Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Toole, Professor of International Health, Burnet Institute

Today Victoria satisfied a common definition of elimination for COVID-19, recording its 28th consecutive day of zero new cases. While there is no international definition of elimination, two average incubation periods without community transmission is widely accepted as local elimination, especially in a geographically isolated country like Australia.

It’s a remarkable achievement following a severe second wave which peaked at daily new case rates of around 700 in early August. But elimination is not eradication, and we can expect the virus to return at some point, as has happened in several countries that previously boasted minimal or no community transmission.

So how did Victoria get here, and what can it do to keep numbers as low as possible?

Elimination is not eradication

There’s no universal definition of elimination. As applied to other infectious diseases such as polio and measles, it means a prolonged period of zero local transmission in a country or region. For measles, the World Health Organisation (WHO) is very exacting and demands no community transmission for 36 months.

With more than 500,000 new daily COVID cases being reported globally, preventing new local transmission in Victoria will depend on the state building a virus-proof defence.

Several countries have shown the virus can return after a long period of minimal local transmission. The most pertinent example is New Zealand, which experienced 102 consecutive days of zero community transmission before a cluster cropped up in Auckland on August 11. Israel, South Korea, Vietnam and Hong Kong have also experienced reemergence of the virus following significant periods of minimal community transmission. And this month, we witnessed a cluster in suburban Adelaide that originated in a quarantine hotel, after South Australia had experienced many months of no community transmission.

Read more: Of all the places that have seen off a second coronavirus wave, only Vietnam and Hong Kong have done as well as Victorians

Indeed elimination doesn’t mean the virus is completely gone. For example, Australia eliminated local transmission of polio in 1972. But it wasn’t until 30 years later, in 2002, that the WHO declared Australia polio-free.

Almost 20 years after that declaration, we still can’t say we’ve eradicated polio because eradication refers to the global removal of a human pathogen; only smallpox has achieved that status. One strain of the polio virus continues to circulate in Afghanistan and Pakistan. In 2007, a 22-year-old student from Pakistan was diagnosed with polio at Box Hill Hospital in Melbourne’s East.

So, how did we get to zero?

Since the grim height of Victoria’s second wave in July and August, several coordinated interventions have eventually borne fruit. One of the most important was the strengthening of the test-trace-isolate-support system. While details are emerging during the parliamentary inquiry into Victoria’s hotel quarantine system, some of the features of this strengthening are known:

• decentralisation through regional hubs and metropolitan public health units

• increased engagement and involvement of communities, through programs aimed at public housing estates and local initiatives led by GPs and community health centres

• adoption of “upstream” contact tracing, identifying contacts of index cases before they developed symptoms as well as after developing symptoms. In both groups, contacts of contacts were identified. This led to the rapid control of clusters such as those in Kilmore and Shepparton.

Other important initiatives included the joint federal-state Victorian Aged Care Response Centre, which eventually managed the explosive outbreaks in residential aged care facilities, and more effective infection prevention and control in health-care settings.

And there were the containment measures that kept people from intermingling. Stage 3 restrictions were reimposed on July 8, limiting the reasons people could leave home. A study published in early August found these restrictions averted between 9,000 and 37,000 cases. From July 23, masks were mandatory at all times outside the home. On August 2, stage 4 restrictions and a night curfew effectively shut down Melbourne. From then on, the number of new cases steadily declined.

Perhaps the greatest achievement of Victoria’s response was to maintain a strong health focus amid a chorus of criticism, much of it from Canberra or the Sydney-based media, pushing the “economy first” mantra. In fact, data show countries that managed to protect the health of their citizens have generally protected their economy more effectively.

Read more: Data from 45 countries show containing COVID vs saving the economy is a false dichotomy

How can we stay where we are?

The first requirement is an effective quarantine system for returned travellers. With cases surging globally, the proportion of travellers who are infected will increase significantly from the 0.7% reported between March and August. This will require arrangements that employ well-trained and adequately paid workers who are regularly monitored by infection control and occupational health and safety experts. The advance contact tracing, which will identify the close contacts of staff before they might test positive for the virus, announced by Premier Daniel Andrews would be a useful adjunct as long as confidentiality is assured.

Crucially, experienced teams of contact tracers must be on standby. They need to maintain the rigorous standards developed over the past few months and engage in simulation exercises that test their capacities. They must retain a focus on community trust and avoid the vilification of individuals that marred the South Australian response.

What’s more, the state must sustain proven containment measures such as physical distancing, hand hygiene, masks indoors, and getting tested if you have symptoms.

Australia is an almost COVID-free oasis, surrounded by a tsunami of virus. Maintaining this status for the next six months or so, while at the same time opening up, will be a huge challenge. Recent responses in Victoria, NSW and SA suggest we are up to it.

And as the story of the sharp-eyed doctor in Adelaide showed us — when she tested a patient in the emergency room who’d initially felt “weak” but had very few COVID symptoms, alerting authorities to the previously silent spread of the virus — to maintain elimination we’re also going to need a little luck.

Read more: South Australia’s 6-day lockdown shows we need to take hotel quarantine more seriously

– ref. Victoria may have eliminated COVID-19, but eradication is a distant dream – https://theconversation.com/victoria-may-have-eliminated-covid-19-but-eradication-is-a-distant-dream-150736

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Poropat, Postdoctoral Researcher (Palaeontology), Swinburne University of Technology

Will there ever be dinosaurs again? — Anonymous

What an interesting question! Well, technically dinosaurs are still here in the form of birds. Just like you’re a direct descendant of your grandparents, birds are the only remaining direct descendants of dinosaurs.

But I suppose what you’re really asking is whether dinosaurs like Tyrannosaurus or Triceratops could ever exist again. Although that would be fascinating, the answer is almost definitely no.

While there’s only one generation between you and your grandparents – that is, your parents – there are many millions of generations between today’s birds and their ancient dinosaurs ancestors.

This is why today’s birds look, sound and behave so differently to the prehistoric beasts that once roamed Earth.

Animals evolve to change, but can’t choose how

To understand this, we have to understand “evolution”. This is a process that explains how every living thing (including humans) evolved from past living things over millions, or even billions, of years.

Different animals evolve their own differences to help them survive in the world. For example, 66 million years ago, birds survived the catastrophic event that killed all other dinosaurs and marked the end of the Mesozoic era.

After this, a blanket of ash wrapped around the world, cooling it and blocking out the sunlight plants need to survive. Plant-eating animals would have struggled to stay alive.

But birds did, perhaps because they were small even then. They likely ate seeds and insects and took shelter in small spaces. And being able to fly would have helped them explore far and wide for food and shelter.

That said, if the conditions that came after the dinosaur extinction event returned today, no modern animal would evolve back into a dinosaur. This is because animals today have a very different evolutionary past to dinosaurs.

They evolved to have features that help them survive in today’s world, rather than a prehistoric one. And these features limit the ways they can evolve in the future.

Which came first, the chicken or the dinosaur?

For an animal to be an actual “dinosaur”, it must belong to a group of animals known by scientists as Dinosauria. These all descended from a common ancestor shared by Triceratops and modern birds.

Other than birds, Dinosauria doesn’t include any living creature. So for a dinosaur to re-evolve in the future, it would have to come from a bird.

Dinosauria’s extinct members included sauropods, stegosaurs, ankylosaurs, ornithopods, ceratopsians and non-bird theropods. Modern birds evolved from a small group of theropods. However, since so much time has passed, this link is limited.

Specifically, birds have a very different collection of “genes”. These are the same built-in “rules” your parents passed down to you that decide, for example, what colour your eyes will be.

The more generations that pass between an ancestor and their descendant, the more different their genes will be.

Even if it could happen, what would this take?

Think of how much a bird would need to change to look like Tyrannosaurus rex or Triceratops. A lot.

Dinosaurs had long tails with bones all along them. Birds’ tails are stumpy and have been for more than 100 million years. It’s unlikely this would ever be reversed.

Also, modern birds walk on their back legs only and (in most cases) have four toes and three “fingers” in their wings.

Compare that with Triceratops, which walked on all four limbs, had five fingers on its front feet (the inner three of which were weight-bearing) and four toes on its back feet.

It may not be impossible for birds to gain two more fingers to have five like Triceratops; some people with a condition called “polydactyly” have more than five fingers, but this is very rare.

There aren’t really any situations where an extra finger (or one less) would be necessary for a bird’s survival. Thus, there’s little to no chance birds will evolve to change in this way.

Even if birds did eventually start to walk on all four limbs (legs and wings), they wouldn’t move the same way a Triceratops did because the purpose of a bird’s wings is very different to that of a Triceratops’s legs.

Dinosaurs are history

We know from fossil discoveries that Triceratops and Tyrannosaurus had scaly skin covering most of their bodies. Most modern birds have scaly feet, but none are scaly all over.

It’s hard to imagine what would force any bird to naturally replace its feathers with scales. Birds need feathers to fly, to save energy (by staying warm) and to put on special displays to attract mates.

Triceratops did have a “beak” at the front of its mouth, but this evolved completely separately to the beaks of birds and had two extra bones — something no living animal has.

What’s more, behind its beak and jaws, Triceratops had rows of teeth. While some birds such as geese have spiky beaks. No bird in the past 66 million years has ever had teeth.

Considering these huge differences, it’s really unlikely birds will ever evolve to look more like their extinct dinosaur relatives. And no extinct dinosaur will ever come back to life either — except maybe in movies!

– ref. Curious Kids: could dinosaurs evolve back into existence? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-could-dinosaurs-evolve-back-into-existence-148623

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Esme Franken, Lecturer in Management, Edith Cowan University

New South Wales premier Gladys Berejiklian, who last week carried on working for up to two hours while awaiting the results of a rapid COVID test, wasn’t the first Australian to “soldier on” in the face of health concerns and a big day at work.

And she almost certainly won’t be the last, despite the COVID pandemic making it clearer than ever before it’s important to take time off if you’re sick or self-isolating.

Soldiering on — also known as “sickness presenteeism” — is alive and well even in 2020. Many people, from state premiers to minimum-wage workers, feel they have no choice but to show up and carry on. Those with precarious employment may feel as if their entire job hinges on it.

If a pandemic won’t get workers to call in sick, then what will? What we need is for managers and leaders (state premiers included) to model responsible behaviour, and foster a healthy workplace culture in which soldiering on isn’t celebrated as heroic.

A 2016 report by Pathology Awareness Australia estimated the economic costs of workers turning up sick or putting in unnecessary extra hours at more than A$34 billion a year, due to productivity loss and the spread of infection to coworkers.

Since the advent of COVID, it has become a significant public health issue too. Cases have been traced to workers spreading the virus at work, including abattoirs and health-care facilities.

Presenteeism is found throughout the employment spectrum, but is more prevalent among “essential” workers, such as those in health care, who typically report feeling “socially obligated” to attend work.

Read more: Presenteeism: A new word for working when sick

A 2019 survey of 6,387 women in the public sector found 90% had gone to work while sick in the preceding 12 months. The main reasons included workload pressures (52%), and the perception they weren’t sick enough to stay home (54%).

But why is sickness presenteeism still a thing in 2020? The sad fact is that even amid a pandemic, workers in essential services such as aged care and teaching report feeling pressured by their managers to turn up to work.

Another reason is the broader socioeconomic issue of job insecurity. Workers on temporary or casual contracts may not have sick pay entitlements at all, or feel their job is at risk if they are absent. Coupled with the workload pressures typical of precarious work, these people face an almost impossible dilemma when sick or self-isolating.

How workplaces can help

The onus is on businesses and organisations to ensure a safe working environment. This means establishing clear expectations and protocols regarding staying home when unwell, and should also include the opportunity for remote working when workers feel well enough to work but may still be infectious. Workplaces should also provide appropriate personal protective equipment, hand hygiene, and social distancing measures.

