Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grant Douglas, Senior Principal Research Scientist (CSIRO Environment) and Visiting Professor (Curtin University School of Molecular and Life Sciences), CSIRO

There are around 440 nuclear power plants operating in 32 countries around the world, supplying some 10% of the world’s electricity. Another 60 reactors are under construction, and 300 more are proposed.

Australia has only one reactor, used for research and medical purposes. But Australia typically produces more than 5,000 tonnes of uranium each year. This is about 9% of the world’s total.

Read more:
Uranium prices are soaring, and Australia’s hoary old nuclear debate is back in the headlines. Here’s what it all means

Uranium mining and processing, and nuclear power plant operations, can produce a range of radioactive elements (called radionuclides). These may be long-lasting hazards if released into the environment. Liquid radioactive wastes present a particular challenge: they often contain a mixture of radionuclides, and few technologies can reliably capture and safely contain these contaminants quickly and efficiently.

We have invented a fast process to capture radionuclides from liquid waste in a clay-like mineral, which can then be baked to form a stable material for disposal and long-term storage. The research is published in Nature Scientific Reports and will soon be presented at the Waste Management Symposium, the world’s largest radioactive waste management conference.

Catching radioactive elements

It has long been known some minerals can capture certain radionuclides. However, this process often involves passing contaminated water through numerous filters packed with these materials.

In contrast, our technology (called EUREECA) uses an approach where a clay-like mineral called a layered double hydroxide is formed within radionuclide-contaminated waters. These minerals are a natural absorbent that can remove a range of radionuclides at once, incorporating these and other contaminants as building blocks in their structure.

This simple approach has many advantages over conventional technologies. In practice, two common industrial chemicals are added to the contaminated water. A reaction occurs in a matter of seconds to produce the layered double hydroxide mineral with the radionuclides trapped inside.

Importantly, the mineral typically comprises less than 0.5% of the mass of the treated water. This means the contaminants become hundreds of times more concentrated.

The mineral is also easily separated from the water using conventional industrial separation techniques.

In studies using wastewater from an Australian uranium mine, the mineral contained up to 1% uranium – a higher concentration than in the mine’s ore. A host of other contaminants were also captured, including a range of radionuclides liberated during mining and associated activities.

Baking for long-term storage

After the contaminants have been captured in the layered double hydroxide mineral, they need to be locked up in perpetuity.

This is the next step of the EUREECA process: baking the mineral to transform it, like pottery in a kiln.

We heated the mineral to more than 1,300℃, similar to that of a Hawaiian lava flow and, with colleagues at Curtin University, analysed how it changed at the atomic level. Several fascinating changes had occurred.

The first was that the layered double hydroxide was transformed into three separate minerals: olivine, periclase and spinel. This is a combination of minerals typically found in the lower mantle, about 2,500km beneath Earth’s surface.

These minerals are not only stable at high temperatures and pressures, but also largely resistant to radiation damage.

When the baked minerals cooled down, we discovered the radionuclides had been concentrated even further. Uranium, thorium, lead and other contaminants were now squeezed into new minerals formed on the microscopically thin boundaries between the olivine, periclase and spinel.

In these boundary regions, the concentration of radionuclides was around 50,000 times greater than in the original uranium-bearing wastewaters.

Easier decontamination

Our process has many potential applications for capture, containment and storage of soluble radioactive wastes in perpetuity. Beyond treating uranium mine wastewater, it could be used to capture and contain radionuclides from medical waste streams.

It would also have been of great use after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011, which generated huge amounts of complex liquid waste.

Rather than using multiple steps and substantial, often complex water treatment procedures and infrastructure, the EUREECA technology could have been rapidly deployed to decontaminate the water and remove radionuclides into solid minerals for long-term storage.

Grant Douglas does not work for, consult, or own shares in any company or organisation that would benefit from this article. To support technology commercialisation CSIRO may receive research funding from technology licensees. He has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond his academic appointment.

– ref. Radioactive waste isn’t going away. We’ve found a new way to trap it in minerals for long-term storage – https://theconversation.com/radioactive-waste-isnt-going-away-weve-found-a-new-way-to-trap-it-in-minerals-for-long-term-storage-200255

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Sanders, Senior Research Fellow on Law and the Future of War, The University of Queensland

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been imploring the US, UK and other allies for advanced fighter jets to assist in defending against Russia’s unlawful invasion – a move that could come soon and potentially alter the course of the war. This comes after Germany and the US finally agreed to give more than 300 heavy tanks to Ukraine after much debate.

Some observers have focused on whether providing increasingly sophisticated weaponry is a good idea for strategic reasons, such as whether it risks further escalating the conflict.

But another important issue that has received less attention is whether this technology being gifted to Ukraine complies with international law.

The use of new, untested military technology in Ukraine – even if outwardly for altruistic purposes – could be problematic and even unlawful. In some instances, for example, military suppliers may have a secondary interest: field-testing their new technologies in a real conflict.

Such testing risks harm to civilians and further destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure, as well as causing unnecessary suffering to combatants on both sides of the conflict.

Autonomous drones being used on both sides in Ukraine

Most new weapon technologies being deployed to Ukraine have been tested in controlled environments or through computer simulation systems prior to their use.

While militaries are constantly looking for novel ways to test new technologies to certify them as safe and lawful,field-testing weapons in a combat situation is not generally done until there has been compliance with in-house testing and assurance measures.

However, Russia is not being as cautious. As its supplies dwindle, Moscow is relying on new equipment sourced from the few states that are continuing to trade arms with them.

And some of these technologies, like the Iranian-supplied Shahed-131 and -136kamikaze drones, are apparently being field-tested in Ukraine.

Read more:
Ukraine war: drones are transforming the conflict, bringing Russia on to the frontline

There have long been concerns about whether autonomous drones comply with the laws of war. One major concern is whether they can properly distinguish between combatants and civilians.

Russia is reportedly changing critical functions of their drones to enhance their lethality and destructive capacity.

While Russia has previously indicated it performs some form of weapons testing and review for legal compliance, it seems unlikely this is happening on these new technologies in the limited time before they appear on Ukraine’s front lines.

Advanced drones are also being used on the Ukrainian side, such as the Kargu-2 and Baykatar TB-2 drones supplied by Turkey.

A UN report in 2021 cited the possible use of these same drones in Libya, with concerns over their reliability and their ability to detect the proper target, in compliance with the laws of armed conflict.

What the laws of armed conflict say about testing weapons

Innovation has been key to Ukraine’s success in the conflict thus far.

The gifting of Western military equipment (whether publicly acknowledged or otherwise) has also been a critical factor. Over 32 countries have provided weapons and advanced military technologies to Ukraine.

However, the use of advanced military equipment must be balanced by the need to reduce the harm to both civilians and combatants alike. Both sides have a duty to comply with the laws of armed conflict – and both sides are entitled to the protections of such laws.

The overarching principles of international humanitarian law should ensure, wherever possible that:

• the impact of conflict – including on combatants – is humane, and

• harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure is minimised.

When it comes to the testing and evaluation of weapons, the rules of international law are unsettled.

States that have signed up to Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions are obliged to undertake testing of weapons and the “means and method of warfare”. But this is not followed very broadly or consistently.

Read more:
Weapons of mass destruction: what are the chances Russia will use a nuclear or chemical attack on Ukraine?

Some countries like Australia have publicly discussed their weapons review processes that fulfill their obligations under this Protocol.

Other states do it as a matter of good practice. For example, the US is not a signatory to the Protocol, but it still undertakes rigorous testing to ensure its weapons systems are generally compliant with international law.

However, this doesn’t apply to all states who are donating equipment to Ukraine or Russia. In fact, just under half of the 59 countries that are signatories to the Protocol acknowledge they systematically do this kind of testing.

Some states argue these rules on testing weapons should only apply to the country that is using them in armed conflict – not the country that is manufacturing them.

But this view is ignorant of the realities of a state facing an existential crisis and relying on international military aid. Is it both unfair and unrealistic to expect Ukraine to test gifted weapon systems and military equipment when it is fighting for its survival.

What Ukraine’s supporters need to do

There are two simple ways for nations gifting weapons to Ukraine to ensure they comply with the laws of armed conflict:

• checking the weapons or technologies are capable of being used lawfully, and

• making sure combatants know how to use them in a way that complies with the law.

Australia, for example, has a rigorous weapons review process that tests the compliance of its military technologies. The weaponry on the Bushmaster armoured vehicles sent to Ukraine will have been subject to this process.

Australia is also training Ukrainian forces to use the systems it supplies. While such training serves to bolster Ukraine’s chances of tactical success, it also ensures the soldiers know how to act in compliance with the laws of armed conflict.

It may seem like a minor and technical point to focus on the lawfulness of weapons in the face of Russia’s alleged mass war crimes, and its challenge to the existing rules-based order by invading Ukraine in the first place. But it is in the interests of liberal democracies to reinforce the existing rules-based order, including compliance with international law.

This isn’t to suggest the provision of military aid to Ukraine should cease. Rather, those states contributing to the conflict should be doing their utmost to minimise human harm. This means ensuring new weapons are not field-tested in someone else’s backyard.

In addition to her role as a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Queensland, Lauren Sanders works as a legal consultant with IWR Pty Ltd, advising Defence industry on international humanitarian law and weapons law issues. Any comments made here are in her personal capacity and do not represent the views of the Australian government or the Australian Defence Force.

– ref. Why Ukraine should not become a testing ground for the world’s new weapons – https://theconversation.com/why-ukraine-should-not-become-a-testing-ground-for-the-worlds-new-weapons-199505

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Sussex, Fellow, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

Wars are world-shaping. Beyond their immediate human and physical tolls, wars alter the fates of societies and states; of clans, cultures and leaders. They establish new lines of access to resources and influence, determining who has what – and who doesn’t. They set precedents for how future wars are justified and, in the case of attempted conquest, wars can ultimately redraw the map of world politics.

One year after its unprovoked invasion on February 24, 2022, Russia’s war against Ukraine encompasses all these dangers.

With Ukraine waging an existential battle for its very survival, and Russia seemingly happy to settle for destroying Ukraine if it fails to conquer it, neither side has any incentive to stop fighting.

Absent the complete collapse of either the Ukrainian or Russian armed forces, the grim reality is that the war will likely drag on throughout 2023 – and potentially beyond it.

2023 will be crucial

But what happens in Ukraine during 2023 will be crucial. For a start, it will reveal whether victory for either side is possible, or whether a “frozen” conflict is more likely.

It will test the resolve of all the main protagonists and their supporters:

• Ukraine’s ability to repel Russian onslaughts and recapture territory
• the extent to which Vladimir Putin can command domestic obedience
• and even of China’s intentions, as it mulls supplying Moscow with weapons.

How the war plays out in 2023 will also reveal how credible the West’s determination to stand up to bullies really is. Will it move further towards supporting Kyiv by all means necessary, revert to drip-feeding its assistance, or give in to apathy and war fatigue?

At present, Ukraine continues to have the upper hand, even if Russia’s armed forces have lately wrested back some momentum. But in the coming months, Kyiv will face two key challenges.

First it will need to absorb Russian attacks while conducting its own offensive operations, which will require Western heavy armour, longer-range strike capabilities, and possibly air power.

Second, Ukraine will require continued international aid and assistance to ensure its social order doesn’t break down as a result of economic collapse, and to be able to mitigate further damage to its critical infrastructure.

Putin’s army – and his authority – in the spotlight

Conversely, for Russia to turn the tide it will have to dramatically reverse the abysmal performance of its armed forces. The recent spectacular failure of the Russian assault on Vuhledar in Ukraine’s south east, seen by many as the prelude to a Spring offensive, doesn’t bode well.

With an estimated 80% of Russia’s entire ground forces now engaged in the conflict, plus tens of thousands of newly mobilised conscripts arriving at the front, there’s mounting pressure on those at the very top of Russia’s military leadership to achieve rapid results.

Failing to achieve that will ultimately rebound on Putin. To maintain social order he has become increasingly repressive, banning books, engaging in shadow conscription campaigns, and imprisoning many of those who speak out against the war.

And while the bitter infighting between the armed forces and paramilitary organisation the Wagner Group seems to have been settled for the moment, the fact that it was conducted so publicly suggests Putin no longer enjoys the same iron control amongst Russia’s leaders that he once did.

Of course, another Russian revolution (either from above or below) is still far off. There’s no alternative value proposition for Russia’s political elites to remove Putin, and the personal risks for trying it remain very high. For its part, Russian society remains effectively apathetic – if no longer very enthusiastic – about the war.

Yet that might change. Putin can’t endure unscathed by forever blaming the West, or purging his security services for his own bad choices. His longevity has relied on the bargain he made with Russians: to protect them, and offer them stable lives with gradually improving living standards. In the last 12 months he has broken both parts of that bargain, drafting large numbers of Russians to fight in Ukraine, and causing tough sanctions in response to his actions.

By using mobilised Russians as cannon fodder, and having emptied much of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund in 2022 to blunt damage to its economy, Putin has created dual pressures on Russian society.

First, the demand for fresh recruits has become recurrent, mandatory and inexhaustible.

Second, sanctions are about to bite much harder. And instead of being able to direct mobilisation campaigns at Russia’s marginalised and minority groups, affluent and influential areas like Moscow and St Petersburg will for the first time find their livelihoods affected by the war in 2023.

If the war escalates, it will likely happen this year

If maintaining control at home becomes more challenging for Putin, a new round of brinkmanship will look increasingly attractive. In turn, that elevates the risks of conflict escalation.

Already the past 12 months have witnessed the Kremlin flirting with global hunger games, hinting at nuclear annihilation, raising the spectre of “dirty bombs”, and branding virtually anyone who opposes Moscow as a Nazi.

