to decide to oppose the Voice.

Still, the Voice has been variously and erroneously mischaracterised as a “third chamber” of parliament, or as a body that would giving Aboriginal peoples “special treatment”. Others claim the Voice will have the power of veto. These ideas, perhaps while emotionally appealing, do not accord with current constitutional arrangements, nor with the idea of a Voice to Parliament as proposed by the government.

Read more:
An Indigenous Voice to Parliament will not give ‘special rights’ or create a veto

Most people seem to understand this, and so the idea that an advisory body with no coercive powers could be imagined as a “third chamber” has recently received little traction.

Despite all of this, the Voice is obviously not going to address every problem facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Instead, it is one positive step towards improving the level of debate and discussion in the area, and moving the nation to truth telling and beyond.

Why there is no ‘special treatment’ for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

The term “special treatment” implies Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians would be given “things” not ordinarily available to others. This is quite disingenuous. To the contrary, of all peoples now sharing this continent, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been singled out for detrimental treatment under the Constitution. This has resulted in many additional hardships and disadvantages.

The Voice referendum, if successful, will be a modest positive measure. It is an advisory body, that will recommend or suggest changes to improve Australian laws. The Voice will potentially recommend measures to soften laws that parliament can now create under the Constitution, via the broad and coercive “races power”. This allows the parliament to make special laws for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Many judges have taken issue with the “races power”. For example, Justice Robert French has argued the “races power” has recently been used against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

In other words, the “special treatment” that has been meted out to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples has often been painful: the removal of their children, for example, to prevent them speaking their language or practising their spiritual and cultural beliefs.

Ideally, the “races power” should be expunged from the Constitution. In the meantime, a Voice to Parliament would help ameliorate its worst excesses. It is time parliament heard Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices, as peoples whose lives we have been altered so completely and without consultation. As the Uluru Statement from the Heart asks: is it not time that this voiceless people is heard?

The Constitution once also mentioned “Aboriginal natives” for the purposes of exclusion. Section 127 excluded “Aboriginal natives” from the count of the human population and regulated “Aboriginal natives” as fauna – this section was removed in the overwhelmingly supported 1967 referendum.

Section 51(xxvi), the “race power”, as enacted, proclaimed the “Aboriginal race” (that is a race other than the Anglo-Celtic majority) were to be regulated by the colonies (and then the states after Federation). While the 1967 referendum was envisaged as creating equality, legal and social equality is yet to be achieved.

Read more:
The 1967 referendum was the most successful in Australia’s history. But what it can tell us about 2023 is complicated

An important step on the road to reconciliation

Australia is the only industrialised nation that allows its parliament to make special detrimental laws for the Indigenous peoples of the land.

Some may argue that parliament can also make beneficial laws for this race of people. However, too often, laws that have been characterised as “beneficial”, such as the laws legitimising the Northern Territory intervention, have in practice proven to be detrimental.

Yes, there are now several Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of parliament across parties, so why isn’t this representation enough? This identification by race is not entirely accurate because under the Westminster democratic process these members or senators do not represent their own race or gender, but are representatives of all voters in their respective electorates. They are also members of political parties, which can inhibit their ability to speak freely in some circumstances.

A Voice will make non-binding representations to parliament, but those who are part of the body are not members of parliament.

A “yes” vote will begin to address some of these and long festering problems in Australia, and help us to heal and move forward as a nation.

Asmi Wood is a member of the Referendum Engagement Group and the Constitutional Expert Group.

– ref. A Voice to Parliament will not give ‘special treatment’ to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/a-voice-to-parliament-will-not-give-special-treatment-to-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-australians-heres-why-200650

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James B. Dorey, Adjunct Associate Professor, Flinders University

Australian native bees have evolved complex social structures and foraging behaviours that help biologists answer longstanding questions, such as the origins of social behaviour, and the drivers of increased biodiversity.

In European honeybees, the queen governs the hive with her sterile female workers. Meanwhile, the males are little more than freeloaders, or hangers-on (sorry boys).

But most Australian bees are different. Some are solitary. Others live in cooperative, egalitarian societies where individuals share and jointly defend a nest. There is no clear division into queen and worker castes.

Our new research, in the journals Biology Letters and Apidologie, reveals fresh insights into the evolution and ecology of Australian bees. These creatures deserve more attention and respect, not only for the ecosystem services they provide, but for the scientific lessons they can teach us.

Unusual bee-haviour

All bees face pressure from parasites and predators. But we discovered a unique strategy in one Australian species known as the capricious masked bee (Amphylaeus morosus).

Of the more than 2,000 species in the highly diverse Colletidae bee family, only the capricious masked bee is known to be social. Females that choose to cooperate can dramatically improve their defence against enemies such as parasitoid wasps and flies.

In these cooperative groups, one female protects the developing brood while the mother is away on foraging trips. (European honeybee queens rely on workers for such tasks, while they stay home.)

The guards do not produce their own offspring. However, guarded colonies do tend to produce more offspring – and the extras are always males.