Organisations should offer medical and well-being support and care to employees at risk of suffering most under sickness presenteeism, such as essential workers and those in precarious employment.

More broadly, managers and organisations should understand that tacitly encouraging people to come to work while unwell impairs organisational performance. Leaders should not preside over a culture in which overwork and “always being on duty” are lionised. Instead, they should communicate that it’s OK not to come to work if you’re not well, and that it’s important to take a sick day if you’re sick.

A crucial element of this is to prepare contingency plans for absences, so employees know that work can still be done without them and their absence won’t be disastrous.

Read more: ‘Far too many’ Victorians are going to work while sick. Far too many have no choice

It should go without saying that you shouldn’t have to go to work when you’re sick (or self-isolating, which is the 2020 twist on a sick day). Many of us — especially those on the COVID frontline — may identify very strongly with our job, and view going to work as crucially important. But amid a pandemic, following health guidelines is paramount.

Unfortunately, the pressure to turn up to work regardless of illness comes from a range of sources: unsympathetic bosses, unfair employment conditions, or a personal reluctance to change your schedule. But as the backlash against Gladys Berejiklian proved, it’s rarely a wise move to soldier on.

– ref. Taking proper sick leave has never been more crucial. So why are people still ‘soldiering on’ at work? – https://theconversation.com/taking-proper-sick-leave-has-never-been-more-crucial-so-why-are-people-still-soldiering-on-at-work-150931

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tootoooleaava Dr. Fanaafi Aiono-Le Tagaloa, Law Lecturer and Convenor of Pacific Engagement, University of Waikato

Within minutes of news that crew members of the cargo ship Fesco Askold had tested positive for COVID-19, a social media storm broke across Samoa. COVID-free until then, the island nation’s anxiety was understandable. More so when you consider its history.

Memories of the deadly 2019 measles outbreak were still fresh. But more distant events resonated just as much. Next to images of the cargo ship in the harbour, people were posting pictures of the Talune, the infamous “ship of death” that brought the Spanish influenza virus to Samoa in 1918, devastating the population.

The Fesco Askold had docked in Apia, Samoa, on November 7, before sailing to Pago Pago in American Samoa, where the crew apparently tested positive. Panic increased when a hoax email claimed a school child was a direct contact of a port worker and all parents should immediately collect their children.

The government later corrected the arrival date of the cargo ship in Apia to November 8. None of the crew had left the ship and there was no contact between them and Samoan harbour pilots. Offloaded containers had been sterilised.

The crisis passed, but within weeks another positive COVID-19 test was reported in a quarantined sailor who had arrived in Samoa on a repatriation flight from New Zealand on November 13.

When further tests showed negative results, swabs were sent to Wellington for more analysis. When these were inconclusive, blood samples were sent, with results still pending.

Meanwhile, a chartered flight from the US was due to arrive in Samoa with up to half of the 300 passengers returning sailors. The flight was postponed this week. Two more repatriation flights from New Zealand scheduled for early December are still to be confirmed.

The influenza and measles tragedies

Both New Zealand and Samoa are highly sensitive to the risks of disease spreading. The Talune was quarantined in Fiji in 1918, but no such precautions were taken in Samoa, then under New Zealand administration. Infected passengers were allowed to disembark. Over a fifth of the Samoan population died as a result.

In 2002, the then New Zealand prime minister, Helen Clark, made a formal apology in person to the people of Samoa for the grievous error of a past government. But in 2019 a measles epidemic that began in New Zealand rocked Samoa, killing 83, nearly all young children. Official inaction by New Zealand was blamed for the tragedy.

Read more: Buying and distributing a COVID-19 vaccine will involve hard ethical and practical choices

While Aotearoa New Zealand has done well controlling COVID-19, Samoa is not nearly as well resourced. Health facilities and expert staff are stretched at best. Furthermore, there are many existing health problems, making the population particularly vulnerable to the virus.

Pictures from other countries of mass graves being prepared for COVID-19 victims trigger traumatic memories in Samoa. Many were buried in this way in 1918 — and even more recently after the devastating 2009 tsunami.

My own family was not spared in what is known as the great Faamai — plague — of 1918. One of my great grandfathers and one of my great, great grandfathers died — two generations in one event.

For Samoans, as for all Pasifika people and Māori, a mass grave is particularly soul-destroying. To be buried without identification and acknowledgement of who the dead are, and their many familial connections, goes against custom and culture.

Samoans mark every rite of passage from the womb to the tomb. This is the basis of our communal structure, embedded in the customs and practices of the Faamatai — more commonly known as the Faa-Samoa or “the Samoan way”.

The lasting effects of 1918

The impact of the 1918 epidemic is also still felt in the laws and political systems of Samoa. In the Land and Titles Court, for example, people represent themselves in an inquisitorial forum reflecting Samoa’s history as a German colony from 1900-1914.

Since 1918, it is not unusual to hear (or read in written petitions) a heartbreaking phrase: Ua tuua ia tama lenei aiga — in our family only the children remained.

For many Samoan families the tragedy resulted in the loss of matai (chiefly) titles and the customary lands owned by those names. The fight by later generations to reclaim their heritage has, rightly or wrongly, given the court its contemporary power, influence and value.

Read more: New cyclone forecasts: why impacts should be the focus of hazardous weather warnings

Right now, Samoans are preparing for a general election in April 2021. The government’s handling of the pandemic is likely to play a major part in campaigning and voting. As a recent Newsline Samoa opinion column was headlined: COVID-19 is a Deadly Virus Not an Election Winner.

Given the current situation and the country’s history, the panic of November 9 was to be expected. Prayers and pleas that this latest plague will pass over Samoa and spare its people are still on the lips of every Samoan, whether they live there or elsewhere.

They know their country could not withstand the ravages of COVID-19 should it reach their shores. In Samoa, 1918 is not a distant memory.

– ref. Devastated by disease in the past, Samoa is on high alert after recent coronavirus scares – https://theconversation.com/devastated-by-disease-in-the-past-samoa-is-on-high-alert-after-recent-coronavirus-scares-150940

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Culum Brown, Professor, Macquarie University

They may have been around for hundreds of millions of years — long before trees — but today sharks and rays are are among the most threatened animals in the world, largely because of overfishing and habitat loss.

Climate change adds another overarching stressor to the mix. So how will sharks cope as the ocean heats up?

Our new research looked at Port Jackson sharks to find out. We found individual sharks adapt in different ways, depending where they came from.

Port Jackson sharks from cooler waters in the Great Australian Bight found it harder to cope with rising temperatures than those living in the warmer water from Jervis Bay in New South Wales.

This is important because it goes against the general assumption that species in warmer, tropical waters are at the greatest risk of climate change. It also illustrates that we shouldn’t assume all populations in one species respond to climate change in the same way, as it can lead to over- or underestimating their sensitivity.

But before we explore this further, let’s look at what exactly sharks will be exposed to in the coming years.

An existential threat

In Australia, the grim reality of climate change is already upon us: we’re seeing intense marine heat waves and coral bleaching events, the disappearance of entire kelp forests, mangrove forest dieback and the continent-wide shifting of marine life.

The southeast of Australia is a global change hotspot, with water temperatures rising at three to four times the global average. In addition to rising water temperatures, oceans are becoming more acidic and the amount of oxygen is declining.

Any one of these factors is cause for concern, but all three may also be acting together.

One may argue sharks have been around for millions of years and survived multiple climate catastrophes, including several global mass extinctions events.

To that, we say life in the anthropocene is characterised by changes in temperature and levels of carbon dioxide on a scale not seen for more than three million years.

Read more: We’ve just discovered two new shark species – but they may already be threatened by fishing

Rapid climate change represents an existential threat to all life on Earth and sharks can’t evolve fast enough to keep up because they tend to be long-lived with low reproductive output (they don’t have many pups). The time between generations is just too long to respond via natural selection.

Dealing with rising temperatures

When it comes to dealing with rising water temperature, sharks have two options: they can change their physiology to adapt, or move towards the poles to cooler waters.

Moving to cooler waters is one of the more obvious responses to climate change, while subtle impacts on physiology, as we studied, have largely been ignored to date. However, they can have big impacts on individual, and ultimately species, distributions and survival.

We collected Port Jackson sharks from cold water around Adelaide and warm water in Jervis Bay. After increasing temperatures by 3℃, we studied their thermal limits (how much heat the sharks could take before losing equilibrium), swimming activity and their resting metabolic rate.

While all populations could adjust their thermal limits, their metabolic rate and swimming activity depended on where the sharks were originally collected from.

Read more: Photos from the field: these magnificent whales are adapting to warming water, but how much can they take?

With a rise in water temperature of just 3℃, the energy required to survive is more than twice that of current day temperatures for the Port Jackson sharks in Adelaide.

The massive shift in energy demand we observed in the Adelaide sharks means they have to prioritise survival (coping mechanisms) over other processes, such as growth and reproduction. This is consistent with several other shark species that have slower growth when exposed to warmer waters, including epaulette sharks and bonnethead sharks.

On the other hand, a 3℃ temperature rise hardly affected the energy demands of the Port Jackson sharks from Jervis Bay at all.

Threatening the whole ecosystem

Discovering what drives responses to heat is important for identifying broader patterns. For example, the decreased sensitivity of the Jervis Bay sharks likely reflects the thermal history of the region.

Read more: Sharks: one in four habitats in remote open ocean threatened by longline fishing

Australia’s southeastern coastline is warmed by the East Australian Current, which varies in strength both throughout the year and from year to year. With each generation exposed to these naturally variable conditions, populations along this coastline have likely become more tolerant to heat.

Populations in the Great Australian Bight, in contrast, don’t experience such variability, which may make them more susceptible to climate change.

So why is this important? When sharks change their behaviour it affects the whole ecosystem.

The implications range from shifts in fish stocks to conservation management, such as where marine reserves are assigned.

Sharks and rays generally rank at the top or in the middle of the food chain, and
have critical ecosystem functions.

Port Jackson sharks, for example, are predators of urchins, and urchins feed on kelp forests — a rich habitat for hundreds of marine species. If the number of sharks decline in a region and the number of urchins increase, then it could lead to the loss of kelp forests.

What’s next?

There’s little research dedicated to understanding how individuals from different populations within species respond to climate change.

We need more of this kind of research, because it can help identify hidden resilience within species, and also highlight populations at greatest risk. We have seen this in action in coral bleaching events in different parts of Australia, for example.

We also need a better handle on how a wide range of species will respond to a changing climate. This will help us understand how communities and ecosystems might fragment, as each ecosystem component responds to warming in different ways and at different speeds.

Steps need to be taken to address these holes in our knowledge base if we’re to prepare for what follows.

Read more: One-fifth of ecosystems in danger of collapse – here’s what that might look like

– ref. How will sharks respond to climate change? It might depend on where they grew up – https://theconversation.com/how-will-sharks-respond-to-climate-change-it-might-depend-on-where-they-grew-up-150460

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yu Tao, Senior Lecturer in Chinese Studies, University of Western Australia

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, about two in every five international students enrolled in Australian higher education institutions were from mainland China. These Chinese students brought in more than $A10 billion a year. During the pandemic, Australian universities have struggled to retain and recruit international students.

The first returning students are due to fly out under a pilot scheme this weekend, arriving in Darwin on Monday. But numbers are very limited due to quarantine requirements.

Read more: COVID to halve international student numbers in Australia by mid-2021 – it’s not just unis that will feel their loss

It’s essential to recruit and retain international students to sustain and develop Australian higher education. The loss of international student fee revenue has prompted universities to make large job cuts. Many are expected to downsize. Some might collapse.