So far, the West has responded tactfully and proportionately to the Kremlin’s threats. It largely weaned itself off Russian energy over the past year, removing a key part of Russian strategic leverage. But in 2023 we should expect a redoubling of Moscow’s efforts to fracture Western unity.

Read more:
Putin’s plan to stop Ukraine turning to the west has failed — our survey shows support for Nato is at an all-time high

Putin’s propensity for risk means any action short of war in the so-called “grey zone” is possible, as demonstrated by reports the Kremlin has been supporting a coup attempt in Moldova and aiding Serbian nationalists protesting against closer ties with Kosovo. More broadly that list could include blackmail, cyberattacks, sabotage, and even assassinations on NATO territory, coupled to posturing and provocations by Russia’s armed forces.

Similar efforts will likely be made to try and sway Western populations. True, Russia’s previous attempts to enlist gullible and/or reflexively suspicious Western citizens with false narratives about NATO enlargement have only enjoyed limited success, mainly because it’s painfully obvious Russia is engaged in a war of imperial expansion.

But just like prohibition-era Baptists and bootleggers, it will continue trying to exert pressure by seeking to unite seemingly disparate groups, such as the anti-war campaigns which have brought together the anti-globalist Far Left with the conspiracy theory-laden Far Right.

NATO’s centre of gravity will continue to shift eastward

The centre of NATO gravity will likely continue to shift further east. Both Poland and Estonia have emerged as strong champions of Ukrainian sovereignty, and have been particularly instrumental in pushing more reticent European nations, including Germany and France, towards a firmer stance. NATO aspirant members Finland and Sweden have been busy too, with both nations increasing their 2022 defence expenditure by between 10% and 20%.

With the exception of Hungary, the Bucharest Nine Group – formed in 2015 in response to Russian aggression in Crimea – has emerged as a powerful voice within NATO, advocating for the transfer of more sophisticated weapons systems to Ukraine.

In January 2023, Poland announced it was increasing its military spending to 4% of GDP, and it has been placing numerous orders for weapons, including from the US and South Korea. Policy coordination between Warsaw and Washington has increased as well, especially on stationing NATO systems, personnel, and providing training for Ukrainian forces – including US President Joe Biden’s surprise visit to Kyiv on Monday to announce a new military aid package, ahead of a visit to Poland to mark the anniversary of Russia’s invasion.

The challenge for NATO is that a two-speed approach to Ukraine within the alliance increases the potential for disagreement and fracture. Conversely, given the reticence of some West European nations to lead the response to Russian aggression, it’s incumbent on the Baltic States, Poland and others to do so.

Ultimately, those predicting a swift end to Russia’s war in Ukraine are likely to be as disappointed in 2023, as they were 12 months earlier. The past year has taught us much: about how the weak can resist the powerful; about the dangers of peace at any price; and about the hubris of believing autocrats can be bought off with inducements.

But perhaps most importantly it has taught us to question our assumptions about war. Now, one year into a conflict in Europe that many thought impossible, we are likely about to rediscover just how world-shaping wars can be.

Matthew Sussex has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Carnegie Foundation, the Lowy Institute, and various Australian government agencies.

– ref. A year on, Russia’s war on Ukraine threatens to redraw the map of world politics – and 2023 will be crucial – https://theconversation.com/a-year-on-russias-war-on-ukraine-threatens-to-redraw-the-map-of-world-politics-and-2023-will-be-crucial-197682

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Edwards, Postdoctoral Researcher and Adjunct Research Fellow, Griffith University

Media personality Em Rusciano has expressed shock after another radio presenter accused her of “leaping on the bandwagon” by widely sharing her autism diagnosis and its impact on her daily life.

The prevalence of autism in our society is increasing as awareness and research escalates. At least one in 100 people are Autistic, yet only a minority openly disclose due to uncertainty over how it will be received.

There has been an assumption that “blanket disclosure”, sharing with everyone the Autistic adult knows, is the best option. But new research challenges this simplistic approach.

Here’s what Autistic people told us about what real-life disclosure experiences look like. And what workplaces should do to make it safer for people to share this aspect of their identity if they choose to.

Read more:
Autism is still underdiagnosed in girls and women. That can compound the challenges they face

Tracking experiences in real time

A major study by the Aspect Research Centre for Autism Practice (ARCAP) documented 231 disclosure experiences of 36 Autistic adults, aged 21 to 71, over two months.

Using a specially designed smart-phone application meant we could track experiences across different environments and get a glimpse of real-time, daily disclosure opportunities that Autistic people experience.

We learnt about the thought processes behind a decision to disclose, or not disclose. We noted positive and negative experiences and which environments were more conducive.

Why disclose – or decide not to?

Sharing being Autistic can lead to understanding and support, but it also exposes the Autistic person to greater risks of discrimination and bullying.

The decision can be a “lose-lose” one for the Autistic person. Not disclosing can contribute to mental health concerns such as stress and anxiety. Whereas sharing being Autistic can have life-changing outcomes, for instance, the loss of job opportunities.

During our study, 153 opportunities were categorised as “disclosure”, where the participant shared they were Autistic. We labelled 78 opportunities as “non-disclosure”, where the participant felt there was an opportunity, but decided not to share.

The most common way our participants shared they were Autistic was a face-to-face conversation (43%). The least common ways participants disclosed were via email (4%), phone call (3%), text (3%) and doctor’s letter (0.4%).

Safety was a key consideration behind disclosure, where participants shared they were Autistic when others were “already aware of my sensory issues. I felt safe disclosing to him”.

But it required time and energy, and other participants didn’t disclose because they “felt exhausted socially” or “had an uncomfortable vibe” about a work leader.

Words and reactions can be positive or negative

The research provided insight into the most common negative and positive reactions that followed a disclosure.

For example, one respondent felt “dismissed or gaslighted”. Others experienced shocked reactions and were asked how they could be a hairdresser if they had autism. Or received an odd look and no response.

Positive responses ranged from neutral reactions, such as “normal, almost no reaction” and not being treated any differently, to a feeling of liberation “not to be judged but rather encouraged and celebrated”.

Some environments were better than others

The research shows disclosure experiences are influenced by context. The most common place for disclosure by Autistic adults was in the workplace (31%), followed by the community (21%), education settings (11%), home (11%), health care (9%) and retail (6%).

Of these disclosure contexts, the workplace proved to be the environment with the most negative disclosure experiences, with frequent references to discrimination and bullying.

Read more:
Australia is lagging when it comes to employing people with disability – quotas for disability services could be a start

So what would make disclosure decisions easier?

Employers need to assume more responsibility in creating a safe environment where Autistic staff can disclose if they choose to. This can include adjustments to the hiring process (such as work trials compared to interviews), working conditions (more flexibility to work from home), sensory environoment (such as lighting or sound modification) and methods of communication (such as clear written guidance).

Disability awareness training would be beneficial across all workplaces, including with health-care professionals. This is particularly important as this group is key to providing education and reducing misunderstanding across contexts.

On a broader societal level, we need to value and support people who may think or act differently to what’s expected. Nobody should feel they have to share something private and personal in order to be treated with respect.

And people on the receiving end of disclosure need to know this is often a scary decision. It may mean your colleague or friend feels safe and trusts you with this information. Believe them and accept them. They are still the same person as before.

Read more:
Disability and dignity – 4 things to think about if you want to ‘help’

Practical guides for disclosure

Society has a long way to go before we can simply promote blanket disclosure. Until then, Autistic people need support to decide whether to disclose their identity.

We’ve developed a series of practical evidence-based resource guides based on our findings.

The guides support Autistic people in their disclosure experiences, and provide helpful advice for colleagues, employers, friends, educators and family.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Chris Edwards and the team behind this research is funded by Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect)

– ref. Real-life autism disclosures are complex – and reactions can range from dismissal to celebration – https://theconversation.com/real-life-autism-disclosures-are-complex-and-reactions-can-range-from-dismissal-to-celebration-199869

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yung En Chee, Senior Research Fellow, Environmental Science, The University of Melbourne

Why should governments do all of the heavy lifting to arrest the steep decline of many ecosystems? Endangered species live on private land too – so why not give farmers and landholders incentives to look after them and restore habitat?

Framed like this, it’s easy to see the appeal of nature repair markets. Harness private money and direct it towards rescuing nature. No wonder the Albanese government is forging ahead with its nature repair market bill and seeking public submissions. If it becomes law, landholders will be able to gain tradeable biodiversity certificates for projects that protect, manage and restore nature.

Why do we need it? According to the government, actually reversing the decades of decline in Australia’s environment is so expensive it’s beyond government and individual landholders.

It sounds beautiful in theory – carbon credits, but for nature. But the idea has a poor track record in practice. Other offset markets have been easily gamed. Ensuring integrity is costly. Policies with teeth – banning land clearing, stronger environmental laws – are much more likely to work.

Where did this idea come from?

It’s not wholly new. Labor’s plan is based on a repackaged and expanded Morrison government biodiversity stewardship program, originally targeted at farmers.

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek has claimed the market is a response to demand. “Businesses tell me all the time that they want to invest in nature because their shareholders, customers and staff are demanding it,” she has said.

Read more:
Australia’s next government must tackle our collapsing ecosystems and extinction crisis

Consultants paint glowing futures where markets in nature balloon in size.
McKinsey estimates the current value of global nature credit markets is around A$7 billion a year. If the forecasts of PricewaterhouseCoopers are correct, that could vastly increase to $137 billion in Australia by 2050.

Enthusiasm for voluntary nature markets is at an all time high. In the last two years, we’ve seen many plans and initiatives, from Nature Finance to the Taskforce on Nature Markets to the Biodiversity Credit Alliance.

So why the scepticism? In short, it’s harder than it looks to unlock private capital and direct it to pro-nature interventions.

If they are to succeed, these kinds of schemes must be legitimate. To make these credits worthy of investment and tradeable, you need a governance framework, measurement systems, certification, registration, contracting, trading, monitoring, reporting, accounting, auditing, and a bureaucracy for administering, consulting and advising on all of it.

3 reasons for scepticism: money, demand and effectiveness

1. Money

If the reason for turning to the private sector is funding, how can we reconcile this with the Stage 3 tax cuts, set to slash government revenues by $300 billion?

Crying poor is not a credible excuse. As economists repeatedly point out, countries with their own sovereign currency can create money to spend on priorities they care about.

2. Demand

You would think a policy aimed at the private sector would be based on credible market data. But demand for these voluntary credits is “untested and likely overestimated”.

Almost three-quarters of the current global biodiversity market is based on compliance. Companies aren’t plowing money in because they want to. They do it because they have to. Australia’s nature repair scheme, by contrast, is voluntary. No other country has launched a large-scale voluntary biodiversity credit scheme.

In showcasing two decades of practice of voluntary biodiversity credits, the World Economic Forum only mustered four examples. None of them have detail on scale, value or improvement to the environment.

3. Effectiveness

To date, we have little evidence market-based regulatory measures, such as compulsory biodiversity and carbon offsets, actually do what they promise to do. In short, it is very unclear that these tools make things better relative to a baseline.

Of Australia’s states, Victoria has arguably the best-developed and most technically sophisticated biodiversity offset scheme. Even so, the Victorian Auditor-General has found the scheme cannot show results. Their report found Victoria “is not achieving no net biodiversity loss from native vegetation clearing on private land”.

In New South Wales, the deficiencies are even more severe. Our most populous state has a scheme which lacks a clearly defined objective to measure success against.

Among the scheme’s many problems are non-delivery, double-dipping, conflicts of interest and potential insider trading.

Why use a market to deliver a public good?

Functioning ecosystems produce clean water, breathable air, nutrient recycling, fertile soil, food, fibre and many other benefits.

So why are we turning to markets to deliver complex public goods like biodiversity?

The natural world is multifaceted, interconnected and complex. Developing market infrastructure to deliver desired natural outcomes is extremely difficult.

Victoria and NSW’s biodiversity offset schemes show us there’s no guarantee advocates of voluntary markets can design and produce tangible, low fraud risk biodiversity credits.

Even if they can, the cost of credibility and good governance will mean these credits will have high transaction costs in conflict with the competitive returns sought by investors.

Consider the challenges faced by the far more straightforward schemes aimed at preserving forests for carbon offsets or credits. These schemes have been plagued by issues, such as human rights violations, questions over credibility of offsets and leakage of environmental damage to other areas.

In these schemes, failure is common and success is rare. It’s time to end the catchcry of “let’s not allow the perfect to become the enemy of the good”.

After 30 years of experience, we can now conclude these schemes have done a great deal more harm than good.

Repairing nature? Use sticks, not carrots

If we want to reverse Australia’s environmental decline, we know what we have to do.

We have to end land clearing to salvage as much habitat as possible.

We have to end unsustainable water extraction.

We have to rapidly cut emissions to limit further climate damage.

We have to put public money into conservation and environmental management.

And we need environmental laws with teeth to act as a more direct and effective method of ending the damage.

Turning nature around is hard. We’ve left it late. But markets are not the answer – they’re a band-aid solution. Time to rip it off.

Read more:
Labor’s plan to save threatened species is an improvement – but it’s still well short of what we need

Yung En Chee receives funding from the Australian Research Council through an Australian Research Council Linkage grant. She also receives research funding and research contracts from Melbourne Water through the Melbourne Waterway Research-Practice Partnership.

– ref. Would a nature repair market really work? Evidence suggests it’s highly unlikely – https://theconversation.com/would-a-nature-repair-market-really-work-evidence-suggests-its-highly-unlikely-199975

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Bates, Lecturer in Initial Teacher Education: English Specialisation, University of Technology Sydney

The majority of classes in Australian primary school are made up of children from the same grade. The philosophy behind this is students of similar ages are grouped together to align with similar stages of learning development.

But composite classes – also called “multi-age” or “split year” – are also common. For example, in New South Wales last year, one quarter of classes in state schools had composite groupings. These combine different grades into one class, usually two consecutive grades, say a Year 1 and a Year 2.