However, having too many nest guards in the population can lead to an excess of males. When males greatly outnumber females, far fewer males (compared to females) will reproduce and pass on their genes. This reduces the genetic “value” of males and in turn cooperative behaviour.

Eventually, the relative benefit of cooperative nesting is diminished. We suggest this limits the frequency of the nest guard strategy, putting the brakes on further social evolution.

Read more:
Phantom of the forest: after 100 years in hiding, I rediscovered the rare cloaked bee in Australia

The birds and the bees

When we took a closer look at the diet of other Australian colletid bees (also known as plasterer bees due to the way they smooth the walls of their nest cells with secretions that dry to a cellophane-like lining), we found it varied considerably.

One group in particular only visited a very restricted range of plants. This group, the euryglossines, account for almost a quarter of all Australian bee species. So why are they so fussy?

The answer may lie in the nature of the food itself. Euryglossines clearly prefer plants in the family Myrtaceae. These include the gums, melaleucas, and tea trees that dominate Australian landscapes and provide massive amounts of pollen and nectar. Their shallow, brush-like flowers are also easy for small bees to access.

These same distinctive flowers are heavily used by parrots such as ringnecks, lorikeets and rosellas – who also love pollen and nectar. This floral system has likely been shaped by co-evolution of parrots and gum trees, and we suspect it was later exploited by euryglossine bees and helps account for their high species diversity. Clearly they are both onto a good thing.

This research supports what many have suspected for years. Natives typically need other natives to flourish. Our native bees rely on our native plants, even if some have more flexible diets than others.

Spend some time looking at a flowering gum and you’re almost certain to see some of our tiniest but hardest-working pollinators – along with some of the brightest and loudest.

How to observe Australian bees

It is all very well for expert bee nerds, like us, to tell you about the value of native species. But to really appreciate our native bees, you should try observing them for yourself: they are all around us, but often smaller and less ostentatious than European honeybees.

Native bees are easy to spot, even in urban environments. Parklands, roadside verges, and even our gardens are full of them. Look for them at work pollinating flowers – they might look like little dark flies initially, but closer inspection will reveal their true bee shape.

They can be nesting in bare patches on the ground, the soft stems of tree ferns or grass trees, in the “bee hotels” made by people, or even pruned rose and hydrangea bushes. Just check for little perfectly round holes with insects buzzing around. With a bit of patience, a cold drink, and a comfy stool or cushion, one can watch these entrances and see critters hard at work.

Social Australian stem nesting bees are surprisingly complex, even though their colonies rarely contain more than four or five females. Watch for guard bees plugging the nest entrance with their red or black abdomens, while other females go to collect food. With extra patience it is possible to see ants or tiny wasps gather around the nest entrances, waiting for an unguarded moment to attack.

Australia has more than 1,650 native bee species. We encourage you to enjoy them on flowers, in the ground, in stems, or wherever you can find them. These little animals have a lot to offer us in terms of how we understand the world, in addition to being vital parts of the ecosystem. And importantly, they are our responsibility to understand and protect.

Read more:
A new $2 coin features the introduced honeybee. Is this really the species we should celebrate?

James B. Dorey has received relevant PhD funding from Flinders University and the Playford Trust as well as relevant research funding from the Ecological Society of Australia (via the Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment), the Field Naturalists Society of South Australia Inc, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (via the New Colombo Plan Mobility Grant), the The Linnean Society of NSW, and the Royal Society of South Australia.

Lucas Hearn has received relevant PhD funding from Flinders University and from the Ecological Society of Australia (via the Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment).

Michael Lee is jointly appointed by Flinders University and the South Australian Museum, and receives funding from the Australian Research Council

Patricia S. Slattery receives funding from the Ecological Society of Australia (via the Holsworth Wildlife Endowment Fund) and the Field Naturalist’s Society of South Australia (via the Lirabenda Endowment Fund). She is affiliated with the Australian Entomological Society as their Director of Student Affairs.

– ref. Move over, honeybees: Aussie native bees steal the show with unique social and foraging behaviours – https://theconversation.com/move-over-honeybees-aussie-native-bees-steal-the-show-with-unique-social-and-foraging-behaviours-200536

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John McCarthy, ARC DECRA Fellow, Flinders University

In 2011, researchers observed a previously unknown feeding strategy in whales, now called tread-water feeding or trap-feeding. It was thought to be a new technique developed by specific whale communities.

Trap-feeding is one of several whale feeding strategies first recorded in recent decades, including lunge feeding, lobtail feeding and the dramatic bubble-net feeding, when whales create a fence of bubbles to herd krill or fish together.

Read more:
Humpback whales have been spotted ‘bubble-net feeding’ for the first time in Australia (and we have it on camera)

In trap-feeding, whales lie at the surface of the water with their mouths open. This allows shelter-seeking prey species such as herring and krill – which do not perceive a stationary object as a threat – to shoal into their open mouths. The whale then heaves its mouth closed, trapping hundreds of prey in a single gulp. This behaviour has been observed in the Gulf of Thailand in Bryde’s or Eden’s whales, and in Canada in humpback whales.