Competition calls for proactive measures

Pilot schemes to bring back small numbers of international students to Darwin, Adelaide and Canberra were announced months ago. However, with priority being given to quarantining returning Australians, the students’ return was delayed.

Australian universities also have other challenges to overcome.

The unravelling relations between Australia and China, if not managed well, may cast a dark shadow over educational exchanges.

Besides, Australia’s pilot plans are small in scale and slow in pace compared to its competitors. British universities such as Queens University Belfast and the University of Manchester have chartered flights to bring students from China back to campus. Canada re-opened its border to all international students on October 20.

Read more: Coronavirus: how likely are international university students to choose Australia over the UK, US and Canada?

The Australian government and higher education sector must be more proactive to remain competitive in international education. Based on my experience as a teacher and researcher of Chinese international students, five approaches are worth considering.

Treat those who are here better

Perhaps somewhat counter-intuitively, a majority of Australia’s international students remain onshore. The most direct and probably most efficient measure to attract more of these students is to treat those who are already here better.

Universities also have professional and moral obligations to look after students who could not return home to their loved ones. Many are far away from their support networks and unfamiliar with support arrangements in Australia.

Australia is very different from their home country in language, culture, values, governance and politics. COVID amplified the culture shocks and psychological pressures.

Despite being unable to travel due to border closures, international students know and often compare how different countries are treating them. Their opinions, based on first-hand experience, can influence decisions on studying abroad by friends and relatives back home as well as members of their social networks.

Read more: 4 out of 5 international students are still in Australia – how we treat them will have consequences

According to my Chinese international students onshore, fee reductions, personalised care, Chinese-language support services and internship and work opportunities are among the best ways to win them over.

Integrate all students in virtual communities

It’s unlikely students now in China will be allowed to enter Australia en masse any time soon. Many universities continue educating these students through remote teaching and learning activities. However, as one Chinese international student said, her friend in China who attends classes on Zoom “constantly feels lost” due to the “lack of personal experiences [of Australia]”.

Universities need to do much more than providing extra study materials to download. To keep offshore students engaged, universities must ensure they remain full members of the class despite their physical absence. Ways to do this include deliberately mixing them with onshore students for peer mentoring and collective assignments.

Research shows local students are much more likely to engage with international students when they can learn from them. And creating opportunities for international students to share their knowledge can empower them.

Read more: Our unis do need international students and must choose between the high and low roads

Help with cross-border travel

Remote education, if well designed, can keep some offshore students enrolled. However, as Monash University vice-chancellor Margaret Gardner points out, teaching online is “a stopgap, not a solution”, because students don’t “have the full experience”.

And students’ inability to travel is a source of pressure and anxiety.

Considering that both Australia and China have largely controlled the virus, the time is ripe for planning a “travel bubble”. Making travel between the countries easier could win the favour of many Chinese students.

Send the right signals

Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s “go home” message to international students in early April was widely regarded as selfish and unsympathetic in Chinese social media. The damaging effect of such remarks can outweigh other messages of solidarity with these students.

Read more: ‘I love Australia’: 3 things international students want Australians to know

The government’s decision in August to revoke the visas of two leading Australian studies experts from China also shocked many Chinese-born academics and students in Australia. The lack of information, beyond citing security concerns, left room for speculation about whether broader anti-China politics was involved.

Chinese students will only enrol in Australian universities if they and their parents consider the country safe and comfortable to study and live. For Australia to remain a desired study destination, the government needs to send clear and consistent signals.

Embrace Australia’s multiculturalism

Multiculturalism is one of Australia’s finest achievements. Unfortunately, the pandemic has surfaced a degree of exclusion and racism towards temporary visa holders, including international students. Anti-Chinese incidents prompted the Chinese government to warn in June against studying in Australia.

Some Chinese students defended Australia as a safe and desirable study destination. Still, many reported they would consider their government’s warning.

Read more: Students in China heed their government’s warnings against studying in Australia

Chinese-born communities, including international students, have greatly enriched the diversity of Australian society. Yet many policymakers and educators have long framed the need to engage with Asia and China along utilitarian lines such as creating jobs or bringing in money.

These discourses may unintentionally create a status of otherness for Australia’s Chinese-born communities. Many of my students have told me they believe the universities see them as cash cows. They, in turn, consider themselves more as customers than learners.

To get ahead in the increasingly competitive global education market, Australia should integrate international students more meaningfully into its society. Ultimately, making these students feel proud of their contribution to Australian multiculturalism is probably the most sustainable way to strengthen their bonds with their host country.

– ref. 5 ways Australia can get ahead in attracting and retaining Chinese international students – https://theconversation.com/5-ways-australia-can-get-ahead-in-attracting-and-retaining-chinese-international-students-148444

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amelia Thorpe, Associate Professor in Law, UNSW

Five food-delivery cyclists have died on Australian roads in the past three months, four in Sydney. Most commentary has focused on the harsh employment conditions that force people to take risks they shouldn’t have to. These problems should of course be fixed, but cycling in general is too dangerous in our cities.

Read more: Three Charts on the rise in cycling injuries and deaths in Australia

We need to look not just at labour laws but at the laws that shape our streets: things like road rules, planning requirements and engineering standards. Food delivery is a compelling example because it shows cycling is the most efficient way to get around the city.

Despite the efforts of supposedly business-minded people like shock jock Alan Jones and New South Wales’ former roads minister, Duncan Gay (who infamously ripped up infrastructure including a cycleway along College Road in central Sydney and a rainbow crossing on Oxford Street in Surry Hills), businesses have worked out bikes are the best way to move around the city.

Bikes are fastest for distances up to 5km, even for beginners. For more experienced cyclists and during peak hour, bikes are faster for trips of 10km and often even more.

Cycling has wider benefits too. Swapping cars for bikes can reduce the tens of billions of dollars lost in traffic congestion, the many gigatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions and the health impacts of sedentary lifestyles. Even after accidents are taken into account, the health benefits of cycling far outweigh the costs.

Read more: Cycle, walk, drive or train? Weighing up the healthiest (and safest) ways to get around the city

Cycling can also help to improve equity and social inclusion, since the burdens of car-centric development are suffered most by people who are already vulnerable. They include the largely migrant food-delivery workforce.

Food-delivery cyclists are not the only people dying in car crashes. Worldwide, traffic accidents cause more than 1.35 million deaths every year and are the leading killer of children.

Blaming the victims

Instead of focusing on the dangers created by cars and trucks, however, NSW Transport and Roads Minister Andrew Constance this week blamed the victim:

If people are riding around, particularly at night, they have an obligation to make sure they are wearing high-visibility jackets. They’ve obviously got to have the requisite lighting in terms of the bike. They themselves should obviously be putting protective and high-vis clothes on.

Before this week, news stories about food-delivery cyclists were mostly negative. Just last month, police announced a crackdown on delivery cyclists riding on footpaths.

Fears about cyclists injuring pedestrians receive a lot of attention, yet car driving kills three times more people per kilometre than cycling. The danger created by trucks is more than ten times greater per kilometre (and vastly greater overall).

Read more: Cars, bicycles and the fatal myth of equal reciprocity

Rules give priority to cars

Of course, we have all seen cyclists doing risky things. But the issue is less about individual behaviour and more about the regulatory environment. In Sydney and many other places, a plethora of state and federal rules and regulations give priority to cars in our cities.

Planning rules entrench the dominance of cars by mandating the provision of car parking (despite its significant impact on housing affordability). Engineering standards support high-speed travel.

Road rules and policing practices also enforce the dominance of cars on streets. An example is penalising pedestrians who step onto or cross the road within 20 metres of a zebra crossing. In contrast, sanctions for dangerous driving are weak and poorly enforced, and cycling is left out of driver education.

Infrastructure is a problem too

Lopsided budget allocations and infrastructure make the situation worse. Even projects supposedly aimed at pedestrians and cyclists often benefit cars far more. An example is overpasses that increase walking and cycling distances, while giving cars a smooth, lights-free ride.

Read more: Cycling and walking can help drive Australia’s recovery – but not with less than 2% of transport budgets

The challenge is particularly acute in older areas, where streets were not designed for high car use. Calls for bike lanes, widened footpaths and other infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists are often refused on the grounds of lack of space. But why do cars get what little space there is?

The site of Sunday’s death is a clear example. The intersection where the cyclist was killed by an excavator-carrying truck is not a highway but a relatively narrow street with houses and a school. Should large trucks really be driving on streets like this?

Read more: Physical distancing is here for a while – over 100 experts call for more safe walking and cycling space

Law reform is overdue

Internationally, there is a growing recognition that legal reform is needed to improve safety, and in turn to achieve both individual and national benefits. The Dutch approach has long been celebrated, both for the high quality of cycling infrastructure and the high level of liability for car drivers. The Swedish Vision Zero has also been influential, with cities around the world introducing laws and policies to eliminate deaths in traffic.

Read more: Cars overwhelmingly cause bike collisions, and the law should reflect that

Even in the US, where car culture is deeply entrenched, many cities are adopting complete streets legislation. These laws require streets to be planned, designed, operated and maintained to enable safe, convenient and comfortable access for users of all ages and abilities, regardless of their transport mode.

In Australia, councils like the City of Sydney are taking very positive actions to support cycling, but this alone is not enough. To save the lives of delivery riders – and everyone else – we need legal reforms at the state and federal levels.

– ref. Delivery rider deaths highlight need to make streets safer for everyone – https://theconversation.com/delivery-rider-deaths-highlight-need-to-make-streets-safer-for-everyone-150752

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW

It is widely tipped that US president-elect Joe Biden will nominate Janet Yellen as Treasury Secretary – one of the most important posts in any administration.

She will make for a terrific Treasury Secretary, bringing with her a wealth of experience and a lot of IQ points. Her appointment also signals what kind of president Biden is likely to be.

Yellen (born August 13, 1946) comes with impeccable credentials. She received her PhD in economics from Yale under Nobel-prize-winning economist James Tobin. She was on the faculty at Harvard and for a long time at the University of California, Berkeley. She was chair of the Council of Economic Advisers for President Bill Clinton and went on to be president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank.

President Barack Obama nominated her in 2010 to be vice-chair of the US Federal Reserve. In 2013 she succeeded Ben Bernanke to become the Fed’s 15th chair.

With apologies to Gilbert and Sullivan, she is the very model of a modern policy maker.

A centrist and experienced administrator

Yellen is in many ways a traditional centre-left economist. Her academic work focused mainly on imperfections in labour markets and how unemployment can arise.

One of her best-known papers concerns how workers will put in less effort if they think they are being paid below what they consider to be a “fair” wage.

As chair of the Federal Reserve, given the tough position the US economy was in, Yellen used monetary policy in a conventional and aggressive way – much like her more conservative successor Jerome Powell has done.

But she also championed tougher financial regulation and emphasised that economic inequality was not merely an intrinsic concern but could be a drag on economic growth.

Though Yellen is in every way an excellent choice to head the US Department of the Treasury, Biden had other options.

He was under pressure to nominate someone much further to the left. Senator Elizabeth Warren, one of Biden’s rivals for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries, reportedly wanted the job herself – although to her credit she has praised Yellen as “an outstanding choice” in recent days.

Yellen may believe in tougher financial regulation, but Warren would have been more than that; she has called the business of Wall Street “legalised looting”, indicated her desire to destroy the entire private equity industry, and to impose a wealth tax of 6% a year – enough to destroy capital accumulation, if not capitalism itself.

All of this signals that Biden, in eschewing the more radical Warren, is (a) not crazy, and (b) planning to run a centrist administration.