Parents can be worried when they hear their child is in a composite class. What does the research say? And what do teachers think about them?

Why do we have composite classes?

Composite classes are more common in smaller schools. Traditionally, classes are combined if there are small numbers of students, or uneven enrolment numbers across different year levels.

Another reason for composite classes is changing teacher-student ratio needs as students move through school. For example, in NSW classes are smaller in the first year of schooling, with a maximum of 20 students to one teacher. This teacher-student ratio decreases from Year 1. From Year 3 on, there can be a maximum of 30 students to one teacher.

But some schools create composite classes deliberately for social and educational benefits. This is part of a “stage-based” over an “age-based” whole-school approach to children’s progression through primary education.

It provides students with two years to achieve academic standards and learn at their own pace. The approach moves away from the idea composite classes are for the “leftover” or struggling students in the more senior year of a two-year combination (for example, a Year 2 and Year 3 combination).

What does the research say?

Research on composite classes reports mixed results. A 2019 review of studies on multi-age learning in small schools found “there is much disagreement in relation to academic outcomes”:

with some studies suggesting no differences, others suggesting lowered outcomes, and still others suggesting increased outcomes for students in mixed-age settings.

But there is general agreement composite classes can have social and emotional benefits for students. Students develop cooperation and understanding across age groups, and older students can develop leadership skills.

A 2006 Australian study suggested parents are likely to react negatively when they hear their child is in a composite class. They worried about the stigma for older children being with younger ones. However, by the end of the year, parents ended up feeling comfortable with the class but only a small number (7%) decided their child was better off.

Read more:
Whether it’s a new teacher or class – here’s what to do when your child is not loving it

Research also shows the way students are grouped is not the most important factor. Rather it is the quality of the teaching, the overall school approach and mindset of the school community.

Studies also note, that if composite education is going to be successful, “a great deal of emphasis is placed on the teacher” and their experience with this type of teaching.

Isn’t every class a composite class?

Despite the dominant approach of grouping children of similar ages into one class, there will always be a range of learners or ages in any one classroom.

A typical “class” in the first year of formal schooling can be made up of children starting school at four, five and six. This means there can be an 18-month age range, and a multi-age class forms naturally.

Since 2015, the national curriculum has provided literacy and numeracy “progressions”. These progressions map literacy and numeracy skills on a learning continuum from kindergarten to Year 10. This means teachers can pinpoint students’ academic achievement levels regardless of their year group or stage of learning.

What do teachers say?

In January this year, I asked teachers on a closed Facebook group for their thoughts on “the success and challenges of composite classes”. Within hours, I had 167 comments.

The responses were varied with over 50% positive about composite classes. Teachers open to composite groupings said they “teach children [according to their] skills processes and abilities, […] and that topics can be adjusted”. They also noted, composites allow for “more flexibility and opportunities for acceleration”.

But teachers also said there were challenges and composite classes could end up being more work. This included more time spent lesson planning, designing assessment and reporting.

Overall [it’s] seen as a great conceptual approach [but] it can double the work without the right type of support, especially if groupings are across stages.

One last thing

Your child might be in a composite class out of necessity because of enrolment numbers, or because their school thinks it is a better way to educate students. Either way, it is important to remember this is not necessarily a “bad” or a “good” thing.

While concerns are understandable, open communication with the school and finding out about how composite classes run can reduce worries about socialisation and how the learning is differentiated.

Whatever class students are in, there will be variation in ages, behaviours and competencies. Teachers help them to learn at whatever stage they are at, regardless of what year they are in.

Read more:
A push to raise the school starting age to 6 sounds like good news for parents, but there’s a catch

Katherine Bates 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. My child is in a composite class this year. Is this a good thing? – https://theconversation.com/my-child-is-in-a-composite-class-this-year-is-this-a-good-thing-199676

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Neil G Sipe, Honorary Professor of Planning, The University of Queensland

Why do Uber, Lyft, Didi, OLA and other ride-sharing companies want to partner with public transport agencies? For Uber and Lyft, the reason is simple: their business plans were based on eventually using driverless vehicles to eliminate their main cost, the labour cost of the driver. But human drivers won’t be replaced for some time.

While many of these companies have raised lots of cash from venture capitalists, they are burning though it at an alarming rate. Uber made a loss of US$8.8 billion in 2022. Lyft, Uber’s main competitor in the United States, lost US$1.28 billion.

These companies, collectively known as transportation network companies (TNCs), have two options to become profitable. They need to increase how much they charge for their services, or find other revenue streams. So most have ventured into e-bikes and e-scooters, food and freight delivery and public transport.

Uber aims to become the “Amazon of transportation” by creating a one-stop platform for all transport services — known as mobility as a service (MaaS). Its move into public transport is a natural progression.

Uber added trains, buses, planes and car rentals to its UK app last April. While it’s not providing these services, the aim is to partner with other transport providers so customers can use the Uber app to buy tickets. If this service succeeds, Uber intends to expand it to other countries.

Read more:
Victorians won’t miss myki, but what will ‘best practice’ transport ticketing look like?

There are more than 4 trillion passenger miles taken on public transport annually. Given this volume, surprisingly few public transport agencies make money. One of the few is in Hong Kong, due to the operator developing the large amount of property it owns around its stations.

Public transport is subsidised because it is essential for our cities; they couldn’t function if everyone used a car to get around.

So how do ride-sharing companies think they can make money by getting involved in public transport? Do they know something they aren’t revealing?

How widespread are these partnerships?

By 2019 Uber had about 20 such agreements and Lyft about 50. Neither company has disclosed whether the number of agreements has increased or decreased in the post-COVID environment.

Uber’s 2021 report, Towards a New Model of Public Transportation, identifies four main areas of co-operation with public transport agencies.

The most common is the integration of public transport information into the TNC app. Uber has done this on a limited scale, including Sydney where its app has provided public transport information since mid-2019.

The second most common area of co-operation involves providing first mile, last mile transport – transferring a commuter between a public transport stop and their home or destination – or providing transport in areas with low public transport frequency. Dallas, in 2015, was the first city to subsidise short shared Uber rides to and from a train station. Dallas transport officials said it cost US$15 per rider on one of their buses, but only US$5 per rider with Uber.

The third area is enabling users to buy public transport tickets on their Uber app. The first of just a few operating examples was in Denver in 2019, followed by Las Vegas in January 2020. A year later a consortium of 13 small transit agencies in Ohio and northern Kentucky was added to this Uber feature.

The fourth area is as a substitute for public transport. To date there is only one example – in Innisfil, Ontario. Innisfil had no public transport, but needed a service for its growing population. The town engaged Uber to provide a bus service. Within a year it was carrying about 8,000 passengers a month.

Read more:
All your transport options in one place: why mobility as a service needs a proper platform

What’s stopping more public transport deals?

Are such partnerships a good idea? While there are some advocates among public transport officials, many others remain sceptical. Their reasons include:

• ride-sharing reduces public transport patronage

• concerns about whether these companies want to cooperate or divert riders

• enticing people from public transport to ride-share vehicles has increased traffic congestion

• these companies historically have not shared their data

• the agencies don’t want to become dependent upon companies whose financial viability is questionable – how can they make money and continue this cooperation when public transport agencies cannot?

Read more:
Can an app change Australia’s car culture? Only if all moving parts work together

So why do some public transport agencies sign up?

What is the motivation for public transport agencies co-operating with these companies? For large public transport agencies it’s about improving operations related to:

• increasing public transport use by subsidising rides to and from commuter rail, bus and tram stations

• late-hours services when it is expensive to run routes, or to provide services where public transport routes are not operating

• increased mobility due to having multiple transport options

• paratransit, a supplement to public transport that provides individualised rides without fixed schedules or routes, which is costly for public transport agencies because they lack vehicles of the right size and the ability to respond efficiently to demand.

However, most of these partnerships can be found in smaller cities. This is because small improvements – such as ride-sharing replacing a low-use bus route – can have a significant impact on their budgets.

Another trend emerging from the pandemic is that public transport agencies are rethinking how they operate and how they can improve services. While some have partnered with transportation network companies, other have decided to implement TNC-like services in house in an effort to increase ridership.

Read more:
What if Opal and Myki became one? It’d help more of us than you’d think

While things were evolving rapidly before the pandemic, progress slowed due to lockdowns and more people working from home. How these companies will fare in a post-COVID environment is still unclear, including whether travellers will use them as a substitute for some public transport services, particularly on low-frequency routes and for first mile, last mile trips.

The companies have indicated the goal of these partnerships is to get people out of their cars. If they can make it easier for people to use public transport, then it is good for these companies because people might buy fewer cars and use more of their services in the future.

Read more:
The battle to be the Amazon (or Netflix) of transport

Neil G Sipe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Ride-share companies are losing billions, so why their interest in unprofitable public transport? – https://theconversation.com/ride-share-companies-are-losing-billions-so-why-their-interest-in-unprofitable-public-transport-132664

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martyn Pedler, PhD Candidate, Swinburne University of Technology

When the new creative head of DC Studios, James Gunn, announced their upcoming slate of films and TV, it included many names you might expect: Superman, Batman, maybe even Swamp Thing.

It also included some lesser-known and leftfield picks, such as the take-no-prisoners superhero team The Authority. The team’s co-creator, artist Bryan Hitch, found that out when everyone else did. “The Authority…?” he tweeted. “I’m glad someone told me…”

Comic book creators forgotten

This kind of disrespect to comic book creators is nothing new. As recounted in Tom De Haven’s book Our Hero: Superman On Earth, Superman’s co-creator wrote a furious press release about the upcoming Superman movie in 1975:

I, Jerry Siegel, the co-originator of Superman, put a curse on the Superman movie! I hope it super-bombs. I hope loyal Superman fans stay away from it in droves. I hope the whole world, becoming aware of the stench that surrounds Superman, will avoid the movie like a plague. Why am I putting this curse on a movie based on my creation of Superman? Because cartoonist Joe Shuster and I, who co-originated Superman together, will not get one cent from the Superman super-movie deal.

For most comic creators, not much has changed. Ed Brubaker, who co-created the Winter Soldier for Marvel’s Captain America comics, also saw his character burst onto the big screen. He wrote:

For the most part, all Steve [Epting, co-creator] and I have got for creating the Winter Soldier and his storyline is a thanks here or there, and over the years that’s become harder and harder to live with.

Brubaker is referring to the “special thanks” that appear in the credits of blockbuster movies, briefly listing the names of comic writers and artists whose work influenced the films. Sometimes that’s all they get, according to The Guardian, sometimes they will receive a flat fee if they lawyer up – like Jim Starlin did, creator of the supervillain Thanos – they can sometimes manage more. Compared to the global box office for superhero movies, though, these payments are pittances.

Work for hire

There are multiple reasons for these tactics from Marvel and DC Comics. First is that the writers and artists create characters under strict “work-for-hire” contracts, granting the publishers full ownership. But it’s also that superhero movies usually aren’t straight adaptations of particular comic book storylines. They pluck what they want to use from a decades-long continuum of stories by a wide variety of writers and artists, making credits more complicated.

That’s why movies and TV have settled on “characters created by”. This, too, is problematic. Take the recently cancelled Doom Patrol TV series. Its credits list Arnold Drake, Bob Haney and Bruno Premiani, who created the original version of the team in 1963. But the show is undeniably based on the cult run of Doom Patrol comics by Grant Morrison and Richard Case that began in 1989. They are not credited – even though Morrison was name-checked by the fourth-wall-breaking villain Mister Nobody.

Comic fans were heartened by Gunn’s announcements, as he pointed to comics by beloved creators for adaptation such as Grant Morrison and Frank Quietly’s All-Star Superman, and Tom King and Bilquis Evely’s Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow. These aren’t just a matter of ladling out characters, stories and themes from the expansive sea of superhero comics, they’re specific comics by specific authors. “Characters created by” just won’t do.

Gunn took pains to say he wasn’t creating a “Gunnverse” of films and TV filtered only through his auteurist vision. “The stories are completely different,” he said, “and each has the individual expression of the writers and the director that are making those projects.” But comic book authors have that same kind of individual expression, and that is usually ignored in favour of treating their work as raw content, ready to be reshaped and repackaged.

Gunn announced that comics writer Tom King has been acting in an advisory role for DC Studios, and hopefully this means he’ll be receiving more than a token payment and a “special thanks”. Most comic creators won’t be so lucky.

Open hearts and open purse strings

A few years ago, the co-creator of Marvel’s gun-toting Rocket Raccoon from Guardians of the Galaxy, Bill Mantlo, was in a nursing home with a traumatic brain injury. His brother set up a GoFundMe, asking fans to chip in for his care. As the New York Daily News reported, “the $100,000 Mantlo is asking for is .0083% of the reported $1.2 billion Avengers: Endgame made worldwide during its opening weekend”.

Read more:
‘Any means necessary’: the police who adopt the skull symbol of the ultra-violent comic book vigilante the Punisher

Marvel, under growing public pressure, eventually did come to a financial agreement with Mantlo – although, as his brother said, “My attorney is very good. I’m not going to say Marvel came to me and opened up their hearts and their purse strings.”

Some say that comic creators willingly signed these contracts, so they don’t deserve any further compensation if their characters earn billions for movie studios. Superheroes, however, don’t care about what’s legal. They care about what’s right.

Marvel and DC should embrace the ethics of their own characters and do the right thing – without needing to be blackmailed or bullied first.

Martyn Pedler 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. ‘Special thanks’: how comic book writers and artists are forgotten during the superhero film boom – https://theconversation.com/special-thanks-how-comic-book-writers-and-artists-are-forgotten-during-the-superhero-film-boom-198997

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

You can bet on one thing in the Aston byelection, which is to be held on April 1. The winner will be a woman.