But it appears parallels to this behaviour were also documented in medieval literature, as we describe in a new paper published today in Marine Mammal Science.

The hafgufa

There are striking parallels between trap-feeding and the hunting strategy of a monstrous sea creature called the “hafgufa”, described in medieval Scandinavian manuscripts.

The mid-13th-century Old Norse text Konungs Skuggsjá (the King’s Mirror) says of this creature:

‘when it goes to feed, it gives a great belch out of its throat, along with which comes a great deal of food. All sorts of nearby fish gather, both small and large, seeking there to acquire food and good sustenance. But the big fish keeps its mouth open for a time, no more or less wide than a large sound or fjord, and unknowing and unheeding, the fish rush in in their numbers. And when its belly and mouth are full, [the hafgufa] closes its mouth, thus catching and hiding inside it all the prey that had come seeking food‘ (M. Firth, Trans.).

Although this text exaggerates the creature’s size, the other details match trap-feeding surprisingly closely. Even the hafgufa’s belch may correspond to reports of rorqual whales expelling a surplus slurry of water and food particles as they filter and swallow their prey.

Interestingly, the creature is not described as a fantastical monster, but as a fish, a term often used interchangeably with whales in medieval sources.

Ancient parallels

If these medieval Scandinavian texts really are describing trap-feeding, it demonstrates the technique is much older than previously thought. So, we examined other pre-modern descriptions of sea creatures looking for parallels.

Many of the texts had been adapted or translated directly from earlier texts, so it was impossible to know if the community which produced them had first-hand experience of trap-feeding. However, in some texts new accurate details had been added, suggesting an eye-witness connection.

The earliest of these, an ancient work on natural history called the Physiologus, was compiled in Egypt and dates back nearly two millennia.

How did we not notice this before?

But if trap-feeding was first recorded 2,000 years ago, why has it not been reported in modern times until 2011?

One possible explanation is that the devastating effect of historical whaling has caused whale numbers to remain much lower than they were in medieval and ancient times. North Atlantic humpback numbers are estimated to be only a fifth of their pre-industrial whaling levels.

Trap-feeding may be a response to higher population density. Just this month, new research on Australian humpbacks showed that whalesongs are becoming less frequent as populations recover from whaling and competition for mating becomes more intense.

Read more:
Australian humpback whales are singing less and fighting more. Should we be worried?

The rise in whaling in the 17th and 18th centuries was accompanied by developments in technology and a corresponding prejudice against medieval society, which was increasingly seen as backwards, unscientific, and superstitious.

However, the most fantastical descriptions of the hafgufa are actually from 17th- and 18th-century writers, who conflated the creature with all kinds of other sea monsters, such as the kraken, resulting in a general confusion about the nature of this creature in modern times. One notable recent depiction of the hafgufa in the popular PlayStation game God of War Ragnarök even depicts it as a giant jellyfish!

In conducting our research, we spoke to marine biologists who assumed it would simply be impossible to determine how long whales had been trap-feeding. So, this multidisciplinary research provides evidence from an unexpected quarter, and may highlight new avenues for researching our marine past.

It also shows that although medieval and ancient people did not have modern scientific frameworks to interpret the natural world, their observations can contain unique evidence of natural phenomena and may be more accurate than we realise.

John McCarthy is an ARC DECRA Fellow, Flinders University

Erin Sebo and Matthew Firth 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 ‘recently discovered’ whale feeding strategy has turned up in 2,000-year-old texts about fearsome sea monsters – https://theconversation.com/a-recently-discovered-whale-feeding-strategy-has-turned-up-in-2-000-year-old-texts-about-fearsome-sea-monsters-200724

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alicia Grealy, Research Projects Officer, CSIRO

Madagascar’s extinct elephant birds – the largest birds ever to have lived – have captured public interest for hundreds of years. Little is known about them due to large gaps in the skeletal fossil record.

A new study published today in Nature Communications used ancient molecules extracted from fossil eggshells to reveal surprising new insights into the biology of these flightless giants. How many species were there? Where did they live? What did they eat?

Answers to these questions contribute to our understanding of the origin and loss of species, which is especially important today as global biodiversity continues to rapidly decline.

Staggeringly large birds

As a biodiversity hotspot, the island nation of Madagascar is a natural test tube for studying evolution and extinction. The numerous species of now-extinct megafauna that once roamed there play a key role in furthering our understanding of these processes.

One such group were the elephant birds, about which precious little has been gleaned since they were first described over 150 years ago.

Alongside Africa’s ostrich, Australia’s emu and cassowary, South America’s rhea, and New Zealand’s moa and kiwi, the elephant birds of Madagascar (or vorompatra in Malagasy language) were large, flightless ratites. They became extinct around 1,000 years ago, soon after humans first settled Madagascar.

These were truly enormous birds, with some weighing over 700kg and standing up to 3m tall. Their eggs, weighing 10kg, were 150 times the size of a chicken’s egg.