Read more: Vital Signs: talk of a US wealth tax is about symbolism as much as it is about economics

The importance of the Treasury Secretary

It is hard for Australians to understand just how important the role of Treasury Secretary is in the US government. Yes, the role of Australia’s federal treasurer is regarded as second only to the Prime Minister, but that is in the context of cabinet government with an expenditure review committee.

By contrast, the US Treasury Secretary (with the support of the US president) wields almost unfettered economic authority.

That might be a blessing and a curse for Yellen, for she will take office with the US in the worst economic shape since the Great Depression.

From day one the whole Biden administration, Yellen included, will face huge challenges.

First, it must get the COVID-19 pandemic – now running rampant – under control. As any amount of international evidence has shown, one can’t have a functioning economy during a pandemic.

Read more: Data from 45 countries show containing COVID vs saving the economy is a false dichotomy

Pandemic control itself will not be Yellen’s job. But what will be immediately important, and within her purview, is getting Congress to pass a stimulus package to boost the US economy while the virus is brought under control through various measures – perhaps even including the rollout of a vaccine.

That will be no easy task. Republicans in “red” states that have set aside so-called “rainy-day funds” feel loathe to fund what they basically see as a bailout to Democratic “blue” states who haven’t done the same. Senator Mitt Romney made exactly this point when talking to CNN podcast host and former Obama advisor David Axelrod last week.

Beyond the immediate coronavirus response, Yellen will also face big challenges – perhaps the most vexing ones of all.

Economic problems beyond the pandemic

Prior to COVID-19, the US economy was in a low-growth, low-inflation funk. Something former treasury secretary Larry Summers has famously referred to as “secular stagnation”.

This is where Janet Yellen, labour economist, may be just the person to be in charge of the treasury.

What economists and policy makers alike still don’t understand is why the speed limit of the US (and other advanced) economies seems to have dropped. Why is it unemployment needs to be close to 3% to get wage growth moving in the US? Why is inflation persistently low even in the face of very loose monetary policy?

This is also where Janet Yellen, former Fed chair, may also be the perfect person to be in charge. Thinking hard about how very low interest rates and fiscal policy interact in a practical way is a deeply important issue.

Plenty of smart people are working on that problem, but there is something unique about a former Fed chair and current Treasury Secretary marshalling an effort to provide a better understanding of this interaction.

When Biden officially announces (and the Senate confirms) Yellen’s appointment, we can look forward to one of the great economic policy makers of our time helping to deal with some of the most pressing challenges of our time.

– ref. Vital Signs: Janet Yellen, the very model of a modern Madam Secretary – https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-janet-yellen-the-very-model-of-a-modern-madam-secretary-150836

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alistair Paterson, ARC Future Fellow, University of Western Australia

Two new Australian museums are emerging from old ones as the year draws to a close.

The new Chau Chak Wing Museum at the University of Sydney assembles rich collections from across the campus, and the WA Museum Boola Bardip (Noongar for “Many Stories”) has opened in Perth. Museums remain relevant in a globalised world where stories of objects and collecting connect people, institutions, places and ideas.

Our Collecting the West Project, in collaboration with the Western Australian Museum, the State Library of WA, the Art Gallery of WA and the British Museum, explores the history of collecting in WA since the late 1600s.

We are tracing the role of collecting in histories of empire, exploration and colonisation; the relations between natural history and ethnographic collecting; the role of state instrumentalities and private individuals; and the networks between them.

Here, we highlight five objects, some displayed in Boola Bardip’s Treasures Gallery, to reveal how they can provide us with insights into history, values, emotions and power.

1. Everything was contemporary once — Corona Smoking Bucket, 2020

On March 26 2020, the WA government suspended tourist operations on Rottnest Island (Wadjemup) to support the government response to the pandemic. Australian citizens aboard the Vasco de Gama cruise ship were directed to be quarantined on the island from Monday March 30.

Whadjuk monitors Ben Ugle and Brendan Moore were on the island to support conservation works at the heritage site — a prison that once held Aboriginal people from all over WA, where many died.

The two Whadjuk men chose to perform a smoking ceremony for the island’s transition to pandemic quarantine facility. Smoking ceremonies are often conducted to cleanse a place spiritually, such as after a death, to welcome people, and as a sign of respect to people including past elders.

A metal tin was found for the smoking ceremony — given the unplanned nature of the event, the only suitable vessel they could find was a Corona beer bucket. Seeing the irony in the serendipitous use of this object, the “Corona Smoking Bucket” was collected for The Wadjemup Museum on Rottnest Island in March 2020.

Like many objects, this bucket symbolises several histories: the fact of its collection, the impact of a global pandemic at a local level, growing recognition of Indigenous cultural practices and the connection between an Indigenous smoking ceremony and the island’s dark history of Aboriginal incarceration (circa 1838-1931).

These histories compete also with the island’s later use — as the site of decades of annual school leavers’ celebrations, reflected in the presence of the Corona bucket.

Read more: Indigenous medicine – a fusion of ritual and remedy

2. Collections carry emotions — Shell, Shark Bay, 1820

This watercolour and ink drawing of a beautiful shell — the Volute ethiopienne — was drawn from a specimen brought back from Shark Bay in 1820 as part of the French Freycinet expedition. It can now be found in the State Library of Western Australia.

Shells from WA were prized for their beauty, part of the Enlightenment’s love affair with discovering the diversity of the natural world.

Aboriginal people have long valued shells for ornamentation and exchange. Shells were also attractive items for some of the earliest European explorers of the WA coast.

In 1697, for instance, Willem de Vlamingh, a Dutch sea captain working for the Dutch East India Company, collected a number of shells from Shark Bay, including a nautilus and a conch. He failed to find the shipwreck he was searching for, but helped to chart the coast. The English explorer William Dampier arrived in 1699 and some of the shells he collected in Shark Bay ended up in Oxford’s Ashmolean Museum.

French explorers followed. Nicolas Baudin’s expedition took a considerable number of shells back to Paris, where they can now be seen at the Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle.

In his journal of the Baudin expedition, the naturalist François Peron described a mussel he found on the shore:

Of all the species of mussels known so far, the one that I discovered [in Shark Bay] is incontestably the most beautiful. Stripped of its marine coating, it shines with the most vivid colours of the prism and precious stones; it is dazzling, if I may say so.

Read more: Friday essay: the voyage of Nicolas Baudin and ‘art in the service of science’

3. Mokare’s place — Spear-thrower, King George Sound, (Albany), c.1831

This spear-thrower was collected by Alexander Collie, the government resident at King George Sound between 1831-33, who formed a close friendship with Menang Noongar man Mokare.

Such historic objects remind us that many collections of plants and objects were formed with the expert assistance of Aboriginal people who knew the land intimately.

The spear-thrower also highlights how objects can embody moments of unexpected friendships, such as the close relationship that developed between Collie and Mokare. Mokare lived with Collie in his hut in the settlement of Albany in 1831, and when near death, Collie asked to be buried beside his friend.

Collie had worked as a naval surgeon and sent objects he collected back to the Royal Navy’s Haslar Hospital Naval Museum at Portsmouth, to assist in naval education. In 1855 the admiralty disbanded the museum, depositing the spear-thrower and other objects in the British Museum.

In 2016-2017, the spear-thrower, along with other objects collected by Collie, returned to Albany to be displayed in the Yurlmun exhibition, which focused on the meaning of these collections to Menang Noongar people today. Despite these objects being only a temporary loan from the British Museum (where they are now in storage), the Menang people viewed their arrival as a “return home to country”.

The objects collected by Collie point to the role of the Royal Navy as a key network of colonisation; the agency of individual Aboriginal people in processes of colonial collection and the potential of these collections to highlight not only the role played by Indigenous people such as Mokare but also the cultural knowledge contained in the objects themselves.

A much earlier collection of weapons, also from Albany, hints at the complexity of collecting practices undertaken within colonial contexts. A Royal Navy surveying expedition, captained by Phillip Parker King, visited King George Sound in December 1821. The crew were engaged with the Menang people in a prolonged and intimate trading exchange for two weeks. In exchange for ships’ biscuit, the crew collected:

one hundred spears, thirty throwing sticks, forty hammers, one hundred and fifty knives and a few hand-clubs.

By contrast, at Hanover Bay on today’s Kimberley coast, a few months earlier, a cache of Worrorra weapons and artefacts were taken as a retaliatory theft for the spearing of the crew’s surgeon.

The crew members related this theft in their journals with the language of revenge: “taking possession of”, “riches”, “spoil”, “prize” and “treasure”, where they took pleasure in “capturing” an Aboriginal “depot”.

These collecting moments reveal different kinds of intimacies — of friendships and violence, trade and exchange — that occurred during early coastal encounters. They also explain why there is no early material from WA in Western Australian collections — most went to Britain as a result of these imperial networks.

4. Colonialism never dies — Wooden dish, Broome, pre 1892

This small wooden bowl carries a history that hints at the role of colonial state instrumentalities in collecting. It is part of a large collection at the WA Museum known as the Phillips Collection.

George Braithwaite Phillips was the commissioner of police between 1887-1890. His family was amongst the first colonists to emigrate to the Swan River Colony (now Perth), coming from Barbados, where they owned sugar plantations.

Phillips had been a high profile civil servant and the commandant of the Western Australian Military Forces. From those positions he was able to commandeer a large network of policemen throughout the colony to collect both Aboriginal material culture and human remains.

Many of the Aboriginal objects collected by police, though not the ancestral human remains, were displayed at International Exhibitions in Paris, Glasgow and Melbourne.

Read more: The violent collectors who gathered Indigenous artefacts for the Queensland Museum

The collection, which included this bowl from Broome, made by Yawuru people, helped form the new Western Australian Museum and Art Gallery in 1894. (The bowl can now be seen at WA Museum Boola Bardip.)

Bernard Woodward, the museum’s first director, continued to ask Phillips for help in sourcing both ethnographic objects and human remains, many of them destined to be exchanged for natural history specimens and ethnographic material from other parts of the world.

So, this bowl is a powerful object. It speaks to Aboriginal cultural practices, the police as active agents of colonisation, and the complex terrain of colonial encounters and their aftermath that form part of the museum’s own inheritance — now slowly being addressed in consultation with relevant communities.

5. Collections are commodities — Red figure hydria, 350-320BC

This red figure vase (circa 350-320BC), probably from Bari — then a Greek colony — was, according to the museum’s first art and craft register, given by Professor E H Giglioli in 1902. Giglioli (1845-1909) was the Director of the Museo Zoologico in Florence — a zoologist and anthropologist remembered as the father of Italian science.

He visited Australia in 1867, writing a book on Australian Aboriginal people. Giglioli understood the uniqueness of WA’s flora and fauna, seeking valuable specimens with which to build his own collection and to trade for other specimens from elsewhere in the world.

Giglioli sent Roman and Etruscan antiquities he acquired in Italy to Perth in exchange for natural history specimens, human remains and ethnographic material.

Collections circulated through collecting institutions, often exchanged or bartered. Giglioli exchanged the WA material with the Smithsonian Museum.

In Australia, antiquities from Europe had their own rarity value. Widely understood as the foundation of Western culture and aesthetics, antiquities were hard to come by in colonial society.

In 1904, Woodward wrote:

it is of paramount importance that the local craftsmen should have good examples to study, in order that they may successfully compete with their fellows in the older centres of civilisation.

The notion of civilisation was especially important in a young nation. Colonial societies, wanting to demonstrate their rightful place amongst civilised societies, often purchased copies of originals.

So it is not surprising Woodward wanted to exchange Western Australian natural history and ethnographic specimens for objects representing the high end of European artistic production or material representing the birth of European civilisation.

This was part of his effort to educate Western Australians into what they thought was the best that Western civilisation offered.

While this was a way for museums around the world to build their collections, it also involved practices that are totally discredited today and which many find deeply distressing. It is important to know about this history and address its legacies. 