Labor already has its female candidate in the field – Mary Doyle, who gave former Liberal member Alan Tudge a run for his money last year. Doyle, who works for an industry super fund, says she’s a “suburban mum” who has “a mortgage on a three-bedroom weatherboard house”.

Peter Dutton was quick to say the Liberals needed a woman, and he won’t be ignored in the way Scott Morrison was, when he wanted a female for the 2018 Wentworth byelection (that was subsequently lost to an independent).

The Victorian Liberal administrative committee is likely to choose the candidate – on the grounds there is not time for a rank and file preselection.

The frontrunners are Melbourne City Councillor Roshena Campbell, a lawyer, and oncologist Ranjana Srivastava. Both have heavyweight referees: former treasurer Josh Frydenberg and former health minister Greg Hunt respectively. Also in the field are former state parliamentarian Cathrine Burnett-Wake and one male – deputy school principal Emanuele Cicchiello.

The Liberals go into the contest as favourites, although both sides are painting themselves as underdogs. As Labor likes to point out, it is more than a century since a government won a federal byelection from an opposition.

Apart from that, the seat is on a 2.8% margin, after a large swing, on a two-party basis, of more than 7% against the discredited Tudge in 2022. If the Liberals can’t hold Aston, they need to be very fearful indeed.

Dutton, who ventured into the seat on Friday, is unpopular in Victoria. But he will be less unpopular in an outer suburban seat like Aston than in the leafy suburban areas that fell to the teals last time. Indeed, it is the outer suburbs in general where Dutton thinks he has his best chance of winning seats at the next election.

The Liberals, predictably, will target cost of living in their campaign, as well as some cuts that have been made in local infrastructure, notably roads.

While cost of living is a very obvious issue, the question is whether the opposition can attach “blame” to the government. Alternatively, will voters accept that most of the drivers of the present situation are outside the government’s control and what “blame” there is should be directed elsewhere?

In recent days, plenty of “blame” has been headed (mostly unfairly) the way of Reserve Bank Governor Phil Lowe.

In the 2021 census the median weekly family income in Aston was $2194 ($2120 nationally). The median mortgage repayments were $2000 (the national figure was $1863).

Voters will no doubt hear a good deal from Labor about the “Noalition”, playing up the Coalition’s opposition to core Labor legislation. On cost of living, Labor will point to its child care and cheaper medicine initiatives, which provide (strictly limited) relief.

One vital sub-contest will be the battle for the Chinese vote. The electorate has (according to the 2021 census) more than 14% of its population who are of Chinese ancestry. This compares with 6.6% of the Victorian population and 5.5% of the Australian population.

The review of their federal election performance done for the Liberals by former party director Brian Loughnane and senator Jane Hume highlighted the problem of the lost Chinese vote.

Read more:
Alan Tudge quits parliament, prompting byelection test for Peter Dutton

“In the top 15 seats by Chinese ancestry the swing against the Party (on a 2PP basis) was 6.6%, compared to 3.7% in other seats,” the review said.

“Rebuilding the Party’s relationship with the Chinese community must be a priority during this term of Parliament.”

The reviewers probably didn’t anticipate the test would come so early, in a seat where the Chinese vote is so large.

The bellicose anti-Chinese rhetoric from Peter Dutton as well as from Scott Morrison alienated many of these voters of Chinese ancestry.

Dutton will obviously need to chart a more nuanced position in the byelection. He hasn’t been helped by Morrison’s strong speech, delivered to an international conference the other day, when the former prime minister suggested consideration of targeted sanctions against individuals over human rights abuses.

Aston is not a seat where an independent would be considered to have a serious chance of victory. The Liberals will just be hoping there is no such candidate with the clout to play a “spoiler” role.

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. View from The Hill: April 1 Aston byelection will be an all-female battle – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-april-1-aston-byelection-will-be-an-all-female-battle-200270

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Ralston, Professorial fellow, Monash University

Today Treasurer Jim Chalmers released a consultation paper on “Legislating the Purpose of Superannuation”.

This is a long-awaited piece of work that has been the subject of ongoing discussion since it was recommended by the Rudd government’s Financial System Inquiry in 2014.

A subsequent bill introduced by the Morrison government failed to obtain agreement and lapsed in 2019.

The 2020 Retirement Income Review, of which I was a panel member, also agreed an objective was required to “anchor the direction of policy settings, help ensure the purpose of the system is understood, and provide a framework for assessing the performance of the system”.

In the consultation paper, Treasurer Chalmers proposes that:

The purpose of superannuation is to preserve savings to deliver income for a dignified retirement, alongside government support, in an equitable and sustainable way.

I find it hard to argue with this statement as it reflects much of the detailed research undertaken by the Retirement Income Review.

The fact is super is there to provide retirement income. It should be seen, not as a nest egg, but as a source of income in retirement.

Not a nest egg

In order to achieve this, it needs to be preserved for that purpose and that purpose only. There are currently many leakages in the system which are exploited by matters, among them the use of super to fund elective surgery.

Hopefully, super funds will provide retirement income projections to reinforce this point and prepare members to think about the level of income they want in retirement and how much they can safely draw down balances.

To do this properly, people need guidance and advice, a subject addressed in the report of a separate Quality of Advice Review released this month.

Read more:
The super giveaway that allows the wealthy to amass even more tax-free

Right now many retirees are intent on preserving their super as a nest egg, to ensure they don’t run out of funds. The Retirement Income Review heard that most go to their graves with 80-90% of their super as an unintended bequest.

As to a “dignified” retirement – the word proposed by Chalmers in the Consultation paper – the age pension already provides a floor for retirement income to ensure people are not at risk of poverty in retirement. It has grown faster than both wages and prices since 2009 and works well as a safety net.

The proportion of retirees receiving the pension increases with age. In mid-2019, 42% of people aged 66 received the age pension, compared with 80% aged 80.

A retirement that maintains standard of living

As super balances grow and the system reaches maturity so retirees have had the super guarantee all of their working lives, reliance on the age pension will decline, particularly for those on middle incomes.

A good goal for super is to allow retirees to maintain a standard of living commensurate with their pre-retirement income. A good way of measuring this is by use of a replacement rate – say 65-75% of pre-retirement income. Absolute targets make little sense when people have become used to different incomes throughout their working lives.

There are a wide range of government programs that help provide this, in addition to super and the pension. Programs such as health and aged care services, tax benefits, and various concessions play an important role as well.

Read more:
Yes, women retire with less, but boosting compulsory super won’t help

“Equity”, another word used by Chalmers, indicates that people in similar circumstances should receive similar benefits. This isn’t the case right now.

At the moment the age pension assets test favours home-owners; high income earners benefit more from super tax concessions than low earners; and women tend to benefit less than men. Some of the reasons for this are outside the retirement system itself, as are the poor situations racing renters who receive inadequate Commonwealth Rent Assistance and involuntary retirees who spend an extended period on unemployment benefits.

A sustainable system

“Sustainability”, another word used by Chalmers, is needed to ensure tomorrow’s workers are not unreasonably burdened supporting today’s retirees. At present those with large super balances benefit the most from tax concessions.

The Retirement Income Review found that in 2018 there were 11,000 people with super balances over $5 million, and by now there are many more.

These balances are arguably well in excess of what is needed for retirement income and the tax concessions which accrue to these accounts could fund a significant number of age pensions.

Over the next two decades these large balances will decline due to caps imposed in more recent years. In the meantime, the concessions are expensive – a tempting piece of low-hanging fruit in tight fiscal times.

Submissions on the Consultation Paper are due by March 31.

The final wording of the sentence that is chosen will be incredibly important.

It will provide a focus to guide deliberations about how much super we need, how much it should be taxed, and what it should be used for. Three decades on from the start of compulsory super, it is overdue.

Deborah Ralston received funding from the Australian Treasury for her role as part of the Retirement Income Review.

– ref. 31 years after the advent of compulsory super, the government is about to decide what it’s for. The answer will matter – https://theconversation.com/31-years-after-the-advent-of-compulsory-super-the-government-is-about-to-decide-what-its-for-the-answer-will-matter-200264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Ralston, Professorial fellow, Monash University

Today Treasurer Jim Chalmers released a consultation paper on “Legislating the Purpose of Superannuation”.

This is a long-awaited piece of work that has been the subject of ongoing discussion since it was recommended by the Rudd government’s Financial System Inquiry in 2014.

A subsequent bill introduced by the Morrison government failed to obtain agreement and lapsed in 2019.

The 2020 Retirement Income Review, of which I was a panel member, also agreed an objective was required to “anchor the direction of policy settings, help ensure the purpose of the system is understood, and provide a framework for assessing the performance of the system”.

In the consultation paper, Treasurer Chalmers proposes that:

The purpose of superannuation is to preserve savings to deliver income for a dignified retirement, alongside government support, in an equitable and sustainable way.

I find it hard to argue with this statement as it reflects much of the detailed research undertaken by the Retirement Income Review.

The fact is super is there to provide retirement income. It should be seen, not as a nest egg, but as a source of income in retirement.

Not a nest egg

In order to achieve this, it needs to be preserved for that purpose and that purpose only. There are currently many leakages in the system which are exploited by matters, among them the use of super to fund elective surgery.

Hopefully, super funds will provide retirement income projections to reinforce this point and prepare members to think about the level of income they want in retirement and how much they can safely draw down balances.

To do this properly, people need guidance and advice, a subject addressed in the report of a separate Quality of Advice Review released this month.

Read more:
The super giveaway that allows the wealthy to amass even more tax-free

Right now many retirees are intent on preserving their super as a nest egg, to ensure they don’t run out of funds. The Retirement Income Review heard that most go to their graves with 80-90% of their super as an unintended bequest.

As to a “dignified” retirement – the word proposed by Chalmers in the Consultation paper – the age pension already provides a floor for retirement income to ensure people are not at risk of poverty in retirement. It has grown faster than both wages and prices since 2009 and works well as a safety net.

The proportion of retirees receiving the pension increases with age. In mid-2019, 42% of people aged 66 received the age pension, compared with 80% aged 80.

A retirement that maintains standard of living

As super balances grow and the system reaches maturity so retirees have had the super guarantee all of their working lives, reliance on the age pension will decline, particularly for those on middle incomes.

A good goal for super is to allow retirees to maintain a standard of living commensurate with their pre-retirement income. A good way of measuring this is by use of a replacement rate – say 65-75% of pre-retirement income. Absolute targets make little sense when people have become used to different incomes throughout their working lives.

There are a wide range of government programs that help provide this, in addition to super and the pension. Programs such as health and aged care services, tax benefits, and various concessions play an important role as well.

Read more:
Yes, women retire with less, but boosting compulsory super won’t help

“Equity”, another word used by Chalmers, indicates that people in similar circumstances should receive similar benefits. This isn’t the case right now.

At the moment the age pension assets test favours home-owners; high income earners benefit more from super tax concessions than low earners; and women tend to benefit less than men. Some of the reasons for this are outside the retirement system itself, as are the poor situations racing renters who receive inadequate Commonwealth Rent Assistance and involuntary retirees who spend an extended period on unemployment benefits.

A sustainable system

“Sustainability”, another word used by Chalmers, is needed to ensure tomorrow’s workers are not unreasonably burdened supporting today’s retirees. At present those with large super balances benefit the most from tax concessions.

The Retirement Income Review found that in 2018 there were 11,000 people with super balances over $5 million, and by now there are many more.

These balances are arguably well in excess of what is needed for retirement income and the tax concessions which accrue to these accounts could fund a significant number of age pensions.

Over the next two decades these large balances will decline due to caps imposed in more recent years. In the meantime, the concessions are expensive – a tempting piece of low-hanging fruit in tight fiscal times.

Submissions on the Consultation Paper are due by March 31.

The final wording of the sentence that is chosen will be incredibly important.

It will provide a focus to guide deliberations about how much super we need, how much it should be taxed, and what it should be used for. Three decades on from the start of compulsory super, it is overdue.

Deborah Ralston received funding from the Australian Treasury for her role as part of the Retirement Income Review.

– ref. 26 years after the advent of compulsory super, the government is about to decide what it’s for. The answer will matter – https://theconversation.com/26-years-after-the-advent-of-compulsory-super-the-government-is-about-to-decide-what-its-for-the-answer-will-matter-200264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharine Kemp, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney

In the recently released Privacy Act Review Report, the Attorney-General’s Department makes numerous important proposals that could see the legislation, enacted in 1988, begin to catch up to leading privacy laws globally.

Among the positive proposed changes are: more realistic definitions of personal information and consent, tighter limits on data retention, a right to erasure, and a requirement for data practices to be fair and reasonable.

However, the report’s proposals on targeted advertising don’t properly address the power imbalance between companies and consumers. Instead, they largely accept a status quo that sacrifices consumer privacy to the demands of online targeted ad businesses.

Capturing personal information used to track and profile

Obligations under the existing Privacy Act only apply to “personal information”, but there has been legal uncertainty about what exactly constitutes “personal information”.

Currently, companies can track an individual’s online behaviour across different websites and connect it with their offline movements by matching their data with data collected from third parties, such as retailers or data brokers.

Some of these companies claim they’re not dealing in “personal information” since they don’t use the individual’s name or email address. Instead, the matching is done based on a unique identifier allocated to that person – such as a hashed email, for example.

The report proposes an expanded definition of “personal information” that clearly includes the various technical and online identifiers being used to track and profile consumers. Under this definition, companies could no longer claim such data collection and sharing are outside the scope of the Privacy Act.

Improved consent (when required)

The report also proposes higher standards for how consent is sought, in cases where the act requires it. This would require voluntary, informed, current, specific and unambiguous consent.

This would work against organisations claiming consumers have consented to unexpected data uses just because they used a website or an app with a link to a broadly worded privacy policy with take-it-or-leave-it terms.