Elephant birds (Aepyornithiformes) have been the stuff of legends for hundreds of years, with early sightings possibly being the origin of the mythical creature, roc (or rukh), and inspiring writers such as H. G. Wells. British naturalist David Attenborough also took a special interest in elephant birds, documenting his journey for answers about his own elephant bird egg in Attenborough and the Giant Egg.

In recent years, elephant birds were found to be most closely related to the chicken-sized kiwi bird – a result that changed our view of avian evolution.

A patchy record

Yet there is still debate about how many species of elephant bird there actually were. At one time, 16 species were named based on differences found between skeletal fossils. In the 1960s, this dropped to seven species, and the most recent revision classified elephant birds into four species. But why the controversy?

Although these birds became extinct relatively recently, the skeletal fossil record through time and space is patchy. Madagascar’s climate can be very hot and humid, which is not conducive to preserving biological material.

When bones are incomplete or fragmented, it can be hard to tell apart different species – and sometimes, bone doesn’t preserve at all, like in the far north of Madagascar where there have been reports of eggshells but no bones.

Modern DNA technology can help overcome this barrier. In a similar way that we can identify people, or tell how they are related to each other by comparing their DNA, ancient DNA from fossils can help identify unknown specimens or uncover relationships within and between species.

The more differences there are between two organisms’ DNA, the more distantly they are related. These differences can then be used estimate when species evolved, which provides clues about how and why. But, just like the elephant bird bones themselves, the DNA within them is not well preserved either.

Thick and abundant eggshell

This is where eggshell comes in. Compared to other birds, elephant bird eggshell is very thick, so the DNA trapped inside is better protected. Eggshells are also much more abundant than bones, with fragments densely scattered across beaches along Madagascar’s coastline, where these birds presumably once nested.

On top of preserving DNA and proteins, eggshell preserves “stable isotope” signatures which can be matched to those of plants and animals from the environment to get an idea of what the birds were eating and drinking.

Physical characteristics of eggshell (such as thickness and pore density) can also reveal information about egg size, bird size, the nesting environment, nesting behaviour, and can sometimes be used to distinguish between bird groups.

With the help and support of Malagasy locals, our team collected hundreds of 1,000-year-old fossil eggshell from across Madagascar. We looked at their thickness, their micro-structure (through micro-CT scanning), DNA and proteins, and their stable isotopes. We screened hundreds of eggshell fragments to find 21 with sufficient DNA to reconstruct a family tree using eggshell and bone specimens of known identity.

A mysterious lineage

We found there were not as many species of elephant bird as previously thought – there was very little genetic difference between specimens. We think some of the size and shape differences seen in the skeletal fossils are just differences between males and females, and not differences between species. It is common among ratites for females to be much larger than males – and to be mistaken for different species.

But more surprisingly, we identified a mystery eggshell from Madagascar’s far north as belonging to a novel lineage of large elephant birds that weighed 230kg and laid 3kg eggs. Although these birds were closely related to the elephant birds of central Madagascar, they were genetically distinct and had a different diet. They were also separated by about 1,000km in distance and 1.5km in elevation.

This proves that elephant birds were living in Madagascar’s far north where no skeletons have ever been found, a result that is reminiscent of the finding of a new hominid from DNA analysis of an unknown fossil.

These weren’t the only unexpected findings: we also identified potential drivers of speciation (formation of new species) and extreme gigantism in elephant birds. As Madagascar became drier and cooler during the last ice age, the vegetation changed, and elephant birds may have adapted to new niches. This led to the evolution of the largest species in a rapid and recent time frame – within the last 1.4 million years, a fraction of their evolutionary history.

These findings demonstrate how ancient DNA from eggshell is a promising avenue for studying the evolution of extinct birds. It contributes to our understanding of Madagascar’s past biodiversity – an important step towards understanding how to conserve its unique species into the future.

This study was funded in part by the Australian Research Council and other international funding bodies.

– ref. Extinct elephant birds were 3 metres tall and weighed 700kg. Now, DNA from fossil eggshells reveals how they lived – https://theconversation.com/extinct-elephant-birds-were-3-metres-tall-and-weighed-700kg-now-dna-from-fossil-eggshells-reveals-how-they-lived-200628

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ash Porter, Research officer, The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity

Bird flu has been causing growing concern in recent months, with hundreds of millions of birds dying of the virus since October 2021. This is the largest global outbreak.

Last week, an 11-year-old child in Cambodia died from bird flu, prompting concern about spillover from wild birds and poultry to humans. But the cases we’ve seen in Cambodia are a different bird flu strain to that causing the massive bird deaths around the world.

While a small proportion of people have become ill while in contact with infected birds, there is no evidence either strain has spread from human to human.

Read more:
What is spillover? Bird flu outbreak underscores need for early detection to prevent the next big pandemic

What is bird flu?

Many types of bird flu naturally circulate in wild birds. These are generally low pathogenic avian influenza viruses (LPAI), which typically cause few or no signs of disease.

However, some viruses are classified as highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and this is the case for the virus causing the global bird flu outbreak.