The collections made by early explorers and settlers, sometimes in collaboration with Indigenous peoples, are important for their role in the development of knowledge about WA, opening up areas of scientific discovery and knowledge about First Peoples, the richness of the state’s flora and fauna and our shared historical experiences.

They are also tangible symbols of colonialism and its legacy today.

– ref. Friday essay: 5 museum objects that tell a story of colonialism and its legacy – https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-5-museum-objects-that-tell-a-story-of-colonialism-and-its-legacy-150642

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

The government’s provision of a RAAF plane for Mathias Cormann’s barnstorming campaign to become OECD secretary-general has stirred predictable outrage, especially when linked to the understandable emotion around the (unrelated) struggle of Australians trying to return home.

But the reaction is, in my view, not justified.

The post is a significant one. If Cormann lands the job – it’s a very tough contest – this would be useful for Australia, especially as the world crawls out of the COVID hole (although he’d be appointed as an individual, rather than Australia’s representative).

The OECD, with 37 members, mostly developed countries, is an intergovernmental body that is, in the words of a former director, Adrian Blundell-Wignall, “the only place where government officials sit down to discuss common problems at the working level in a shifting dynamic world”.

Yes, Cormann could have travelled commercially, but it would have been difficult in the age of COVID. A Zoom campaign would have been possible, but probably not have given him the best chance of success.

Read more: Simon Birmingham to become finance minister and Senate leader as Australia nominates Cormann for OECD

So the government is easing his path, making available staff for his campaign as well as the plane. And the prime minister is lobbying anyone of significance he speaks to. Scott Morrison was in Joe Biden’s ear about Cormann in his phone call congratulating the president-elect, and in the ear of the Japanese prime minister during their meeting.

But in the battle for votes Cormann, with plenty of qualifications (long-term former finance minister, multilingual) is carrying a big handicap. Australia is seen as a laggard on climate policy, and his own credentials on the issues go against him.

Way back in 2009 when he resigned from Malcolm Turnbull’s shadow ministry, climate change was at the heart of it. He and two other frontbenchers who were quitting said in a joint statement: “We are opposed to the passage of Labor’s Emissions Trading Scheme prior to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen and before any similar action by our major trading partners. Consequently, we are unable to support the Leader of the Opposition’s decision to support the passage of these bills.”

Only too aware of the problem he has, Cormann is taking on as much of a green tinge as he can to assist him in his campaign.

In his “vision statement” for the job, Cormann says, “Climate policy responses will increasingly need to factor into long-term planning,” and “we must get to zero net emissions as soon as possible”.

The Australian Greens are lobbying OECD countries not to support Cormann.

Greens leader Adam Bandt has written to them saying the organisation “requires a leader with a clear commitment to addressing the climate crisis”, but Cormann’s “record on climate change has been to block action at every turn”.

While Cormann works to convince the OECD he’d be in tune on climate policies Morrison, driven by his own political needs, is slowly repositioning his government on the issue. Morrison knows he’ll be operating in changed circumstances in the next year, and he’s manoeuvring to adapt to them.

Tony Abbott once famously described himself as a “weathervane” on climate policy. Morrison is a genuine weathervane on many things. And, as he looks towards 2021, he is aware Australia risks being severely buffeted unless it is seen to be more credible in its climate policy.

Biden’s appointment this week of John Kerry, former secretary of state and former presidential candidate, as the US climate envoy underscores the importance the new administration is putting on the issue. Kerry calls it “the biggest challenge of this generation and those that will follow”.

Morrison has already sought to find common ground with Biden by stressing, when they spoke, their mutual interest in elevating the role of technology in reducing emissions.

In an address this month Morrison told business leaders the government’s “ambition” was to avoid using Australia’s Kyoto carryover credits (gained by exceeding previous targets) in meeting its Paris targets. The potential use of these credits has been widely criticised.

He flagged he’d have “more to say about this before the end of the year as we update our emissions projections”. This suggests he knows these figures will point to a likely positive story on the carryovers.

Morrison has already pivoted from coal. It seems only yesterday that, when treasurer, he brandished a lump of coal in the House of Representatives – but for him it’s a lifetime ago. Former resources minister Matt Canavan, from the Nationals, is still spruiking the case for building coal-fired power stations, but he’s baying at the moon. Experts don’t expect the feasibility study for a Queensland coal-fired project to return a positive result.

As he’s moved away from coal, Morrison has talked up gas excessively, inviting a mixture of condemnation and scepticism. But in practice gas is likely to settle into a relatively modest place to help the transition to renewables.

Read more: Mathias Cormann wants to lead the OECD. The choice it makes will be pivotal

In terms of symbols and intentions, the major test for Morrison has become whether he signs Australia up to reaching net zero emissions by 2050.

You can see this target as meaning everything and not that much.

Not that much because, even acknowledging the need for long-term planning, 30 years is a time-frame in which anything can happen and a government making promises today knows it won’t be around for the reckoning.

But the target means everything because, in the current international and domestic context, accepting it would demonstrate good faith and serious intent. It would bring Australia into line with the majority of countries and – significantly – with all Australian states and territories.

How can it be that the federal government is out of step with every other Australian government? It seems ridiculous.

Morrison is crab-walking towards the target. “Looking beyond 2030 we want to reach net zero emissions as quickly as possible and to achieve this through technology, not higher taxes,” he said in his business speech.

The question is whether, pushed by international forces and the approach of an election, Morrison will adopt the target ahead of the Glasgow climate conference late next year.

Liberal backbencher and former diplomat Dave Sharma wrote this week: “Australia will work closely with Britain to make the next global climate change conference, COP26, a major step forward in dealing with climate change.”

To do that, Australia will need to accept the 2050 target. British PM Boris Johnson has already stressed to Morrison “the importance of setting ambitious targets to cut emissions and reach net zero”.

Read more: Grattan on Friday: A Biden presidency would put pressure on Scott Morrison over climate change

In his nomination speech this week, Kerry said: “At the global meeting in Glasgow one year from now, all nations must raise ambition together or we will all fail together. And failure is not an option.”

If Australia is not to be an outlier at Glasgow, Morrison has less than a year to move from a commitment to reach net zero “as quickly as possible” to Australia doing it “by 2050”. For him, it’s not a large step; within the Coalition it’s very slippery ground.

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Will Morrison adopt 2050 target before Glasgow climate conference? – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-will-morrison-adopt-2050-target-before-glasgow-climate-conference-150959

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tambri Housen, Epidemiologist | Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University

“Test, trace and isolate” has become the catch cry of the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s recognised as an essential strategy for containing the spread of the virus.

The “trace” part, of course, refers to contact tracing — the process of identifying people who may have come into contact with an infected person, so we can prevent further transmission of the virus.

Contact tracing can only be successful if three things happen:

1. the contact tracer asks the right questions

2. the person who has tested positive provides detailed and accurate information on whom they’ve had contact with

3. every person identified as a close contact can be reached and quarantines as requested.

So what can you expect if a contact tracer calls you?

Read more: Explainer: what is contact tracing and how does it help limit the coronavirus spread?

The contact tracer’s puzzle

If you’ve tested positive for COVID-19, a public health officer will call to interview you. The contact tracer is interested in two specific time periods.

The first piece of the contact-tracing puzzle is the time from two days before you developed your first symptoms until the time you began your isolation. This is known as the “infectious period”.

If you didn’t develop symptoms, you will be asked about the two days prior to your test and the period after you were tested until you began isolating.

Contact tracers are interested in the infectious period because this is when someone who has tested positive is most likely to infect others.

Contact tracers will ask you to recall everywhere you went during your infectious period, whom you were with, what type of contact you had with each person, and for how long.

For example, if you went to the pub for dinner you’re likely to be asked:

• where did you sit?

• who was with you?

• how long were you at the pub for?

• did the staff serve at the table or did you order at the bar?

• did you go to the bathroom?

• was there social distancing?

• did you talk to anyone else (other than the people you were with)?

There might be more questions too.

Based on all this information, contact tracers will determine who meets the definition of a close contact and therefore needs to be called, asked to quarantine, and followed up to check if they develop symptoms.

Read more: How long are you infectious when you have coronavirus?

The second piece of the puzzle is the “incubation period”. Experts believe the incubation period for COVID-19 is up to 14 days. This means if you’re going to develop COVID symptoms, it’s likely to happen within 14 days of you being exposed to the virus.

So, if you test positive, contact tracers will also ask you where you’ve been and whom you were with for the 14 days before you developed symptoms.

For contact tracers this information is essential. It can be the difference between being able to stop the spread or seeing many more people become infected with the virus.

When two or more people who have tested positive for COVID-19 report being at the same place at the same time, this leads to a more in-depth epidemiological investigation, and can help identify other people who may have also been exposed to the virus at this place and time.

Essentially, the first piece of the puzzle is about ascertaining to whom you might have spread the virus, whereas the second is more concerned with whom you might have picked it up from.

What if I can’t remember?

Many of us can’t remember what we did two days ago, let alone every day for 14 days. Contact tracers may use a variety of tools to help you remember where you were and what you were doing.

They may ask you to look up your bank statements to recall where you used your debit or credit card (they won’t ask to see this, but it can help jog your memory). They may also ask you to check your text messages, social media posts and photos you’ve taken on your phone as a way of helping you remember.

What about my right to privacy?

It’s not usual to be asked about where you were every minute of every day. On top of dealing with the diagnosis of COVID-19, this can be a confronting experience. It can feel like an invasion of privacy and it might feel threatening.

Some people may be involved in things they don’t want others, including people close to them, to know about. For example, a teenager may not want their parents to find out they were somewhere they shouldn’t have been; an adult having an affair or taking part in an illegal activity may want to keep their movements private.

There are many reasons people may not feel comfortable disclosing their exact movements at every moment of the day to a stranger on the phone.

However, if you are in this position, to keep your loved ones and community safe, it’s essential you answer the contact tracer’s questions honestly and to the very best of your ability.

Contact tracers are not there to judge you, report you or get you into trouble. They’re bound by the Privacy Act 1988, which sets out that health information can only be used for the primary purpose for which it is collected. So information collected through contact tracing can only be used for contact tracing.

Ensuring confidence in the process

It’s important to understand there may be many reasons why people make decisions to disclose or not disclose particular things.

Last week, authorities made judgemental statements and revealed the gender, nationality and place of work of the person in South Australia who tested positive for COVID-19 and didn’t fully disclose their movements. This “blame game”, which spread to the media and onto social media, is not OK.

We need to build a culture of trust so people feel comfortable disclosing personal and private information, knowing they won’t be judged or punished as a result. This is how we’ll get the best results from contact tracing.

Read more: Hating on the Woodville Pizza guy won’t fix a problem that was entirely foreseeable

– ref. What can you expect if you get a call from a COVID contact tracer? – https://theconversation.com/what-can-you-expect-if-you-get-a-call-from-a-covid-contact-tracer-150742

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Parmeter, Research Scholar, Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies, Australian National University

Australian-British academic Kylie Moore-Gilbert’s release from an Iranian prison after more than two years’ detention is certainly a welcome development.

However, the circumstances raise some uncomfortable questions for Australian and Western diplomats related to Iran’s penchant for using hostage-taking as a bargaining chip for the release of its own citizens detained abroad for suspected or proven crimes, including terrorism.

There seems little doubt Moore-Gilbert was released as part of a prisoner exchange. Iranian state media has shown pictures of the academic with Australian embassy officials in Tehran, juxtaposed with film of three Iranian men being welcomed by Iranian officials, apparently at Tehran’s airport.

The Iranian media says she was exchanged for an Iranian “economic activist” and two Iranian citizens, who had been detained “abroad on trumped-up charges”. The report does not name the men.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has given a carefully worded statement in response to questions about a prisoner swap.