For example, companies would need to demonstrate the higher standard of consent to collect sensitive information about someone’s mental health or sexual orientation. The report also proposes that some further data practices, such as precise geolocation tracking, should require consent.

However, it specifically states consent should not be required for some targeted ad practices. Yet surveys show most consumers regard these as misuses of their personal information.

‘Fair and reasonable’ data practices

The report proposes a “fair and reasonable” test for dealings with personal information in general.

This recognises that consumers are saddled with too much of the responsibility for managing how their personal information is collected and used, while they lack the information, resources, expertise and control to do this effectively.

Instead, organisations covered by the Privacy Act should ensure their data handling practices are “fair and reasonable”, regardless of whether they have consumer consent. This would include considering whether a reasonable person would expect the data to be collected, used or disclosed in that way, and whether any dealing with children’s information is in the best interests of the child.

Prohibiting targeted ads based on sensitive information

The report proposes the prohibition of targeting based on sensitive information and traits. However, it’s not always easy to draw the line between “sensitive” information or traits, and other personal information.

For instance, is having an interest in “cosmetic procedures” or “rapid weight loss” a sensitive trait, or a general reading interest? Companies may exploit such grey areas. So while prohibiting targeting based on sensitive information is appropriate, it’s not enough in itself.

Another loophole arises in the report’s proposal that consumer consent should be necessary before an organisation trades in their personal information. The report leaves open an exception to this consent requirement where the “trading” is reasonably necessary for an organisation’s functions or activities.

This may be a substantial exception: data brokers, for example, might argue their trade in personal information (without consumers’ knowledge or consent) is necessary.

Read more:
Is your phone really listening to your conversations? Well, turns out it doesn’t have to

Opt out only, not opt in

Both the ACCC and the UK Competition & Markets Authority have recommended consumers should opt in to the use of their personal information for targeted advertising if they wish to see this content.

But the report proposes individuals should only be allowed to opt out of “seeing” targeted ads. This still wouldn’t stop companies from collecting, using and disclosing a user’s personal information for broader targeting purposes.

Even if a consumer opts out of seeing targeted ads, a business may continue to collect their personal information to create “lookalike audiences” and target other people with similar attributes.

Although having the option to opt out of seeing targeted ads gives consumers some limited control, companies still control the “choice architecture” of such settings. They can use their control to make opting out confusing and difficult for users, by forcing them to navigate through multiple pages or websites with obscurely labelled settings.

Are targeted ads necessary to support online services?

This limitation of consumers’ choices was partly explained by the view of the Attorney-General’s Department that targeted ads are necessary to fund “free” services. This refers to services where consumers “pay” with their attention and data (which companies use to make revenue from targeted advertising).

However, many companies using customers’ personal information for targeted ad businesses aren’t providing free services. Consider online marketplaces such as Amazon or eBay, or subscription-based products of media companies such as NewsCorp and Nine.

Meta (Facebook) and the Interactive Advertising Bureau Australia argued that if consumers opt out of targeted ads, a company should be able to stop offering them the service in question. This proposal was rejected on the basis that a platform can still show non-targeted ads to such consumers.

Inconsistently, the report failed to question broader claims that targeted advertising – as opposed to less intrusive forms of advertising – must be protected for online services to be viable.

Real change is needed

The reform of our privacy laws is long overdue. The government should avoid watering down potential improvements by attempting to preserve the status quo dictated by large businesses.

The government is seeking feedback on the report until March 31. It will then decide on the final form of the reforms it proposes, before these are debated in Parliament.

Read more:
This law makes it illegal for companies to collect third-party data to profile you. But they do anyway

Katharine Kemp receives funding from The Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation. She is a Member of the Advisory Board of the Future of Finance Initiative in India, and the Australian Privacy Foundation.

– ref. Proposed privacy reforms could help Australia play catch-up with other nations. But they fail to tackle targeted ads – https://theconversation.com/proposed-privacy-reforms-could-help-australia-play-catch-up-with-other-nations-but-they-fail-to-tackle-targeted-ads-200166

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

You can bet on one thing in the Aston byelection, which is to be held on April 1. The winner will be a woman.

Labor already has its female candidate in the field – Mary Doyle, who gave former Liberal member Alan Tudge a run for his money last year. Doyle, who works for an industry super fund, says she’s a “suburban mum” who has “a mortgage on a three-bedroom weatherboard house”.

Peter Dutton was quick to say the Liberals needed a woman, and he won’t be ignored in the way Scott Morrison was, when he wanted a female for the 2018 Wentworth byelection (that was subsequently lost to an independent).

The Victorian Liberal administrative committee is likely to choose the candidate – on the grounds there is not time for a rank and file preselection.

The frontrunners are Melbourne City Councillor Roshena Campbell, a lawyer, and oncologist Ranjana Srivastava. Both have heavyweight referees: former treasurer Josh Frydenberg and former health minister Greg Hunt respectively. Also in the field are former state parliamentarian Cathrine Burnett-Wake and one male – deputy school principal Emanuele Cicchiello.

The Liberals go into the contest as favourites, although both sides are painting themselves as underdogs. As Labor likes to point out, it is more than a century since a government won a federal byelection from an opposition.

Apart from that, the seat is on a 2.8% margin, after a large swing, on a two-party basis, of more than 7% against the discredited Tudge in 2022. If the Liberals can’t hold Aston, they need to be very fearful indeed.

Dutton, who ventured into the seat on Friday, is unpopular in Victoria. But he will be less unpopular in an outer suburban seat like Aston than in the leafy suburban areas that fell to the teals last time. Indeed, it is the outer suburbs in general where Dutton thinks he has his best chance of winning seats at the next election.

The Liberals, predictably, will target cost of living in their campaign, as well as some cuts that have been made in local infrastructure, notably roads.

While cost of living is a very obvious issue, the question is whether the opposition can attach “blame” to the government. Alternatively, will voters accept that most of the drivers of the present situation are outside the government’s control and what “blame” there is should be directed elsewhere?

In recent days, plenty of “blame” has been headed (mostly unfairly) the way of Reserve Bank Governor Phil Lowe.

In the 2021 census the median weekly family income in Aston was $2194 ($2120 nationally). The median mortgage repayments were $2000 (the national figure was $1863).

Voters will no doubt hear a good deal from Labor about the “Noalition”, playing up the Coalition’s opposition to core Labor legislation. On cost of living, Labor will point to its child care and cheaper medicine initiatives, which provide (strictly limited) relief.

One vital sub-contest will be the battle for the Chinese vote. The electorate has (according to the 2021 census) more than 14% of its population who are of Chinese ancestry. This compares with 6.6% of the Victorian population and 5.5% of the Australian population.

The review of their federal election performance done for the Liberals by former party director Brian Loughnane and senator Jane Hume highlighted the problem of the lost Chinese vote.

Read more:
Alan Tudge quits parliament, prompting byelection test for Peter Dutton

“In the top 15 seats by Chinese ancestry the swing against the Party (on a 2PP basis) was 6.6%, compared to 3.7% in other seats,” the review said.

“Rebuilding the Party’s relationship with the Chinese community must be a priority during this term of Parliament.”

The reviewers probably didn’t anticipate the test would come so early, in a seat where the Chinese vote is so large.

The bellicose anti-Chinese rhetoric from Peter Dutton as well as from Scott Morrison alienated many of these voters of Chinese ancestry.

Dutton will obviously need to chart a more nuanced position in the byelection. He hasn’t been helped by Morrison’s strong speech, delivered to an international conference the other day, when the former prime minister suggested consideration of targeted sanctions against individuals over human rights abuses.

Aston is not a seat where an independent would be considered to have a serious chance of victory. The Liberals will just be hoping there is no such candidate with the clout to play a “spoiler” role.

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. View from The Hill: April 1 Aston byelection will be an all-female contest – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-april-1-aston-byelection-will-be-an-all-female-contest-200270

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Euan Ritchie, Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University

No matter where you live, apex predators and large carnivores inspire awe as well as instil fear.

Large predators have been heavily persecuted and removed from areas where they once lived because of conflict with livestock graziers.

Beyond their large teeth, sharp claws and iconic status, research is finding they are crucially important in ecosystems. So there is considerable interest in returning large carnivores to areas where they once lived, as part of a shift towards rewilding.

Bringing back carnivores is not without risk, but it’s a potentially powerful conservation tool.

Rewilding dingoes and Tasmanian devils in Australia could benefit many of our troubled ecosystems, by keeping herbivore numbers down, keeping feral cats and foxes fearful, and triggering a rebound in vegetation and small animal populations.

Predators vs prey

Predators can affect their prey’s behaviour. When prey species know a predator is around and perceive risk to their survival, they change how they behave.

The landscape of fear predators create can make it harder for prey species to survive.

That’s often good for ecosystems. The effect of dingoes in reducing, say, kangaroo and wallaby populations and changing their behaviour, can actually help bring back plants and smaller animals through a “trophic cascade”. For example, wolves chasing, eating and scaring deer can lead to an increase in the growth of plants, which can benefit other species.

Predators also affect other predators. If humans poison, shoot, trap and exclude top predators like dingoes, smaller predators can increase in number and get bolder, in a phenomenon called mesopredator release. In California, when coyotes disappeared due to habitat destruction, populations of smaller predators such as cats grew and songbird numbers fell.

How is it done?

Rewilding can occur passively, by changing laws to stop the exclusion or killing of large carnivores and making areas more favourable for carnivores to live. When this happens, species often move back by themselves. Encouragingly, this is happening in many parts of the world, including a recent sighting of a wolf in Brandenburg, Germany.

In other cases, rewilding may need a more active approach, such as physically moving animals to an area. The return of wolves to Yellowstone National Park and the ecological transformation that followed is a famous example of this, although in recent times the details of this story have been questioned.

When does rewilding work best? Recent research shows wild-born animals fare better than captive-born animals, though the results are far from conclusive. Wild-born animals may have an edge due to their skills in hunting and defending territories critically important for survival.

Rewilding in Australia means bringing back dingoes

Once carnivores are killed or fenced off from an area, the ecosystem changes. Will we restore nature by bringing them back? Potentially – but it’s not guaranteed.
Australia’s controversial canine, the dingo, is a perfect example. Aside from humans, dingoes are Australia’s only living land predator over 15 kilograms.

Dingoes have a vital role in Australian ecosystems, such as keeping populations of kangaroos and emus under control. They can also take down feral goats. Their natural control of herbivores means plants can bounce back, as well as making room for smaller animals. Their effect on plant life may even affect the height and shape of sand dunes.

In some parts of Australia, kangaroo populations have exploded. Land clearing for pasture favours kangaroos, as do the dams and water troughs for livestock, the killing off of dingoes and the ending of First Nations Peoples’ cultural practices and hunting.

At times, these population booms have led to sudden crashes, with widespread starvation in droughts. Harvesting kangaroos is one response, but this is often controversial and unpopular. Bringing dingoes back would help reduce kangaroo numbers in a way more palatable to many people.

When present, dingoes also keep a lid on our worst introduced predators, feral cats and foxes, either by eating them or forcing them to alter their behaviour. If cats and foxes have to be more careful, it may benefit their smaller prey.

We could rewild dingoes very easily by removing large barriers like the dingo fence. This, of course, would trigger pushback from livestock graziers worried about attacks on their stock.

Read more:
The dingo fence from space: satellite images show how these top predators alter the desert

It doesn’t have to be this way though. We’ve learned a lot about ways to reduce conflict between farmers and predators. It’s now entirely possible for livestock producers and top predators to coexist. Western Australian farmers are already using guardian animals such as Maremma dogs to protect livestock.

So should we do it?

Australia has been slow to support and attempt large carnivore rewilding. But we can learn valuable lessons from the relocation of Tasmanian devils to an offshore haven, Maria Island.

Devils were introduced to safeguard the species against the severe population decline from devil facial tumour disease. These predators were not native to Maria Island, but they’ve flourished. One unexpected side effect was the devastating impact on the island’s little penguin population.

Rewilding comes with risks. But it also comes with major benefits, which may help our collapsing ecosystems and threatened species.

Time is short. Conservation must take calculated and informed risks to achieve better outcomes. Rewilding attempts are valuable, even when things don’t go entirely as planned.

What else could we do? Discussions over the carefully planned reintroduction of Tasmanian devils to mainland Australia continue. If the devils come back to the mainland for the first time in thousands of years, they might help to manage herbivore and feral cat populations.

Rewilding is not about recreating the mythical idea of wilderness. Humans have shaped ecosystems for millennia.

If rewilding and ecological restoration is to succeed, communities and their values, including First Nations groups, must be involved.

Euan G. Ritchie is a Councillor within the Biodiversity Council, and a member of the Ecological Society of Australia and the Australian Mammal Society.

– ref. From the dingo to the Tasmanian devil – why we should be rewilding carnivores – https://theconversation.com/from-the-dingo-to-the-tasmanian-devil-why-we-should-be-rewilding-carnivores-199879

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Smallcombe, Post-doctoral Research Associate, University of Sydney

We like to think of babies as tiny versions of ourselves. But babies aren’t simply miniature adults, especially when it comes to coping in the heat. Babies are at greater risk of overheating and need different cooling strategies to those that work for adults.

Parents have long covered prams and strollers with cloth to shade the carriage from the hot sun. However, our recent study showed this can substantially increase temperatures inside the stroller.

After just 20 minutes – the time it takes to go to the shop or drop your child off at daycare – the stroller carriage was 3.7℃ hotter than outside when draped with a dry flannelette cloth and 2.6℃ when draped with dry muslin.

Attaching a battery-operated fan to the stroller wasn’t very effective either at reducing the stroller temperature, cooling the carriage by just 0.1℃ relative to outside.

But dampening the cloth can reduce the temperature in the carriage.

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

Why are babies vulnerable in the heat?

There are three main reasons why babies might struggle more in hot weather compared to adults.