Avian influenza viruses are also categorised by subtype (creating the H and N number combination, here H5N1) and specific clades within the H5 subtype (equivalent to SARS-CoV-2 variants). The one we’re currently concerned about is H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b.

The current strain of bird flu emerged in 2020/21, and spread rapidly causing outbreaks in Europe and Asia. The virus spread to North America in December 2021, causing substantial outbreaks in wild birds and poultry since.

The virus entered South America in December 2022, with catastrophic outbreaks in wild birds and marine mammals.

Only Australia and the Antarctic remain free.

How does it get to humans?

The virus which causes bird flu is the same species that causes seasonal human influenza, swine influenza, equine influenza, and canine influenza, although different subtypes and strains are involved.

However, viruses are able to jump the species barrier. This is called “spillover”. We see strains of human influenza in Australian pigs, for example, and some strains of canine influenza originated in horses. There is also evidence that human flu strains emerged from birds.

Scientists are concerned about the large numbers of spillover events with this strain of bird flu. Cases have been detected in marine mammals in Peru and New England, wild foxes, skunks, otters, bobcats, bears and raccoons in North America and other countries, and in farmed mink in Spain.

What’s happening in Cambodia?

Last week, a child with H5N1 died in the Prey Veng province of Cambodia. Of 12 contacts identified, only one tested positive: the child’s parent, who is currently asymptomatic.

Both infections appear to be due to exposure to infected birds, which were found on the family’s property. Human-to-human transmission is unlikely.

Rapid genetic sequencing of the virus determined it was a lineage commonly found in Cambodia (2.3.2.1c), and distinct from the clade 2.3.4.4b lineage causing concerns globally.

This is not the first report of spillover into humans. Recently a child in Ecuador was infected with 2.3.4.4b, most likely originating from sick poultry. Human cases due to 2.3.4.4 have occured in Russia, China, the United Kingdom, the United States, Spain, Vietnam. So far, all human cases have occurred in people exposed to infected birds.

Spillover events like these occur when people are in contact with sick birds. Thankfully, spillover events do not often lead to human-to-human transmission of the virus.

However, if the virus develops the capability to spread in a new host, then outbreaks (and even pandemics) can occur. Scientists are closely monitoring for any evidence of bird flu adapting and spreading between mammals including humans.

Read more:
Bird flu continues to spread in mammals – what this means for humans and wildlife

Why (and how) do viruses switch hosts?

As part of their natural evolution, some viruses are particularly good at “jumping” to new hosts. For example, mpox (which used to be called monkeypox) and SARS-CoV-2 are both zoonotic viruses.

It is thought that mpox naturally infects rodents. Mpox spills over into humans every few years, including a spillover last year that has continued into a widespread, ongoing outbreak.

We expect the ancestral lineage of SARS-CoV-2 was circulating in bat populations before it spilled over into humans. SARS-CoV-2 might have infected an intermediate host before jumping into the human population, picking up some advantageous mutations that allowed it to spread rapidly in humans. Several animals have been suggested as potential intermediate hosts, including mink and pangolins.

Based on genomic surveillance, cases of bird flu in mammals almost always contain the same mutation. There is concern that further mutations may arise when circulating in an intermediate host which may allow the virus to better transmit between mammals, such as the spillover in mink farms, where mink-to-mink transmission was suspected to have occurred.

To date, the risk of human-to-human transmission of bird flu remains low. But as ferrets (which are related to minks) are a model animal for influenza infection in humans, if mink-to-mink transmission occurred on the farm in Spain, human-to-human transmission is plausible.

What might happen next?

Climate change and urbanisation are pushing humans and wildlife closer together, meaning there is more opportunity to interact with infected animals.

Our history of influenza pandemics caused by viruses with combinations of swine, avian and human influenza A virus genes shows we need consistent and ongoing surveillance of influenza A viruses, particularly in farms along with wild-living and captive animal populations.

Government agencies and researchers across the globe are actively working on detection, response and genomic surveillance of bird flu outbreaks in birds and mammals. Genomic sequencing and surveillance can help inform us about where viruses are spreading, and how viruses is adapting to new hosts.

The World Organization for Animal Health recommends avoiding direct contact with sick or dead wild birds, poultry and wild animals and reporting outbreaks to local authorities.

Read more:
Bird flu: domestic chicken keepers could be putting themselves – and others – at risk

Michelle Wille receives funding from the Australian Research Council and is a member of the National Avian Influenza Wild Bird Steering Group.

Ash Porter 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. When should we worry about bird flu making us sick? When we see human-to-human transmission – and there’s no evidence of that yet – https://theconversation.com/when-should-we-worry-about-bird-flu-making-us-sick-when-we-see-human-to-human-transmission-and-theres-no-evidence-of-that-yet-200710

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rowan Foley, CEO of Aboriginal Carbon Foundation, Indigenous Knowledge

The Albanese government is embarking on a suite of environmental reforms: beefing up Australia’s carbon credit scheme, and establishing a market to fund environmental restoration. These big policy changes may seek to justify colonial practices imposed on First Nations people and their country.