If other people have been released in other places, they are the decisions of the sovereign governments. There are no people who have been held in Australia who have been released.

That may be true as far as Australia is concerned. But a report by The New York Times, quoting Iranian social media channels associated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), identifies the three Iranians as Saeed Moradi, Mohammad Khazaei and Masoud Sedaghat Zadeh.

The three had been detained in Thailand since 2012 on charges of planning to plant bombs in Bangkok and assassinate Israeli diplomats there. One of those men had reportedly lost his legs when a bomb he was carrying exploded prematurely.

Read more: I kept silent to protect my colleague and friend, Kylie Moore-Gilbert. But Australia’s quiet diplomatic approach is not working

In a similar context, the release last year of two Australians being held in Iran, Jolie King and Mark Firkin, coincided with an Iranian research student at the University of Queensland, Reza Dehbashi Kivi, being permitted by Australian officials to return to his home country.

Dehbashi Kivi had allegedly been seeking to export radar equipment for detecting stealth planes in contravention of US sanctions. The ABC reported at the time the US was seeking his extradition.

Quiet diplomacy usually works best

The Australian government is depicting Moore-Gilbert’s release as a win for quiet diplomacy in assisting Australians arrested abroad.

There is no doubt a calm and measured approach is the most effective way of resolving knotty consular cases – even when the charges levelled against our citizens seem highly doubtful, as was the case with Moore-Gilbert.

This approach worked with the release of journalist Peter Greste from detention in Egypt in 2015, although there is no evidence of any prisoner exchange or other quid pro quo in that case.

In the Moore-Gilbert case, the apparent prisoner exchange would have required the agreement of the Thai government, and possibly clearing the arrangement with Israel as well, given the Iranians held in Thailand had reportedly been plotting attacks against Israeli interests. Quite an effort for “quiet diplomacy”.

Australians travelling abroad are constantly reminded they are subject to the laws of the country they are visiting. If an Australian is detained abroad, the most consular officials can usually do is ensure that person is treated fairly and humanely in accordance with local laws.

Thumping the table and making demands, even if the charges seem totally outrageous, is usually totally counter-productive.

A fraught relationship

The situation for Australians who get into trouble in Iran is particularly fraught. Australia’s relations with Iran are tense at normal times. The Iranian security authorities see Australia as close not only to the US, but to Israel, and are therefore suspicious of Australians.

If an Australian is a dual-Iranian national, Iranian law treats him or her as an Iranian citizen, further complicating the task of consular officials when individuals are detained.

Read more: The Australian government needs to step up its fight to free Kylie Moore-Gilbert from prison in Iran

Iran has reason to be particularly suspicious of US and Israeli hostility at the moment.

In July, there were reports of a series of explosions at sites linked Iran’s missile and nuclear programs.

Media reports suggested Israel was responsible. Israel has a history of unattributed attacks on Iran’s nuclear program, including use of the Stuxnet computer virus, which US officials have confirmed was developed in partnership with the US.

Moreover, under the Trump administration, the US has had a policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran’s economy, which has drastically curtailed Iran’s oil exports. Israel’s Defence Forces have also been instructed to prepare for the possibility Trump may order a military strike against Iran in the final days of his presidency, according to Axios.

Other Westerners still being detained

Complicating Australia’s relationship with Iran even further are the different power centres in Iran.

Iran’s IRGC has the power to overrule all civilian authorities, including President Hassan Rouhani. It was significant that Moore-Gilbert was arrested when seeking to leave Iran after attending an academic conference to which she had been formally invited. This implied official approval to enter and leave the country.

Read more: Infographic: what is the conflict between the US and Iran about and how is Australia now involved?

Diplomatic and consular officials in Tehran must also deal with the Iranian Foreign Ministry in cases involving detained foreigners. The foreign ministry is often powerless in cases in which the IRGC has an interest.

So Moore-Gilbert’s release at this time is remarkably fortuitous, particularly as Iran currently holds more than 10 Westerners or dual-national citizens captive.

However, if it is confirmed that the deal is a direct prisoner exchange, criticism here and among our allies that Australia has aided and abetted Iran’s hostage taking strategy is bound to grow.

– ref. Kylie Moore-Gilbert has been released. But will a prisoner swap with Australia encourage more hostage-taking by Iran? – https://theconversation.com/kylie-moore-gilbert-has-been-released-but-will-a-prisoner-swap-with-australia-encourage-more-hostage-taking-by-iran-150942

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Antony Burnham, Research Fellow, Research School of Earth Sciences, Australian National University

Earth is the only planet we know contains life. Is our planet special? Scientists over the years have mulled over what factors are essential for, or beneficial to, life. The answers will help us identify other potentially inhabited planets elsewhere in the galaxy.

To understand what conditions were like in Earth’s early years, our research tried to recreate the chemical balance of the boiling magma ocean that covered the planet billions of years ago, and conducted experiments to see what kind of atmosphere it would have produced. Working with colleagues in France and the United States, we found Earth’s first atmosphere was likely a thick, inhospitable soup of carbon dioxide and nitrogen, much like what we see on Venus today.

Read more: If there is life on Venus, how could it have got there? Origin of life experts explain

How Earth got its first atmosphere

A rocky planet like Earth is born through a process called “accretion”, in which initially small particles clump together under the pull of gravity to form larger and larger bodies. The smaller bodies, called “planetesimals”, look like asteroids, and the next size up are “planetary embryos”. There may have been many planetary embryos in the early Solar System, but the only one that still survives is Mars, which is not a fully fledged planet like Earth or Venus.

The late stages of accretion involve giant impacts that release enormous amounts of energy. We think the last impact in Earth’s accretion involved a Mars-sized embryo hitting the growing Earth, spinning off our Moon, and melting most or all of what was left.

The impact would have left Earth covered in a global sea of molten rock called a “magma ocean”. The magma ocean would have leaked hydrogen, carbon, oxygen and nitrogen gases, to form Earth’s first atmosphere.

What the first atmosphere was like

We wanted to know exactly what kind of atmosphere this would have been, and how it would have changed as it, and the magma ocean beneath, cooled down. The crucial thing to understand is what was happening with the element oxygen, because it controls how the other elements combine.

If there was little oxygen around, the atmosphere would have been rich in hydrogen (H₂), ammonia (NH₃) and carbon monoxide (CO) gases. With abundant oxygen, it would have been made of a much friendlier mix of gases: carbon dioxide (CO₂), water vapour (H₂O) and molecular nitrogen (N₂).

Read more: The rise and fall of oxygen

So we needed to work out the chemistry of oxygen in the magma ocean. The key was to determine how much oxygen was chemically bonded to the element iron. If there’s a lot of oxygen, it bonds to iron in a 3:2 ratio, but if there is less oxygen we see a 1:1 ratio. The actual ratio may vary between these extremes.

When the magma ocean eventually cooled down, it became Earth’s mantle (the layer of rock beneath the planet’s crust). So we made the assumption that the oxygen-iron bonding ratios in the magma ocean would have been the same as they are in the mantle today.

We have plenty of samples of the mantle, some brought to the surface by volcanic eruptions and others by tectonic processes. From these, we could work out how to put together a matching mix of chemicals in the laboratory.

In the lab

We determined this atmosphere was composed of CO₂ and H₂O. Nitrogen would have been in its elemental form (N₂) rather than the toxic gas ammonia (NH₃).

But what would have happened when the magma ocean cooled down? It seems the early Earth cooled enough for the water vapour to condense out of the atmosphere, forming oceans of liquid water like we see today. This would have left an atmosphere with 97% CO₂ and 3% N₂, at a total pressure roughly 70 times today’s atmospheric pressure. Talk about a greenhouse effect! But the Sun was less than three-quarters as bright then as it is now.

How Earth avoided the fate of Venus

This ratio of CO₂ to N₂ is strikingly like the present atmosphere on Venus. So why did Venus, but not Earth, retain the hellishly hot and toxic environment we observe today?

The answer is that Venus was too close to the Sun. It simply never cooled down enough to form water oceans. Instead, the H₂O in the atmosphere stayed as water vapour and was slowly but inexorably lost to space.

On the early Earth, the water oceans instead slowly but steadily drew down CO₂ from the atmosphere by reaction with rock – a reaction known to science for the past 70 years as the “Urey reaction”, after the Nobel prizewinner who discovered it – and reducing atmospheric pressure to what we observe today.

So, although both planets started out almost identically, it is their different distances from the Sun that put them on divergent paths. Earth became more conducive to life while Venus became increasingly inhospitable.

Read more: Ancient minerals on Earth can help explain the early solar system

– ref. Ancient Earth had a thick, toxic atmosphere like Venus – until it cooled off and became liveable – https://theconversation.com/ancient-earth-had-a-thick-toxic-atmosphere-like-venus-until-it-cooled-off-and-became-liveable-150934

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bernadette McCabe, Professor and Principal Scientist, University of Southern Queensland

Biomethane technology is no longer on the backburner in Australia after an announcement this week that gas from Sydney’s Malabar wastewater plant will be used to power up to 24,000 homes.

Biomethane, also known as renewable natural gas, is produced when bacteria break down organic material such as human waste.

The demonstration project is the first of its kind in Australia. But many may soon follow: New South Wales’ gas pipelines are reportedly close to more than 30,000 terajoules (TJs) of potential biogas, enough to supply 1.4 million homes.

Critics say the project will do little to dent Australia’s greenhouse emissions. But if deployed at scale, gas captured from wastewater can help decarbonise our gas grid and bolster energy supplies. The trial represents the chance to demonstrate an internationally proven technology on Australian soil.

What’s the project all about?

Biomethane is a clean form of biogas. Biogas is about 60% methane and 40% carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other contaminants. Turning biogas into biomethane requires technology that scrubs out the contaminants – a process called upgrading.

The resulting biomethane is 98% methane. While methane produces CO₂ when burned at the point of use, biomethane is considered “zero emissions” – it does not add to greenhouse gas emissions. This is because:

• it captures methane produced from anaerobic digestion, in which microorganisms break down organic material. This methane would otherwise have been released to the atmosphere

• it is used in place of fossil fuels, displacing those CO₂ emissions.

Biomethane can also produce negative emissions if the CO₂ produced from upgrading it is used in other processes, such as industry and manufacturing.

Biomethane is indistinguishable from natural gas, so can be used in existing gas infrastructure.

Read more: Biogas: smells like a solution to our energy and waste problems

The Malabar project, in southeast Sydney, is a joint venture between gas infrastructure giant Jemena and utility company Sydney Water. The A$13.8 million trial is partly funded by the federal government’s Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA).

Sydney Water, which runs the Malabar wastewater plant, will install gas-purifying equipment at the site. Biogas produced from sewage sludge will be cleaned and upgraded – removing contaminants such as CO₂ – then injected into Jemena’s gas pipelines.

Sydney Water will initially supply 95TJ of biomethane a year from early 2022, equivalent to the gas demand of about 13,300 homes. Production is expected to scale up to 200TJ a year.

Biomethane: the benefits and challenges for Australia

A report by the International Energy Agency earlier this year said biogas and biomethane could cover 20% of global natural gas demand while reducing greenhouse emissions.

As well as creating zero-emissions energy from wastewater, biomethane can be produced from waste created by agriculture and food production, and from methane released at landfill sites.

The industry is a potential economic opportunity for regional areas, and would generate skilled jobs in planning, engineering, operating and maintenance of biogas and biomethane plants.

Methane emitted from organic waste at facilities such as Malabar is 28 times more potent than CO₂. So using it to replace fossil-fuel natural gas is a win for the environment.