First, their body shape is very different. Infants have a much greater area of skin surface available to exchange heat with the surrounding environment, compared to their body mass. This means in very hot conditions their body temperature can warm up at a much faster rate.

Second, infants can’t sweat as much as mum or dad and are therefore less able to cool down by sweat evaporation. This is the main physiological disadvantage that places them at greater risk in hot weather.

Finally – and possibly most importantly – babies are almost entirely dependent on someone else to keep them cool. Other than crying, babies can’t communicate that they are too hot. On a hot day, it is the parents who have to check for signs of distress, choose suitable clothing, and make sure shade is found during the hottest part of the day (normally noon to 3pm). Babies can’t do any of this for themselves.

Read more:
Curious Kids: What happens in the body when we sweat?

So, what can be done to keep baby strollers cool?

In our same study, we also showed some strategies are really effective at cooling strollers down even on hot and sunny days.

Loosely draping a damp muslin cloth over the stroller reduced the temperature inside the stroller by 3℃.

This cooling effect was even greater when a damp cloth was combined with a clip-on fan, reducing the stroller temperature by 4.7℃ compared with outside.

This method harnesses the power of evaporation. Just like we lose body heat when sweat evaporates from our skin, the evaporation of water from the damp cloth removes heat from the air inside the stroller and lowers the temperature inside.

Using a spray bottle to regularly top-up the water in the cloth every 15-20 minutes will prevent it drying out and increase the amount of time this method will provide cool relief.

How else can I protect my baby from the heat?

Minimise the time spent outside with your infant during hot weather – get from A to B as quickly as possible.

Babies should never be left in a stationary stroller in the sun (even if covered with a damp cloth) as this reduces air movement through the stroller and increases the speed at which it heats up.

Any time infants or children are exposed to the heat, it’s important to keep them well hydrated. Drinking water or breastfeeds should be offered frequently. Infants will need more fluids during hot weather.

It’s also important to regularly check infants for signs of heat illness. The most common are:

• being overly warm to touch
• hot, red and dry skin
• irritability
• looking generally unwell and/or lethargic.

If your baby is showing signs of heat illness, find cool relief immediately and seek medical help.

Read more:
Evacuating with a baby? Here’s what to put in your emergency kit

James Smallcombe receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

Ollie Jay receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, NSW Health, NSW Dept of Planning, Industry and Environment, and the NSW Reconstruction Authority (formerly Resilience NSW).

Mohammad Fauzan Bin Maideen 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. Covering your baby’s pram with a dry cloth can increase the temperature by almost 4 degrees. Here’s what to do instead – https://theconversation.com/covering-your-babys-pram-with-a-dry-cloth-can-increase-the-temperature-by-almost-4-degrees-heres-what-to-do-instead-199099

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Iftekhar Ahmed, Associate Professor, University of Newcastle

Australia and New Zealand have both faced a series of devastating floods triggered by climate change and the return of the La Niña weather pattern. So it makes sense that Australia has now sent disaster crews to help with the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle.

With five serious floods in the space of 19 months in 2021-2022, Australia’s experiences – and how people responded – offer New Zealand a guide for recovering and rebuilding after an extreme weather event.

The flooding events in both countries share two key common elements. First, the floods broke previous records and were the largest in recent history. Second, there were also repeat flood events.

In Auckland, there were two massive floods within five days, while Cyclone Gabrielle became the Coromandel’s fifth severe weather event for 2023 and devastated other parts of the North Island.

The other common factor is urbanisation. Auckland’s population has been growing, resulting in the increasing development of the built environment. Intensifying urban development places pressure on existing drainage systems – parts of which are no longer fit for purpose.

Extensive built-up and paved areas with hard, impermeable surfaces can also cause rapid run-off during heavy rain, with the water unable to be absorbed into the ground as it would be in soft, vegetated areas.

Working with the community

Our recent research in the Hunter Valley in Australia – one of the areas affected by those five successive floods – identified similar factors contributing to the flooding events, including a rapidly growing regional population.

Two of our research sites – the Cessnock and Singleton local government areas – had growing urban centres that reflected a similar development trajectory to Auckland, albeit in a smaller scale.

Our research in the Hunter Valley established the importance of identifying existing community resilience and gaps. We also observed the need to involve the community at all levels. This included having early warning systems and evacuation protocols in place to improve community access to information and warnings.

The State Emergency Services (SES) is the main agency in New South Wales responsible for flood response and management. Supported by community volunteers, the SES has a clear focus at the local level.

Read more:
We spoke to the exhausted flood-response teams in the Hunter Valley. Here’s what they need when the next floods strike

This community focus is evident with its “door-knocking kit”, which is based on a community-level vulnerability assessment. The SES has a list of those in the community who are most at risk, such as the elderly and people with disabilities. When a flood risk becomes evident, SES volunteers go knocking on doors to check their preparedness and provide evacuation support.

The equivalent of SES in New Zealand, Auckland Emergency Management, could learn from this community-based approach and include it within its Community Group Support initiative, so that future disaster responses can be more closely tailored to the community.

In the recent floods in Auckland, communication was an issue. Relaying directives and information through multiple institutional layers led to confusion, which could have been avoided through a closer community-based approach.

Building a volunteer army

Another key factor in Australia is the large cadre of SES volunteers – around 9,000 in New South Wales, a state with a population of just over eight million. This is a significant form of social capital, without which the current approach to flood response and management would not be possible.

While there are initiatives in New Zealand to attract and engage volunteers, more needs to be done. Civil defence needs to conduct a structural review of the existing volunteer organisations that work in the disaster and emergency response field to identify ways to improve the recruitment and retention.

We also found evidence of volunteer “burn-out”, meaning there’s a need to support volunteers emotionally and financially during extended periods of disaster response and recovery.

Read more:
‘Top down’ disaster resilience doesn’t work. The National Recovery and Resilience Agency must have community at its heart

While there is a large number of SES volunteers in Australia, more are needed as climate change drives more frequent, extensive and intense disasters. Given the similar nature of repeat climate-related disaster events in New Zealand, provisions for a large cadre of well-supported and well-trained volunteers is necessary.

A review of existing volunteer agencies and community organisations should be undertaken to identify ways they can be harmonised to avoid competing pressures for resources. As well, there’s a need to nurture collaboration between agencies to help with sharing skills, training, data and resource management.

The need for resilience

Perhaps the key lesson for New Zealand, and also Australia, is the need to think beyond emergency management to building long-term resilience within agencies and communities.

As climate-related disasters become more common, we need to think about how our cities grow and how we can incorporate flood resilience by retaining green areas and vegetation, improved drainage and transportation links.

But both countries also need to focus on being ready for a disaster, instead of managing it after it happens. In doing so, the pressures of managing the disaster when it arrives would be less – and so would the long-term impacts on people and the economy.

Iftekhar Ahmed received funding from the University of Newcastle for a research project entitled “Improving local resilience to floods in the Hunter Region to address Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13′, from which this article is drawn.

– ref. What Australia learned from recent devastating floods – and how New Zealand can apply those lessons now – https://theconversation.com/what-australia-learned-from-recent-devastating-floods-and-how-new-zealand-can-apply-those-lessons-now-200078

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Edward Scheer, Professor of Performance and Visual Culture, Head of School of Art and Design, UNSW Sydney

Review: William Yang’s Sydneyphiles Reimagined, State Library of New South Wales.

We are all photographers now, since the advent of smartphones and the selfie. So it may seem strange to be writing a review of an exhibition of photographs when, in their digital form, they are both ubiquitous and at the same time largely redundant.

William Yang’s photographs in Sydneyphiles offer the complete opposite of the selfie. Instead of the throwaway image, he offers carefully framed and curated portraits.

In his famous slideshow performances, he narrates the events behind the pictures and names the subjects so they are not forgotten or discarded. In doing this, Yang also ensures he is still part of the picture, just as he is a part of the community of artists and gay radicals he has lived among and photographed. He brings the pictures back into the present moment.

Read more:
Tenderness, desire and politics: William Yang’s work is a portrait of a life well lived

Alternative Sydney up close

William Yang (pronounced Young but he says he doesn’t care anymore) is 80 this year. He has seen the alternative cultures of Sydney up close, in a way few people alive have.

He never goes far without his cameras, shooting social events over the past 50 years for the social pages of newspapers and fashion magazines.

Yang has an extensive visual record of Sydney cultural life, beginning with his first ever exhibition of photographs, Sydneyphiles. Sydneyphiles was shown at the then ACP gallery in Oxford Street, Paddington in 1977, documenting the mainstream Sydney social scene and the then illegal gay party scene in the years since his arrival in Sydney in 1969.

It is a priceless resource, as the State Library of NSW has recognised having purchased the collection. It has now been remounted in its entirety as a part of Sydney World Pride 2023. Pride’s theme, Mana Nangamai Djuralli, means “Gather, Dream, Amplify” in Gadigal language. It is an especially apt theme for this exhibition.

Portraits and private parties

More than 200 images, mostly portraits, are on display: celebrities such as Brett Whiteley, Kate Fitzpatrick, Jackie Weaver, Penelope Seidler, Robyn Nevin among many others alongside candid shots with titles such as “Men Fucking” and “Gary Injecting Junk”.

Others with captions such as “Untitled no 1 (men sleeping)” reveal two naked young men spooning in post-coital slumber in the basement of a house party. Another image “Doris Fish with man in bondage gear” shows the eponymous drag queen Doris performing fellatio on the man – viewers get much more than the label suggests.

Many are shots taken at private parties such as those held by Madame Lash in her warehouse. These pictures feature guests tied to a rack surrounded by crowds of party-goers. It is a part of Sydney’s recent cultural history that few people still alive have witnessed.

Many of Yang’s subjects were lost to the AIDS epidemic, powerfully captured in his photographs and performances in unforgettably moving works such as Sadness and Friends of Dorothy. That’s what makes this an important exhibition for Sydney in this year of World Pride.

Gay liberation

Yang’s work also features in The Party currently at UNSW Galleries, another significant exhibition of Sydney gay visual culture for Sydney World Pride.

This covers the years beginning with the inaugural Mardi Gras in 1978, a protest march for gay rights that became infamous for the brutality of the NSW police, to now.

The changes could not be more stark. Mardi Gras is now and has been for some time (for those living under a rock) a celebration and affirmation of LGBTQI culture and identity with the NSW Police participating.

Yang refers to these as the years of “gay liberation” and is justly proud of his role in recording this extraordinary transition of gay life from illegality to recognition and celebration.

Read more:
Friday essay: hidden in plain sight — Australian queer men and women before gay liberation

Open hearts and minds

It was a treat to see him present the photographs to a packed house at a one-off recital at the State Library on February 10.

He has performed his quiet storytelling alongside his pictures since 1989 and was recently awarded a Life Time Achievement Award by the Sydney Theatre Critics Circle. The power of these simple shows, as Helena Grehan and I wrote about them some years ago, is that they open onto “vast as well as minute landscapes of grief, love, loss and friendship”.

In presenting Sydneyphiles, the slideshow, he evinced a new level of quiet defiance and a newly stated sense of purpose for his work. He expressed “no regrets or apologies” for the radical lifestyle he so eloquently captures and an assertiveness of the value of his work in making the gay and lesbian community of that time visible.

He offers a valuable reminder of a time when these gatherings had to be held in secret. His work stands as a contestation and a refusal of this – and a softly spoken demand that our societies, hearts and minds remain open.

Sydneyphiles is at State Library of NSW until June 4.

Read more:
Friday essay: 10 photography exhibitions that defined Australia

Edward Scheer works for UNSW.

– ref. Illegal Sydney warehouse parties, lives lost to AIDS, and gay liberation: photographer William Yang captured it all – https://theconversation.com/illegal-sydney-warehouse-parties-lives-lost-to-aids-and-gay-liberation-photographer-william-yang-captured-it-all-199181

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Armin Alimardani, Lecturer, University of Wollongong

As the “chatbot wars” rage in Silicon Valley, the growing proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) tools specifically designed to generate human-like text has left many baffled.

Educators in particular are scrambling to adjust to the availability of software that can produce a moderately competent essay on any topic at a moment’s notice. Should we go back to pen-and-paper assessments? Increasing exam supervision? Ban the use of AI entirely?

All these and more have been proposed. However, none of these less-than-ideal measures would be needed if educators could reliably distinguish AI-generated and human-written text.

We dug into several proposed methods and tools for recognising AI-generated text. None of them are foolproof, all of them are vulnerable to workarounds, and it’s unlikely they will ever be as reliable as we’d like.

Perhaps you’re wondering why the world’s leading AI companies can’t reliably distinguish the products of their own machines from the work of humans. The reason is ridiculously simple: the corporate mission in today’s high-stakes AI arms is to train ‘natural language processor’ (NLP) AIs to produce outputs that are as similar to human writing as possible. Indeed, public demands for an easy means to spot such AIs in the wild might seem paradoxical, like we’re missing the whole point of the program.

A mediocre effort

OpenAI – the creator of ChatGPT – launched a “classifier for indicating AI-written text” in late January.

The classifier was trained on external AIs as well as the company’s own text-generating engines. In theory, this means it should be able to flag essays generated by BLOOM AI or similar, not just those created by ChatGPT.

We give this classifier a C– grade at best. OpenAI admits it accurately identifies only 26% of AI-generated text (true positive) while incorrectly labelling human prose as AI-generated 9% of the time (false positive).

OpenAI has not shared its research on the rate at which AI-generated text is incorrectly labelled as human-generated text (false negative).

A promising contender

A more promising contender is a classifier created by a Princeton University student during his Christmas break.

Edward Tian, a computer science major minoring in journalism, released the first version of GPTZero in January.

This app identifies AI authorship based on two factors: perplexity and burstiness. Perplexity measures how complex a text is, while burstiness compares the variation between sentences. The lower the values for these two factors, the more likely it is that a text was produced by an AI.