Both reforms require land owned by Indigenous Australians. First Nations peoples hold tenure over 54% of Australia’s landmass – including native title and freehold, and other interests such as pastoral leases. First Nations people also manage almost half of Commonwealth parks and reserves.

The global response to the climate crisis will require a great deal of land, including for carbon abatement and nature repair. But First Nations people cannot be locked away from this land. They must be allowed to benefit from it, in a way that’s environmentally and economically sustainable.

And land needs people to care for it – to reduce the risk of destructive bushfires, control weeds and feral animals, and improve soil health.

First Nations people should have a real say in decisions affecting them and their Country. Here, we look at how the above policy-making efforts measure up.

The Chubb review: a welcome sign of progress

The independent Chubb Review of Australia’s carbon credit system was released in December. The review, commissioned by the Albanese government, investigated the issuing of credits under the Emissions Reduction Fund, a national scheme to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In a welcome acknowledgement, the review stated:

First Nations Australians hold deep knowledge and understanding of Healthy Country, informed by thousands of years of observation and stewardship of local ecosystems, and passed down through many generations.

The review called for a number of substantial changes, including several involving First Nations rights. We believe these measures, if implemented, will strengthen the carbon industry and First Nations engagement in the carbon economy.

Significantly, the review reiterated that First Nations Australians people should to participate in and benefit from the carbon credit scheme – a concept known as “core benefits”.

Core benefits occur when a project leads to carbon abatement, and delivers environmental, social, cultural and employment benefits to First Nations people and others.

The long overdue principle of free, prior and informed consent has now also been adopted. This includes removing the option to conditionally register carbon abatement projects on Native Title lands before consent is granted.

The review also recommends that at least one member of an important new committee be a First Nations Australian with relevant experience. This is a welcome development, although it begs the question: why just one?

To properly reflect the importance of First Nations land and knowledge, surely at least half the members on important committees should be First Nations people.

Read more:
Australia’s agriculture sector sorely needs more insights from First Nations people. Here’s how we get there

Nature repair market: room for improvement

Another major national reform on the cards is the Nature Repair Market Bill. The legislation, if passed, would establish a scheme whereby landholders who restore or manage habitat would be rewarded with “certificates” which can then be sold on a market.

A fact sheet accompanying the bill highlights the importance of First Nations knowledge. And we welcome the requirement for consent from native titleholders for any project.

Unfortunately, though, the bill fails to build in an Indigenous understanding of land management.

For example, it does not include a mechanism to measure “core benefits” as described above – nor does it provide a framework for Indigenous-led verification of the environmental, social and cultural values associated with community and economic development programs.

Additionally, only one position on the Nature Repair Market Committee is made available to a person “with Indigenous Knowledge”.

These are serious failings. As a group of experts said in a submission to the recent royal commission into natural disasters, First Nations people have managed Australian landscapes for more than 65,000 years using highly effective holistic land management practices. As the submission stated, these methods:

have been the result of intimate knowledge of Country developed over many, many millennia of careful observation, continual interaction and active custodianship.

The best known example of this knowledge is “cultural burning” – the First Nations practice of burning Country for environmental, cultural and regenerative benefits.

All Australians benefit when First Nations people contribute their highly nuanced land management expertise to climate and environmental protection schemes.

The bill has missed an opportunity to draw on First Nations expertise in improving biodiversity and healing our climate. To address this, it must draw on the wealth of First Nations knowledge and experience of managing Country. This requires putting Indigenous decision-making at the centre of the policy’s development.

Read more:
Friday essay: how ancient beliefs in underwater worlds can shed light in a time of rising sea levels

Eradicating eco-colonialism

There’s currently much talk about the need to involve First Nations people when devising policy reform. In policy circles, this is known as “co-design”.

In our experience, however, the process usually involves only superficial amendments so a policy appears to include Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing – yet allowing the dominant Western framework to persist. All too often, the resulting policy does not serve the interests or reflect the knowledge of First Nations people.

At worst, the Aboriginal art on the cover of a policy document may be the only expression of “co-design”. A stench of tokenism persists. We call this the “eco-colonial elephant in the room”.

Instead, governments and First Nations people should share decision-making in a process in which Indigenous and non-Indigenous worldviews have equal billing.

Because when it comes to tackling the most pressing environmental issues of our time, we must embrace an “us and us” ideology that draws on the best ideas and most valuable experiences – locking the eco-colonial elephant out of the room once and for all.

Read more:
65,000-year-old plant remains show the earliest Australians spent plenty of time cooking

Lisa McMurray is the Learning and Program Development Manager at the Aboriginal Carbon Foundation.

Lily O’Neill and Rowan Foley 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 stench of tokenism’: how environmental reforms ignore First Nations knowledge – https://theconversation.com/a-stench-of-tokenism-how-environmental-reforms-ignore-first-nations-knowledge-198393

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Lehmann, Honorary Lecturer, College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University

There is a story doing the media rounds that international students – particularly from China – will now “flood” back to Australia. It is claimed this will push up already high rents for scarce housing in our major cities.