Read more: Emissions of methane – a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide – are rising dangerously

It’s also a win for Jemena, and all energy users. Many of Jemena’s gas customers, such as the City of Sydney, want to decarbonise their existing energy supplies. Some say they will stop using gas if renewable alternatives are not found. Jemena calculates losing these customers would lose it A$2.1 million each year by 2050, and ultimately, lead to higher costs for remaining customers.

The challenge for Australia will be the large scale roll out of biomethane. Historically, this phase has been a costly exercise for renewable technologies entering the market.

The global picture

Worldwide, the top biomethane-producers include Germany, the United Kingdom, Sweden, France and the United States.

The international market for biomethane is growing. Global clean energy policies, such as the European Green Deal, will help create extra demand for biomethane. The largest opportunities lie in the Asia-Pacific region, where natural gas consumption and imports have grown rapidly in recent years.

Australia is lagging behind the rest of the world on biomethane use. But more broadly, it does have a biogas sector, comprising than 240 plants associated with landfill gas power units and wastewater treatment.

In Australia, biogas is already used to produce electricity and heat. The step to grid injection is sensible, given the logistics of injecting biomethane into existing gas infrastructure works well overseas. But the industry needs government support.

Last year, a landmark report into biogas opportunities for Australia put potential production at 103 terawatt hours. This is equivalent to almost 9% of Australia’s total energy consumption, and comparable to current biogas production in Germany.

A clean way to a gas-led recovery

While the scale of the Malabar project will only reduce emissions in a small way initially, the trial will bring renewable gas into the Australia’s renewable energy family. Industry group Bioenergy Australia is now working to ensure gas standards and specifications are understood, to safeguard its smooth and safe introduction into the energy mix.

The Morrison government has been spruiking a gas-led recovery from the COVID-19 recession, which it says would make energy more affordable for families and businesses and support jobs. Using greenhouse gases produced by wastewater in Australia’s biggest city is an important – and green – first step.

Read more: ‘A dose of reality’: Morrison government’s new $1.9 billion techno-fix for climate change is a small step

– ref. Not just hot air: turning Sydney’s wastewater into green gas could be a climate boon – https://theconversation.com/not-just-hot-air-turning-sydneys-wastewater-into-green-gas-could-be-a-climate-boon-150672

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Guido Governatori, Software Systems Research Group Leader, Data61

Can computers read and apply legal rules? It’s an idea that’s gaining momentum, as it promises to make laws more accessible to the public and easier to follow. But it raises a host of legal, technical and ethical questions.

The OECD recently published a white paper on “Rules as Code” efforts around the world. The Australian Senate Select Committee on Financial Technology and Regulatory Technology will be accepting submissions on the subject until 11 December 2020.

Machines cannot read and respond to rules that are expressed in human language. To make rules machine-readable and actionable, the interpretation of the rules must also be coded. Determining how best to code law is important as we venture deeper into a digital future.

Decades in the making

The coding of legal rules is not entirely new. Over the past five decades, artificial intelligence and law researchers have produced a range of formally coded versions of tax and other laws.

In 1986 UK computer scientists Bob Kowalski and Marek Sergot, for example, coded the British Nationality Act. More familiar examples of the results of such work would include guiding instruments and tools provided by the Australian Tax Office to assist taxpayers.

Read more: Smart contracts – smart or dumb?

Over the past decade Data61, the data science arm of the CSIRO, has developed a way to re-imagine regulation as an open platform, based on digital logic. This platform makes it easier to develop software that can automatically check whether the processes of a business or other organisation comply with relevant rules. For example, this could be used to check whether a new company needs to apply for any permits, and if so how to do it.

What is ‘Rules as Code’?

Coding legal rules is often complex. Rules written in human language are not drafted with coding in mind. Vague, broad rules may be difficult to interpret and to apply to specific cases.

The coding process is painstaking and resource-intensive. Law and technology experts must grapple with each rule in sets of rules that are often very large.

In response, government projects in New Zealand and New South Wales (both closely linked to Australian digital government expert Pia Andrews) and in France, Canada and other countries have tried a different approach: “Rules as Code”. This means that drafters and coders develop legal rules together, producing a human-language text as well as an official coded version.

The recent OECD report contends that Rules as Code “could allow businesses to consume machine-consumable versions directly from government, reducing the need for individual interpretation and translation”. Further, technical capacity to translate human-readable rules into machine-consumable ones:

may eliminate (or, substantially minimise) the need for multidisciplinary cooperation and learning, thereby reducing the need for different types of experts to adjust their ways of working to improve the overall rule quality.

Loss of flexibility

While Rules as Code may hold efficiency benefits, it may also lead to a loss of flexibility in how laws are interpreted. Interpretation of law is carried out by various stakeholders, the courts being the final authority.

Coding makes it easy to apply the rules to cases that the rule-makers addressed, as well as ones they may have foreseen even if they didn’t address them explicitly. However, the coded version produced during drafting may be too rigid to respond appropriately and fairly to unforeseen cases.

Read more: People are using artificial intelligence to help sort out their divorce. Would you?

Rules as Code raises a number of thorny legal issues. Would it be constitutional when applied to complex laws, or would it be viewed as appropriating, undermining or limiting the role of courts to interpret the law? How authoritative is the drafter and coder’s view of the meaning of the new law?

If a Rules-as-Code tool informed by an incorrect interpretation provides wrong information how will the mistake be identified and who will be liable? A possible example would be a tool that erroneously advises a user they are ineligible for a welfare payment.

Understanding the risks

Excitement about the potential of Rules as Code should be balanced by a deep understanding of the structural risks. Rules as Code assumes the law, regulations and the role of government remain the same as they were in the 20th century.

However, technology is transforming law and empowering people and other entities. Colin Rule, a global leader in online dispute resolution, recently asserted this will have a significant impact on the future of justice.

Citizens use technology in almost every area of their lives, and they have the fundamental right to use, interpret and respond to rules in a way that is consistent with the law (that is, with what a court would hold). This is true whether or not it agrees with the government’s own interpretation built into code.

Read more: From robodebt to racism: what can go wrong when governments let algorithms make the decisions

Regulatory computer systems that implement a single “authoritative” or “official” view of the relevant rules can undermine the rules themselves, human freedoms, and democracy.

The long-standing approach to coding law and the new Rules-as-Code approach both provide important building blocks for digital law in the future. But neither approach can successfully navigate the legal challenges and demands while producing coded law at the scale required to support general AI solutions.

How to make it work

A better approach would be to build AI solutions that can interpret and code legal rules with sophistication and transparency, advancing the objectives of the rules while supporting the complex rights of individuals. This is a future vision that requires, among others, the development of mechanisms to determine when to interact with human regulators and domain experts, as well as institutions that would ensure the integrity of the outcomes.

A range of expert knowledge – not only legal, but also ethical, economic, financial, medical, psychological, and so on – is essential to correctly determine how this can be achieved.

Australia should support broad, collaborative, multi-disciplinary, public-private research partnerships into legal technologies or “lawtech”. This would harness our existing knowledge and capacity in AI and Rules as Code. By combining the right expertise and resources we can enable Australia to embrace the future opportunities and properly address the challenges of coding law.

– ref. ‘Rules as Code’ will let computers apply laws and regulations. But over-rigid interpretations would undermine our freedoms – https://theconversation.com/rules-as-code-will-let-computers-apply-laws-and-regulations-but-over-rigid-interpretations-would-undermine-our-freedoms-149992

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Willsteed, Senior lecturer, Queensland University of Technology

Review: David Byrne’s American Utopia, directed by Spike Lee

Two years ago, on a warm Broadbeach night strolling back to our hotel, my teenage daughter gathered up what we were thinking in eight words: “That was the best night of my life”.

We had travelled south from Brisbane to see show number 141 of a 143-date world tour of David Byrne’s American Utopia.

It takes a lot to prise us loose from our suburban setting, but memories of Talking Heads’ first Australian tour came back into focus and gave me a nudge.

The Festival Hall show in the winter of 1979 had been sharp and groovy. A gaggle of us walked the two blocks back to their hotel with the band. I followed Byrne into the lift, where we suffered in pained silence until his floor. I was too shy to speak.

Back in the bar with the rest of the band, bottles of red wine and my silly, punky buddies I was probably loquacious as hell.

The Byrne on stage in Broadbeach was 40 years older but no less energetic or committed. The energy was different — smoother and more focused than the frenetic twitch of the 70s — but the commitment was clear.

This show was a transformation. A new way of looking at live music.

Redefining performance

A bare stage. An oblong light illuminates Byrne on a basic wooden chair, his hands flat on a wooden table framing a human brain.

The music delicately builds as he lifts the brain and sings:

Here is a region of abundant detail, here is a region that is seldom used.

Thin cables raise mounds of chains gathered on the floor. A set has been created: three walls of shimmering metal curtain.

Spike Lee filmed five shows at the Hudson Theatre in New York in order to create David Byrne’s American Utopia. The result is stunning.

The breadth of the show — the shape and swing of it — are captured in shots from the audience’s perspective. Precise overhead shots of the stage provide neat patterns of light and movement. But, edited by Adam Gough, it is the feeling of being onstage with the performers, the close-ups and crane shots, which bring this remarkable story home.

Byrne and his band come and go through the walls, barefoot, in matching grey suits and shirts. After the opening of Here, the band are slowly revealed through slices of the Byrne/Talking Heads catalogue. Beautiful versions of Don’t Worry About the Government, This Must Be the Place (Naïve Melody) and then I Zimbra, when the whole band finally appears onstage.

There are five drummer/percussionists, guitar, bass and keyboards, two wonderful singers and Byrne. All are “untethered” as he describes it later – wireless mics and marching band rigs allow them to be anywhere, redefining the idea of what a band onstage looks like.

There are some songs, like The Bullet or One Fine Day, which have a slow, almost static quality, but mostly the movement is constant. Annie-B Parsons’ choroeography is delightfully appropriate to Byrne’s style, and as intrinsic to the film as the music.

Somewhere around the middle of the film, he is thrown into the spotlight — a floppy man, a rag doll — for Once In A Lifetime. People on stage sway and swoop, sometimes chaotic, sometimes ordered and symmetrical.

The constant movement is mesmerising, often with Byrne at the centre and the players snaking and skipping around him.

Connections

As in Johnathon Demme’s 1984 concert film Stop Making Sense, Byrne has much to say.

He carefully illustrates the importance of voting, asking people to register at the table in the foyer. He tells the story of Kurt Schwitters’ Ursonate, and of Hugo Ball’s poem Gadji beri bimba which became I Zimbra. He remembers Janelle Monáe singing Hell You Talmbout at the Women’s March on Washington in 2017 before performing his own powerful version.

Lee makes this moment bigger and stronger by cutting in pictures of the names being spoken: relatives holding up the faces of their murdered sons and daughters on an empty stage.

But what resonates most with me, maybe because it feels so personal, is the thread which begins with the brain in Here. We start life with a myriad connections between the hemispheres, discarded as we grow and we make choices on our way.

As the show comes to a close, Byrne proposes these connections, seemingly lost, can be reconstructed in our relationships with others; that music and performing are his way of rebuilding those potent connections with which we are born.

American Utopia had a profound effect on audiences around the world. The movie honours that love. Lee has created a live performance film that can sit up there happily with the best of the genre.

And then the chains rise and disappear, leaving black walls and the band onstage singing the beautiful a capella introduction to Road to Nowhere. Then the instruments kick in and they slide off the stage and around the theatre, making the connection between performer and audience as real as it can be.

The song finishes, Byrne hooting and high-fiving the audience, and looking genuinely happy as he exits the stage door on his bicycle, heading off into the chilly New York night.

My kid was right. That was the best night of my life.

American Utopia is in Australian cinemas from today.