We pitted this modest David against the goliath of ChatGPT.

First, we prompted ChatGPT to generate a short essay about justice. Next, we copied the article – unchanged – into GPTZero. Tian’s tool correctly determined that the text was likely to have been written entirely by an AI because its average perplexity and burstiness scores were very low.

Fooling the classifiers

An easy way to mislead AI classifiers is simply to replace a few words with synonyms. Websites offering tools that paraphrase AI-generated text for this purpose are already cropping up all over the internet.

Many of these tools display their own set of AI giveaways, such as peppering human prose with “tortured phrases” (for example, using “counterfeit consciousness” instead of “AI”).

To test GPTZero further, we copied ChatGPT’s justice essay into GPT-Minus1 — a website offering to “scramble” ChatGPT text with synonyms. The image on the left depicts the original essay. The image on the right shows GPT-Minus1’s changes. It altered about 14% of the text.

We then copied the GPT-Minus1 version of the justice essay back into GPTZero. Its verdict?

Your text is most likely human written but there are some sentences with low perplexities.

It highlighted just one sentence it thought had a high chance of having been written by an AI (see image below on left) along with a report on the essay’s overall perplexity and burstiness scores which were much higher (see image below on the right).

Tools such as Tian’s show great promise, but they aren’t perfect and are also vulnerable to workarounds. For instance, a recently released YouTube tutorial explains how to prompt ChatGPT to produce text with high degrees of – you guessed it – perplexity and burstiness.

Watermarking

Another proposal is for AI-written text to contain a “watermark” that is invisible to human readers but can be picked up by software.

Natural language models work on a word-by-word basis. They select which word to generate based on statistical probability.

However, they do not always choose words with the highest probability of appearing together. Instead, from a list of probable words, they select one randomly (though words with higher probability scores are more likely to be selected).

This explains why users get a different output each time they generate text using the same prompt.

Put simply, watermarking involves “blacklisting” some of the probable words and permitting the AI to only select words from a “whitelist”. Given that a human-written text will likely include words from the “blacklist”, this could make it possible to differentiate it from an AI-generated text.

However, watermarking also has limitations. The quality of AI-generated text might be reduced if its vocabulary was constrained. Further, each text generator would likely have a different watermarking system – so text would next to checked against all of them.

Watermarking could also be circumvented by paraphrasing tools, which might insert blacklisted words or rephrase essay questions.

An ongoing arms race

AI-generated text detectors will become increasingly sophisticated. Anti-plagiarism service TurnItIn recently announced a forthcoming AI writing detector with a claimed 97% accuracy.

However, text generators too will grow more sophisticated. Google’s ChatGPT competitor, Bard, is in early public testing. OpenAI itself is expected to launch a major update, GPT-4, later this year.

It will never be possible to make AI text identifiers perfect, as even OpenAI acknowledges, and there will always be new ways to mislead them.

As this arms race continues, we may see the rise of “contract paraphrasing”: rather than paying someone to write your assignment, you pay someone to rework your AI-generated assignment to get it past the detectors.

There are no easy answers here for educators. Technical fixes may be part of the solution, but so will new ways of teaching and assessment (which may including harnessing the power of AI).

We don’t know exactly what this will look like. However, we have spent the past year building prototypes of open-source AI tools for education and research in an effort to help navigate a path between the old and the new – and you can access beta versions at Safe-To-Fail AI.

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

– ref. We pitted ChatGPT against tools for detecting AI-written text, and the results are troubling – https://theconversation.com/we-pitted-chatgpt-against-tools-for-detecting-ai-written-text-and-the-results-are-troubling-199774

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Maynard, Director/Chair of Aboriginal History – The Wollotuka Institute, University of Newcastle

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and/or images of deceased people.

The most startling point on the referendum for a Voice to parliament is the fact the majority of people in this country have no idea of history. And I mean both Black and white people.

Australian history, as written for nearly two thirds of the 20th century, glorified discoverers, explorers, settlers, and Gallipoli. We as Aboriginal people had been conveniently erased from the historical landscape and memory. Most Australians gave Aboriginal people little or no consideration.
The majority of Aboriginal people were trapped in a historical vacuum through the fact that great numbers of our people had been confined to heavily congested and controlled missions and reserves.

As part of this confinement, we were encouraged to forget our past. Everyday decisions were removed from people; they were told what to eat, what to wear, who you could marry, and their movement was severely restricted. There was a process of historical erasure and memory.

We were to be severed from any sense of past or inspiration. We could not participate in ceremonies, speak our language, tell our stories, practice songs and dances or conduct our everyday hunting and living experiences. Over time our people could only remember the controlled life on the reserve. It became the pattern of misery.

In his 1968 Boyer lecture, After the Dreaming, anthropologist W.E.H. Stanner exposed Australia’s failure to regard, record or acknowledge Aboriginal people in the country’s history. Australian history, he said, had been constructed with:

a view from a window which had been carefully placed to exclude a whole quadrant of the landscape.

What is critically important in history understanding is that the call for a Voice to parliament is not a new initiative. Aboriginal activists nearly 100 years ago first called for a voice to parliament as part of their political platform and demands during the 1920s.

À lire aussi :
The 1881 Maloga petition: a call for self-determination and a key moment on the path to the Voice

The Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association

The first Aboriginal political organisation, the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association (AAPA), was formed in Sydney in 1924 and led by my grandfather Fred Maynard.

It advocated several key demands in protecting the rights of Aboriginal people, centring on:

• a national land rights agenda

• protecting Aboriginal children from being taken from their families

• a call for genuine Aboriginal self-determination

• citizenship in our own country

• defending a distinct Aboriginal cultural identity

• and the insistence Aboriginal people be placed in charge of Aboriginal affairs.

The call for Aboriginal rights to land was explicit. Leader Fred Maynard declared:

The request made by this association for sufficient land for each eligible family is justly based. The Australian people are the original owners of the land and have a prior right over all other people in this respect.

The association’s conference in Sydney was front page news in the Sydney Daily Guardian.

Over 200 Aboriginal people attended this conference held at St David’s Church and Hall in Riley Street, Surry Hills.

In the space of six short months the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association had expanded to 13 branches, four sub-branches and a membership in excess of 600.

Its established offices in Crown Street, Sydney and a state-wide network of information regarding Aboriginal people.

Calls for direct representation in parliament

Late in October 1925, the association held a second conference in Kempsey, New South Wales. It ran over three days with over 700 Aboriginal people in attendance.

It was noted in press coverage of the conference that

pleas were entered for direct representation in parliament.

Two years later in 1927, the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association produced a manifesto. It was delivered to all sections of government – both state and federal – and published widely across NSW, South Australia, Victoria, and Queensland.

One of the significant points was for an Aboriginal board to be established under the Commonwealth government, and for state control over Aboriginal lives be abolished. It envisioned:

The control of Aboriginal affairs, apart from common law rights shall be vested in a board of management comprised of capable educated Aboriginals under a chairman to be appointed by the government.

This board would not be comprised of government-selected or handpicked individuals but would be Aboriginal elected officers.

This push for an Aboriginal board or place in parliament continued in 1929, when Fred Maynard spoke to the Chatswood Willoughby Labour League in NSW on Aboriginal issues. A report in the The Labor Daily newspaper in February that year mentioned his call for:

Aboriginal representative in the federal parliament, or failing it, to have an [A]boriginal ambassador appointed to live in Canberra to watch over his people’s interests and advise the federal authorities.

Surveillance, threats, intimidation, abuse

The Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association disappeared from public view in late 1929.

There is strong evidence the organisation was effectively broken up through the combined efforts of the NSW Aborigines Protection Board, missionaries, and the police.

The state government and the Protection Board had been embarrassed by the exposure of their unjust policies in the media and wanted the organisation broken up.

Fred Maynard, in a newspaper interview in late 1927 in The Newcastle Sun revealed the level of surveillance, threat, intimidation, and abuse he and the other Aboriginal activists were subjected to. The report noted:

He said that he had been warned on many occasions that the doors of Long Bay were opening for him. He would cheerfully go to jail for the remainder of his life, he declared if, by so doing he could make the people of Australia realise the truly frightful administration of the Aborigines Act. He knew cases where children had been torn from their mothers and sent into absolute slavery.

When one ponders upon the legacy of the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association the sad reality is that if the demands of these early activists had been met nearly a century ago, we would not be suffering the severe disadvantage that hovers over Aboriginal lives still today.

Imagine if enough land for each and every Aboriginal family to build their own economic independence had been granted.

Or that we would not have suffered another five decades of Aboriginal child removal and the shocking impact of that policy on generations of Aboriginal lives.

If the demand to protect a distinct Aboriginal cultural identity had been taken up, we would not today be working to piece together the shattered cultural pieces of language, stories, songs, and dances.

And finally, if Aboriginal people had been placed in a position to oversee Aboriginal policy and needs, the history of our people would have been vastly different.

The reality today is we continue to fight for the demands that the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association established nearly 100 years ago.

À lire aussi :
Capturing the lived history of the Aborigines Protection Board while we still can

John Maynard received funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) grants program examining Aboriginal political protest back in 2003-2010.

– ref. Long before the Voice vote, the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association called for parliamentary representation – https://theconversation.com/long-before-the-voice-vote-the-australian-aboriginal-progressive-association-called-for-parliamentary-representation-198064

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angel Dixon, Researcher, Griffith University

The prevailing public perception is that everything people with disability do is a challenge. Sometimes, that is true. In those times, we may ask or say “yes” to a kind and respectful offer of assistance. Other times, and more often than not, we are simply navigating daily life when a person without disability interjects to offer assistance.

It is rare anyone means to be discriminatory in their approach to supporting people with disability, but society’s attitude still has a way to go.

Disability rights activism used to take place in the streets or by occupying government property or buildings (sometimes it still does). But the age of social media has created an opportunity for people with disability to explore and exercise advocacy in new ways too. Air travel experiences of being treated – and handled – like “baggage”, as writer and advocate Zoe Simmons recently detailed on Twitter, expose the attitudinal barriers people with disability encounter when others “help”.

There could be lots of reasons why people with disability decline or don’t want offers of help. Recent research at the Dignity Project, at Griffith University, echoes Simmons’ experience and also shows there is no “one-size fits all” approach to recommend.

But not offering assistance to fellow human beings is not the answer either. So, what is the right way to ask a person with disability if they would like help?

Disability is about the environment, not a diagnosis

More than 1.3 billion people globally live with disability. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities states disability does not result from a diagnosis or impairment, but when a person encounters inaccessible, inflexible, or insufficient environments, systems and attitudes.

In an ideal world, everyone would appreciate that disability is a mismatch between person and environment and would be motivated by a human rights perspective.

In reality, Australian society is still lagging in its understanding of and attitude towards disability. Most people are confused or unsure about how to treat people with disability, which leads to exclusion and increases the barriers people with disability encounter.

Barriers for people with disability can be as obvious as a building with no elevator or as subtle as a pat on the back from a passerby.

À lire aussi :
Unregistered NDIS providers are in the firing line – but lots of participants have good reasons for using them

Barriers take their toll

Participants in the Dignity Project, a citizen science research and advocacy program at Griffith University, shared the impact and cumulative effect frequent and repeated encounters with barriers can have on a person’s mental health and behaviour.

These undignified interactions result in people feeling like “less of a person, less worthy, less valid, less visible, annoyed, frustrated, sad, angry” with “no rights, no voice, and reduced control”.

As a result, people may avoid social situations and isolate themselves. Over time, people with disability are silenced or diminished in their role as decision makers in their own lives.

It can be useful to think about four aspects of offering help.

1. Acknowledge people and their rights

Misinformation and limited or reductive tropes perpetuated in the media contribute to the challenge of confronting and changing attitudes.

Participants in the Dignity Project called for acknowledgement and recognition that people with disability are human beings with the same full dimensions of personhood and human rights as people without disability. They described very few instances of needing help but when they did, said dignified experiences are defined by acknowledgement. In the words of one person:

First off, ask me ‘do you need help?’ and acknowledge that I might not need it. I will ask for help if I need it […] Ask how best to help and provide the help I ask for, rather than doing what [you think] I needed.

2. Pay attention to the response and consider what might be behind it

People with disability have rights including the right to freedom of expression and opinion and respect for privacy.

So, listen to a person’s response when asked about needing assistance. If you receive a negative response, have empathy for what you may not necessarily understand. If a response is short or angry, accept it and don’t grow resentful. That response may come from a history of discrimination and misrecognition.

The way to ask a person with disability if they would like help depends on contextual, subjective and relational factors. Providing help or support requires consideration of the diversity of experience, the situation, your relationship with the person and the consequences of helping or not helping.

Although helping may seem like an appropriate and polite thing to do, it may not even be appropriate to ask, particularly if doing so becomes a public act that draws attention to the person.

3. Know what not to do

There are some clear messages about what not to do, reiterated in our research and in Zoe Simmons’ tweets.

Never physically touch someone, their assistive technology, aid or a support animal without asking.

It is inappropriate to ask people about their diagnosis or impairment if not related to the topic at hand and make sure you use language that is dignified.

Even if you mean well, avoid comments that frame disability or a person’s existence in a negative light, such as “you’re managing so well despite everything” or “you’re so brave”.

4. Think bigger

Social change takes time. Auditing your own personal biases while respectfully interacting with a person with disability and simultaneously managing the mix of emotions that can be triggered by disability is a complex social skill.

Building an inclusive society will ensure people with and without disability can interact comfortably in the world together.

A positive and affirming form of “help” might be ensuring environments and attitudes over which you have influence are always accessible and inclusive.

À lire aussi :
Will AI tech like ChatGPT improve inclusion for people with communication disability?

Angel Dixon is affiliated with Attitude Foundation.

Elizabeth Kendall et Kelsey Chapman ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur poste universitaire.