This story is one of three myths that risk setting up international students as scapegoats for Australia’s ongoing housing crisis. However, immigration data and our monitoring of social media, where international students share their experiences, simply don’t support these narratives.

Indeed, these students’ social media posts highlight the challenges they are facing, including scams that seek to exploit their difficulties in securing accommodation.

Read more:
As international students flock back, they face even worse housing struggles than before COVID

What’s behind this story?

Part of this story stems from a Chinese government announcement in January that students will no longer have their degrees certified if they study online. This means students who have been studying with our institutions while based in China during the pandemic are being encouraged to return to campus.

The announcement was made less than two weeks before the start of the university year. It left students and institutions rushing to make sense of the change.

Media reports have since warned “more than 40,000 Chinese students” are about to arrive in Australia as a result. This has heightened fears about their impact on rents.

We use AI technology to listen to what international students are talking about on open online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and online forums. We also monitor Chinese platforms such as Weibo. We read comments students make about media posts to determine their reactions to events and issues.

We also monitor what Australians are saying about international students on platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. This allows us to understand how the local community is responding to international students and to better understand the challenges students are facing.

Lately we are seeing negative sentiment on social media towards international students in Australian cities. Some claim these students pose a risk to local housing security. For example, one post reads:

Australia more interested in housing overseas students in high rise dog boxes than in its own residents.

Another reads:

All these international students taking up homes meant for Australians. Why aren’t Aussies being prioritised here?

Fears like these are being fuelled by three key myths that are increasingly circulating during the rental crisis.

Myth 1: 40,000 arrivals from China are imminent

Many of Australia’s international students have already arrived in time for the university year. As for Chinese international students who are currently offshore, myriad challenges are delaying their return to Australia. These include high airfares, visa delays, Australia’s requirement they provide evidence of a negative COVID-19 test and difficulties leaving jobs they have in China.

Australia’s housing crisis is being widely reported on Chinese social media. Students are actively talking about difficulties with accommodation and are worried about arriving without first securing a bed. One student’s post directed towards the Chinese government, “Are you asking us to sleep under the Sydney Harbour Bridge?”, attracted hundreds of reactions.

At a recent Senate estimates hearing, the Department of Home Affairs confirmed there had not been a significant spike in visa applications since the Chinese government’s announcement. A full return of students to Australia’s universities is not expected until later in 2023.

Read more:
International students are returning to Australia, but they are mostly going to more prestigious universities

Myth 2: all these students can afford inner-city apartments

Survey analysis by global education services provider Navitas recently found the cost of study has risen from the fifth-most-important consideration to the second-most-important consideration for Chinese students deciding where to study abroad.

While some students may be able to afford top-price inner-city living, many can’t. And many of those who are already here are struggling with the cost of living. As one student posted:

It already costs so much for us to pursue studies in Australia but now it costs much more to afford basic needs. Already on loan and not all of us students come from rich families. I hope this is raised and some help is offered to those of us who are struggling.

The cost of living in the inner city is leading students to seek advice online from their peers in Australia about living in suburbs further away from campus. There is a need for information to be provided to these students about alternative suburbs, including travel times and facilities, along with reassurances about safety and cost.

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

Myth 3: students can walk into properties

International students who have not been in Australia for the past few years lack the rental and financial history that landlords require. Online, students talk about feeling discriminated against, with landlords considering them “high risk”.

Some students recount being asked for two or three months’ rent in advance to secure a property. Others are voicing fears about being scammed as a result of their lack of a paper trail.

I was asked to pay 2 months rent on top of my bond to secure a spot. I was told international students are not trustworthy so they required more payment upfront. Is this legal?

In recent weeks, various scams targeting international students have been aired on social media. These range from “fake” real estate agents requesting hefty deposits, and agents charging a month’s rent to “hold” the property, to threatening students who do not comply that this will slow down visa processing.

In response, the Chinese consulate in Sydney has issued a warning to students. The notice urged students to be wary of rental scams and to take care to ensure their safety and security in their dwellings.

The return of international students is an important sign of economic and urban recovery in Australia. Students support local economies as tourists, consumers, taxpayers and a vital source of labour.

Unless the challenges they face on their return are seen and addressed, we risk this group of young people being turned into scapegoats for a housing crisis that is the result of domestic policy failures over many years.

Read more:
The market has failed to give Australians affordable housing, so don’t expect it to solve the crisis

Angela Lehmann works for The Lygon Group.

– ref. ‘Are you asking us to sleep under the Harbour Bridge?’: 3 myths about international students and the housing crisis – https://theconversation.com/are-you-asking-us-to-sleep-under-the-harbour-bridge-3-myths-about-international-students-and-the-housing-crisis-200274

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Howard, Senior Lecturer, Discipline of English, University of Sydney

Dixi et salvavi animam meam.

This Latin phrase – I have spoken and saved my soul – sits at the end of Karl Marx’s Critique of the Gotha Programme.