– ref. Disability and dignity – 4 things to think about if you want to ‘help’ – https://theconversation.com/disability-and-dignity-4-things-to-think-about-if-you-want-to-help-198993

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Lo, Senior Lecturer in Climate Change, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Two extreme and deadly weather events within the first two months of 2023 have brought the consequences of climate change into sharp focus. Auckland’s January 27 flood is the most expensive weather event in New Zealand insurance history. Cyclone Gabrielle prompted a national state of emergency, only the third time one has been declared.

Auckland and the upper North Island also face an increasing risk of extreme heatwaves. These floods, storms and heatwaves are becoming more frequent and intense in a changing climate. Our cities, including Auckland, are poorly prepared for what is coming.

Perhaps not surprisingly, there is now a lot more talk about the need for “sponge cities”, with Auckland being a prime candidate. The basic principle is to manage urban flood risks by utilising more natural drainage and flood-resilient systems and material.

The concept is well understood and undoubtedly an appropriate response to current and future conditions – but it is not cheap. Overseas experience, especially in China, suggests building and adapting a city like Auckland to be more “spongey” would require serious financial commitment.

Mimicking nature

The sponge city requires a holistic approach that differs considerably from the way we currently build infrastructure. It involves integrating flood-resilient elements such as bio-swales, pervious pavements, underground water-storage tanks, rain gardens, wetlands and green roofs.

These features can mimic natural hydrological responses and absorb urban stormwater. Increased vegetation and water bodies can also lower ambient temperatures and help people cope with extreme heat.

À lire aussi :
The Auckland floods are a sign of things to come – the city needs stormwater systems fit for climate change

This type of development is already underway in various places: Australia’s water-sensitive urban design schemes, for example, and the sustainable urban drainage systems and Blue-Green Cities approach in Britain.

Auckland Council has also implemented similar principles, with a good example being the Long Bay residential development, where land use and catchment management planning have been developed simultaneously. Streets are designed to form an integrated “treatment train” for stormwater, involving swales, rain gardens and a wetland at the bottom of the catchment.

In fact, Auckland was recently ranked the “spongiest” of nine global cities, mainly due to its lower urban density and lots of green areas. But this sponginess is clearly still not adequate, as demonstrated by the January floods.

Lessons from China

If the sponge city is our goal, we need to see what has been achieved in China, which has been running a large-scale programme for nearly ten years under a nationally coordinated policy. A total of 30 cities participated and provided financial and technical support.

The targets were to increase the area of urban land able to absorb surface water discharges by approximately 20%; to retain or reuse approximately 70% of urban stormwater by 2020; and to reuse up to 80% of stormwater by the 2030s. As well as mitigating flood risk, the programme is about the collection, purification and reuse of urban stormwater to address future climatic extremes (floods and droughts).

À lire aussi :
Massive outages caused by Cyclone Gabrielle strengthen the case for burying power lines

The concept requires more than eco-friendly measures for urban water management. A holistic urban development strategy is crucial. Planting more trees, using less impervious surface, and building more green roofs are key elements.

But China’s ultimate goal is to modernise the urban system by creating and reorganising resilient blue-green spaces (rivers, wetlands and trees), with a target of up to 80% coverage in major districts across the selected cities by the 2030s. The estimated construction area in the first 16 pilot sponge cities is more than 450 square kilometres.

Costs and returns

This all requires substantial public investment. The average cost lies between US$14 million and $21  million (about NZ$23 to $35 million) per square kilometre over the first three years of construction and operation. This may be higher in New Zealand due to price differences and inflation.

The Chinese government allocated 400 to 600 million yuan (around NZ$92–$140 million) to each pilot city for the first three years. This was just startup investment – many pilot cities struggled to finance the implementation of their original plans.

An alternative to taxpayer funding might be to encourage public-private partnerships. But private investors in China have shown little interest in financing sponge city initiatives, which are often located in high-risk areas like floodplains. It’s hard to estimate investment returns or guarantee performance in the long time-frame of climate change.

The fact that 19 of the 30 pilot cities have experienced flooding since 2014 is not an encouraging signal, either. In Zhengzhou, one of the pilot cities, nearly 300 people were killed in a catastrophic flooding event in 2021.

There are financial instruments for reducing risk, such as green bonds, green loans and insurance. But a high return is required to cover the risks and costs. Apartments and buildings with green elements are more likely to generate those returns than public parks and underground water-storage systems.

À lire aussi :
Flood warning: NZ’s critical infrastructure is too important to fail – greater resilience is urgently needed

Local solutions

There are other challenges, too. Creating greener, more desirable neighbourhoods can also displace people who can’t afford the price of gentrification.

Auckland has a smaller population and lower urban density than most of the Chinese sponge cities. This means the new infrastructure and developments required would be more spread out across the city.

And Auckland is not like Hong Kong, for example, where a huge underground stormwater storage tank (with a 60,000 cubic metre capacity) has been built. The potential for developing such large and concentrated drainage infrastructure is comparatively limited in a city like Auckland.

New Zealand’s sponge city initiatives would be of smaller scale and more diffuse – as will be the potential benefits. We will need locally adapted solutions and systems – but the lessons and examples from elsewhere can be central to that process.

Alex Lo has previously received funding from the Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and Australia’s National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility.

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

– ref. NZ cities urgently need to become ‘spongier’ – but system change will be expensive – https://theconversation.com/nz-cities-urgently-need-to-become-spongier-but-system-change-will-be-expensive-200061

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ange Fitzgerald, Professor, Associate Dean (Education) and Director (Initial Teacher Education), RMIT University

There is a new push for private schools to open their grounds and facilities to the broader community. North Sydney mayor Zoe Baker, wants to ask top private schools in her area to share their green spaces and other facilities.

For so much of the year, schools sit unused and most campuses close at 4pm. We should search for opportunities where space can be shared where it is suitable.

Along with opening up space for the public, she also suggests public school students could use the playing fields, halls and performing arts centres after-hours.

Amid headlines about private schools building plunge pools and A$125 million sports centres and a widening gap in results between students between high and low socioeconomic backgrounds, could this be a way to make the education system fairer and improve outcomes for all students?

À lire aussi :
Australian private high school enrolments have jumped 70% since 2012

The idea isn’t new

The idea to open up grounds and facilities is not new.

In 2018, former New South Wales education minister Rob Stokes said both public and private schools should be opened up to the community as they were “public spaces”.

We pay for them, I feel the same way about private schools as well, a lot of money goes into them and a way they can get a social licence to operate in the local community is to let the community utilise them.

The NSW government also introduced a Share Our Space program where schools received a grant to upgrade their facilities for both community and school use during the school holidays.

In Victoria, schools have been encouraged to consider partnerships with other school sectors to improve education and opportunities for students since 2016.

However, partnerships are only formed in an ad hoc way, relying on schools to develop their own relationships. Current sharing arrangements between public and private schools mainly focus on infrastructure. This includes access to sporting grounds, theatre spaces, and specialist learning environments, such as STEM centres.

Could sharing be expanded?

So far, this debate has underestimated what government schools could bring to the equation. The traffic tends to be one way from private to public.

Public schools could also share their teaching expertise, professional learning opportunities and curriculum resources with nearby private schools. As a result, more subject areas and elective options could be offered.

This could equally include partnering with other public schools to expand opportunities for their students. It is interesting to consider how this approach may have better supported schools and teachers throughout pandemic lockdowns.

The Victorian government has begun some work in this area. It has a toolkit which highlights the possibilities of sharing teaching and curriculum ideas. But again, this continues to be ad hoc and more formalised mechanisms are needed to build partnerships.

Is this a good idea?

Firstly, care must be taken to not overestimate the value of private schooling on learning. While access to state-of-the-art facilities is understandably attractive, research suggests there is little evidence a private school education ultimately a difference to students academically, once socio-economic status is taken into account.

A possible sticking point in any sharing arrangements is that existing partnership models have traditionally involved payment. Arguably if one school is simply paying another a fee to use their resources or facilities it may not really be classified as “sharing”.

À lire aussi :
Australia has a new online-only private school: what are the options if the mainstream system doesn’t suit your child?

If sharing occurred between schools, rather than just public students using private schools’ facilities, it may be possible to rethink this approach. Thinking needs to move from a focus on physical resources and facilities to include the sharing of curriculum and teaching expertise in both directions.

While there may be some resistance from school communities where parents are paying large school fees, the benefit for private schools is building local goodwill which may prove useful in seeking to expand their brand in the community.

Of course, we are still left with the issue of why some private schools have the facilities they have in comparison with other schools and the funding system that allows this to happen.

This debate is a vexed one. But there is an opportunity here if school communities are prepared to work together to share their strengths and resources.

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

– ref. Should private schools share their facilities with public students? – https://theconversation.com/should-private-schools-share-their-facilities-with-public-students-199965

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By April Reside, Lecturer, The University of Queensland

Iran’s ancient forests, rugged mountains, vast deserts and captivating coasts are rich in biodiversity, including animals found nowhere else on Earth. But many of these precious areas are not formally protected from development, potentially endangering the species that live there.

Fortunately, the Iranian government has committed to expanding the network of protected areas to cover 20% of the land. That is a substantial increase from the existing approximately 11% in conservation reserves.

Our new research pinpoints those areas where threatened species are most in need of conservation.

We hope this will help guide decision-making to maximise the number of species protected for generations to come.

Honing in on hotspots for conservation

Visitors to Iran can experience all four seasons at any time of year, from summer in the southern and northern parts of the country by the sea (the Caspian Sea in the north and the Persian Gulf in south), to winter in the snowy mountains of the west.

The variable climate and topography has given rise to a wide variety of plants and animals, such that every corner of the country has outstanding global value.

However, land-use change has contributed to biodiversity decline throughout the broader region, driving the fragmentation and loss of habitat. While 80% of the land in Iran is covered by natural ecosystems, many of these remain unprotected.

These include two of the world’s biologically richest, but highly threatened, areas: more than half of the Irano-Anatolian and around 10% of the Caucasus biodiversity hotspots.

To identify the areas most in need of protection we:

• used maps of internationally listed threatened species found in Iran, placing highest importance on those that breed in Iran, or only occur there

• identified which species already had some level of protection, within Iran’s existing national parks and other protected areas, which currently cover 11% of the land

• accounted for human population density, to avoid urban areas when establishing new protected areas.

From there, we determined which areas are the most important to protect those species not already represented in existing protected areas.

A wealth of wildlife worth protecting

Regions in the north, northwest and west of the country consistently ranked highest on the need for urgent conservation action. These areas complement the existing protected areas by protecting species that are currently falling through the gaps.

The high-priority areas were globally important ecoregions, including the ancient Caspian Hyrcanian forests in the north, which remain from the Quaternary glaciations that began 2.58 million years ago.

The mixture of mountain and lowland forests next to the Caspian Sea covers 7% of Iran, yet is home to 44% of Iran’s plants, 180 species of birds, and 58 mammal species. Iconic species found here include Persian leopards (Panthera pardus), Asiatic cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus), and the endemic critically endangered Gorgan mountain salamanders (Paradactylodon gorganensis).

Coastal areas north of the Caspian Sea provide habitat for migratory birds wintering in wetlands and aquatic ecosystems, including the endangered white-headed duck (Oxyura leucocephala), critically endangered Siberian crane, and critically endangered fish species such as Persian sturgeon (Acipenser persicus) and great sturgeon (Huso huso). Elburz Range Forest Steppes provide habitat for the endemic endangered Latifi viper (Montrivipera latifi).

The northwest came out as a high priority for its wetland species found nowhere else, including vulnerable bird species such as marbled teal (Marmaronetta angustirostris), lesser white-fronted goose (Anser erythropus), and dalmatian pelican (Pelecanus crispus).

In contrast, the South Iran Nubo-Sindian desert and semi-desert regions were important for the many threatened species that occur there, such as the critically endangered black bears (Ursus thibetanus) and vulnerable mugger crocodiles (Crocodylus palustris).

The Persian desert basins in the centre of Iran provide habitat for iconic species such as the critically endangered Asiatic wild ass (Equus hemionus) and the Asiatic cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) in their central home range.

The endangered saker falcon, one of the largest of its kind, is threatened by illegal and tourism hunting, and needs protection across Iran.

Different levels of protection

We also assessed how different levels of protection could benefit our target threatened species in an expanded protected area network.

If 20% of the country is protected, more than 70% of the distribution of fish, amphibians, reptiles and endemic birds would be protected, and up to 45% of all birds and mammals. This demonstrates that it is particularly important to protect birds and mammals in those parts of their distribution that fall within high ranked areas.

Expanding the protected area in Iran from the current 11% to 20% would make a big difference to the variety of wildlife included.

Deciding exactly which areas to protect will make a big difference when it comes to how many species are conserved, or left behind. Furthermore, species’ conservation outside national parks and other protected areas is also crucial.

Iran has already lost two of its iconic big cat species: the Caspian tiger in the north and Persian lion in the south, to development and hunting.

Without recognising the areas of greatest importance for conservation, we stand to lose representative ecosystems of global ecoregions and their unique fauna, forever if we fail to protect these areas.

The author would like to acknowledge the contributions of Azadeh Karimi of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (Iran), and Hossein Yazdandad of Tarbiat Modares University (Iran), who led the research and without whom this article would not have been possible.

Read more:
National parks are not enough – we need landholders to protect threatened species on their property

April Reside is the Chair of the Black-throated Finch Recovery Team and is on Birdlife Australia’s Research and Conservation Committee. April has received funding from the NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, and is a member of the Ecological Society of Australia.

– ref. Mapping Iran’s biodiversity hotspots to create new protected areas covering 20% of the landscape – https://theconversation.com/mapping-irans-biodiversity-hotspots-to-create-new-protected-areas-covering-20-of-the-landscape-198988