Written in 1875, this text imagines a communist society that will come about “after the enslaving of the individual to the division of labour, and thereby also the antithesis between mental and physical labour has vanished”.

Only then, Marx argues, “can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be completely transcended and society inscribe on its banners: from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!”

Roger Waters – bassist, lyricist and conceptual mastermind behind Pink Floyd’s 1973 album The Dark Side of the Moon, released 50 years ago today – knows Marx’s Critique. Indeed, he quotes it when discussing the record with music journalist John Harris.

“Making The Dark Side of the Moon, we were all trying to do as much as we possibly could,” Waters told Harris.

It was a very communal thing. What’s that old Marxist maxim? ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.’ That’s sort of the way the band worked at that point.

Assertions about solidarity, cooperation and shared “unity of purpose” – as Waters says – situate Dark Side in the context of Pink Floyd’s notoriously fractious recording career and helps us understand the album’s enduring appeal.

Shine on you crazy diamond

Pink Floyd formed in London in 1965. Led by the charismatic songwriter, guitarist and lead vocalist Syd Barrett, the group established itself as a leader in the London underground music scene. They released their debut album The Piper at the Gates of Dawn in 1967.

Soft Machine member Kevin Ayers described The Piper at the Gates of Dawn as “something magical, but it was in Syd Barrett”.

Not long after the record’s release, Barrett suffered a catastrophic, LSD-induced breakdown. In response, the band recruited David Gilmour on guitar and recorded a second album, A Saucerful of Secrets, as a five-piece in 1968. Around this time, the increasingly unstable Barrett was unceremoniously ousted by the rest of the band.

After Barrett left, says Ayers, “Pink Floyd became something else totally”.

There are different versions of Pink Floyd. The recordings released after Barrett left the band in 1968 bear little resemblance to the first.

Dark Side sounds nothing like the whimsical Piper. But it is obvious the record is in large part preoccupied with the loss of Barrett.

This preoccupation comes to the fore in the album’s penultimate track.

Brain Damage, written and sung by Waters, references Barrett’s adolescence (“Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs”), alludes to his illness (“And if the dam breaks open many years too soon”), and acknowledges his leaving the group (“And if the band you’re in starts playing different tunes; I’ll see you on the dark side of the Moon”).

Drummer Nick Mason confirms the group didn’t want to lose Barrett.

In his autobiography, he writes:

He was our songwriter, singer, guitarist, and – although you might not have known from our less than sympathetic treatment of him – he was our friend.

Read more:
‘The Wall’ cemented Pink Floyd’s fame – but destroyed the band

If the dam breaks open many years too soon

What we hear on The Dark Side of the Moon is a band dealing with trauma.

In this sense, Dark Side represents the start of a reckoning with the past – a process that culminated with the band’s next record, 1975’s elegiac Wish You Were Here.

Culmination is a useful term when it comes to Dark Side more generally. On this record, all the avant-garde techniques and tendencies the band had toyed with in the post-Barrett period – musique concrète, sonic manipulation, extended improvisation, analogue tape manipulation – come together to spectacular effect.

Money – with its anti-capitalist lyrics penned by Waters (“Money, it’s a crime; share it fairly, but don’t take a slice of my pie”), odd time signature, and handmade tape-loops mimicking the sounds of cash tills, bags of coins being dropped from great height and bank notes being torn up – is one of the stranger hit singles in pop music history.

Be that as it may, Money and the album from which it is taken, of which more than 50 million copies have been sold, continue to resonate with listeners worldwide, five decades on from its initial release.

Read more:
Pink Floyd’s $1.8m desk shows timeless appeal of analogue sound

The enormous risk of being truly banal

“I made a conscious effort when I was writing the lyrics for Dark Side of the Moon to take the enormous risk of being truly banal about a lot of it,” Waters told John Harris, “in order that the ideas should be expressed as simply and plainly as possible.”

On this point, if nothing else, David Gilmour agrees. He told Harris:

There was definitely a feeling that the words were going to be very clear and specific. That was a leap forward. Things would mean what they meant. That was a distinct step away from what we had done before.

Mortality, insanity, conflict, affluence, poverty and, in another nod to Marx, alienation are some of the themes presented on the record. The need – and this brings us full circle – for compassion, if not outright solidarity, is another.

This is an album about the importance of understanding, as Waters insists:

the potential that human beings have for recognising each other’s humanity and responding to it, with empathy rather than antipathy.

Given the sorry state of the world in 2023, about which Roger Waters has many contentious and problematic things to say, I wager Pink Floyd’s masterwork will continue to resonate with listeners for a while yet.

Read more:
How Stoicism influenced music from the French Renaissance to Pink Floyd

Alexander Howard 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 Dark Side of the Moon at 50: how Marx, trauma and compassion all influenced Pink Floyd’s masterpiece – https://theconversation.com/the-dark-side-of-the-moon-at-50-how-marx-trauma-and-compassion-all-influenced-pink-floyds-masterpiece-198400