– ref. Review: David Byrne’s American Utopia is a film honouring the love of the live performance – https://theconversation.com/review-david-byrnes-american-utopia-is-a-film-honouring-the-love-of-the-live-performance-149977

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dorothy Ann Lee, Stewart Research Professor of New Testament, Trinity College, University of Divinity, University of Divinity

Almost three years on from same-sex marriage becoming legal in Australia, the issue is threatening to break up the Anglican Church in this country.

This is the gravest threat to the church’s unity in its more than 200-year history. For the three million-plus Australians who identify as Anglican, it could mean at the least sharp disagreement and at worst, damaging disunity.

Same-sex blessings approved

Long-simmering tensions within the church have come to a head with a recent judgement that supports the right of clergy to bless civil marriages, regardless of sexual orientation.

Last year, the dioceses of Wangaratta and Newcastle approved services for marriage blessings. Wangaratta diocese, once conservative, has become more progressive, while Newcastle has long had progressive stance.

Their new services are just for blessings of couples married in civil ceremonies, not actual church marriages.

Nevertheless, the services sparked fierce opposition from the fundamentalist Diocese of Sydney. During the same-sex marriage debate in 2017, Sydney Diocese gave $1 million to the “No” campaign, because Sydney and its conservative allies condemn same-sex relationships as sinful and bound for hell-fire.

Church’s court weighs in

Given the disagreement, the blessing services were immediately referred to the church’s highest court, the Appellate Tribunal, to see if they conformed to the basic principles of the national church’s constitution.

On November 11, the court ruled by a majority of five to one in favour of same-sex blessings. The one person who opposed the majority view was a lawyer from the Sydney Diocese, and whose minority view is included in the tribunal’s report.

Read more: How the Anglican Church has hardened its stance against same-sex marriage

The bishops of all the Australian dioceses then held rapid virtual meetings to review the tribunal decision, and it was expected they would decree no blessings should go ahead in the interests of church unity.

At this point, those in favour of the blessings, including Equal Voices Anglican, feared progressive bishops would give in to a conservative push to do nothing until the next meeting of the General Synod. The synod, the church’s national “parliament”, is not scheduled to meet until mid next year. But given the pandemic, even that timing is uncertain.

A statement issued by the bishops on November 20 acknowledges “there is not a common mind” on same-sex issues among them. This is a significant comment, as this group has traditionally agreed in formal statements — however artificial — in the interests of church unity.

While the bishops say the General Synod will be able to address the issues, they have nevertheless urged clergy to consider carefully “whether or how to bless those married according to the Marriage Act” (which allows for same-sex marriage). In other words, the Australian bishops have officially recognised these blessings can now go ahead.

But disagreement continues

This will not be the end of heated disagreement. The Sydney Diocese will not easily give in on this issue. On same-sex relationships, they base their stance on a few contested Bible texts.

Most biblical scholars, however, see those texts as referring to predatory forms of sexual behaviour rather than loving monogamous relationships. They claim there is nothing in the Christian scriptures condemning same-sex marriage.

Other Anglican churches have split

The dispute is very real. There have already been splits in Anglican churches around the world over this issue. Whole dioceses and individual parishes have broken away from national churches to form conservative enclaves in the United States, Canada, and New Zealand.

Last year, Archbishop of Sydney Glenn Davies told Anglican supporters of same-sex marriage they should leave the church. Other Anglicans accused him of trying to force a split.

An amicable agreement might yet be possible across the Australian church, because there is already considerable diversity among the dioceses on numerous issues, such as women as priests and bishops, the submission of wives to husbands, and the remarriage of divorced persons.

But same-sex issues might well prove to be the Rubicon, because they have become an international Anglican issue in the era of the internet. This can be seen from the “Jerusalem Declaration” from the first meeting of the influential Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008.

We acknowledge […] the unchangeable standard of Christian marriage between one man and one woman as the proper place for sexual intimacy and the basis of the family.

Once some clergy go ahead and bless some same-sex marriages, the Sydney Diocese might push for some form of division in the Anglican Church in the coming months. The crucial issue will be what form it would take.

Would progressives have to abandon the church?

The Sydney Diocese is by far the largest diocese in Australia, and would not countenance being part of an offshoot church. It would want to establish itself as the “true” Anglican Church in this country, laying claim to the name and status. It would draw other conservative dioceses into its boundaries, and possibly even parishes and individuals from within progressive dioceses.

Read more: Same-sex marriage is legal, so why have churches been so slow to embrace it?

Progressive dioceses might be forced to abandon the national church structure, and be left impoverished. The battle over this issue, and who owns the name and church property, could well tie up lawyers and civil courts for years to come.

Such a split would also further diminish Anglicanism as a voice for justice and equality in Australian society.

However, such a split is not inevitable. Church leaders across the board will have to work hard in the coming months to find a way to prevent it, while allowing conservative and progressive forms of Anglicanism to flourish side-by-side, with mutual respect.

The decisions the leaders make in 2021 will be the most critical they have ever faced.

– ref. Is the Anglican Church about to split? It is facing the gravest threat to its unity in more than 200 years – https://theconversation.com/is-the-anglican-church-about-to-split-it-is-facing-the-gravest-threat-to-its-unity-in-more-than-200-years-150365

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Smerdon, Assistant Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland

The new Netflix miniseries The Queen’s Gambit has received rave reviews around the world. Surprisingly for a chess-themed show, it received a warm reception by the global chess community, which is usually highly critical of portrayals of tournament chess in film.

The experiences of star character Beth Harmon loosely correlate to those of Bobby Fischer, a US chess prodigy and arguably the most talented player in history. Fischer rose to fame in the 1950s, becoming the youngest ever US Champion at age 14 and breaking the record for the youngest international grandmaster one year later.

His meteoric rise ignited an explosion of popularity in the Western world for the historically Soviet-dominated game. Fischer’s victory in the World Chess Championship in 1972 against the Russian-born Boris Spassky came in the midst of the Cold War and captured the attention of the general population around the world.

This famous match is emulated in the final episode of The Queen’s Gambit, in which the American Harmon plays her own Soviet nemesis in Russia.

But chess in Australia during the 1960s, the period of The Queen’s Gambit, was a far cry from the popularity of the game in the US.

Read more: Checkmate: top chess players live longer

Chess in Australia in the 1950s and ‘60s

Australia had no recognised chess grandmasters at the time. Its geographic isolation presented logistical and financial obstacles to chess improvement.

It proved almost prohibitively difficult for Australian players to acquire chess learning materials and travel abroad to tournaments.

The chess scene was largely dominated by two men, Gary Koshnitsky and Cecil Purdy. Koshnitsky was born in Kishinev, in what’s now Moldova but was then part of the Russian Empire. He emigrated to Australia as a child, where he went on to become Australian champion.

Purdy was born in Egypt but his family eventually moved to Australia, and he taught himself chess as a teen. He won the inaugural World Correspondence Chess Championship, in which individual moves were sent and received by post in the early 1950s, and earned titles of international chess master and international grandmaster of correspondence play during the same decade. (He collapsed while playing a chess tournament in 1979 and died that day. Reportedly, his last words were about his final game: “I have a win, but it will take some time.”)

Purdy and Koshnitsky wrote a book titled Chess Made Easy. It was hugely popular worldwide, selling 600,000 copies in Australia alone.

Australia’s first grandmasters

Things started to pick up in the 1970s and ’80s, primarily in Melbourne, where the third-largest chess library in the world, the MV Anderson Collection at the State Library of Victoria, was hosted. It was, and still is, enormously helpful as a place for chess players to acquire knowledge and meet other players.

The Melbourne chess scene helped develop Australia’s first two chess grandmasters, Ian Rogers and Darryl Johansen.

The title of grandmaster is awarded by the world chess federation (also known as Fédération Internationale des Échecs or FIDE). To earn it, a player must achieve three grandmaster “norms” (based on an outstanding performance in an international chess tournament), each of which typically requires beating several players of master level in a single event.

For Rogers and Johansen, this meant living out of suitcases in Europe for periods of the 1980s and giving up the option of a regular job and steady income to pursue their chess careers.

Their sacrifices blazed a trail for other Australian chess players to follow. There was substantial growth in the chess community and particularly in the development of the junior ranks during the 1990s.

Another significant factor was the introduction of “chess in schools” businesses in the late 1990s. Coupled with the formation of a national competition for schools, this led to a dramatic increase in the number of Australian children learning chess, a trend that continues today.

A tipping point for Australian chess

Despite these developments, it was still some time before an Australian player was again able to break into the grandmaster ranks.

When one of us (David Smerdon) achieved a grandmaster norm in 2006, it ended a drought of 25 years.

This coincided with a tipping point for Australian chess. By 2009, the number of Australian grandmasters had doubled from two to four, and by 2020 it had risen to ten.

In recent years, a number of individual and team achievements paint a promising picture for the future. At the 2016 chess Olympiad in Azerbaijan, an Australian earned a draw against the reigning World Champion for the first time.

And in October this year, the Australian team sensationally won the Asian Nations Cup, beating top seed India (ranked fourth in the world) in the final.

The championship was held online due to COVID restrictions; chess has been one of the few sports largely unscathed by the pandemic, and in fact has significantly increased its membership during 2020.

Queens and Kings

The steep increase in popularity of internet chess has helped level the playing field for traditionally less prominent chess nations in Australia, Asia and Africa.

This is personified in another success of chess on the screen: the 2016 film Queen of Katwe. It tells the true story of a 10 year old Ugandan girl, Phiona Mutesi, who learned chess in the slums of Kampala. Mutesi would eventually go on to represent her country at the 2010 chess Olympiad in Siberia, and has proved an inspiration for chess-playing girls in Uganda and other African nations.

Not all the elements in The Queen’s Gambit reflect reality. No female player worldwide has ever contested the chess World Championship, and only one has been ranked in the world’s top ten.

Men dominate participation rates as well: only 15% of the players with international chess ratings are female.

Many hope the unexpected success of the Netflix series may spark a boom for women’s chess not unlike Fischer’s impact on chess in the West.

Though women’s chess in Australia is still waiting for its own tipping point, there are promising signs. In 2017, a Queensland woman, Heather Richards, achieved the first victory by an Australian female over a grandmaster since the turn of the century (unfortunately, the victim was one of us – David Smerdon).

Hopefully, it is only a matter of time before we see the emergence of our own Australian Beth Harmon or our own Queen of Queensland.

Read more: Most people think playing chess makes you ‘smarter’, but the evidence isn’t clear on that

– ref. The Queens(land) gambit: a brief history of chess in Australia – https://theconversation.com/the-queens-land-gambit-a-brief-history-of-chess-in-australia-150638

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nigel McMillan, Program Director, Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Menzies Health Institute, Griffith University

Early in the pandemic, many researchers feared people who contracted COVID could be reinfected very quickly. This was because several early studies showed antibodies seemed to wane after the first few months post-infection.

It was also partly because normal human coronaviruses, which are one cause of common colds and are cousins of SARS-CoV-2, do not generate long-lasting immunity, so we can get reinfected with them after 12 months.

But new preliminary research suggests key parts of the immune system can remember SARS-CoV-2 for at least eight or nine months, and possibly for years.

Immune memory

When a country is invaded by an enemy, it rallies its forces, fights the war and hopefully repels the invaders. While the enemy has disappeared back to their own territory, a smart country sets up watchers to look for any signs of a new invasion. These lookouts know what the enemy looks like and are familiar with their uniform and how they travel.

Our immune system is exactly the same. Whenever we fight a bacterial or viral infection we leave behind certain cells that remember exactly what this invader looks like. These are called memory cells and their job, in the event of another “invasion”, is to warn our immune system early and ensure the right sort of response is mounted. It means we don’t have to start all over again to make a new response, and so reinfection is either eliminated or the time to recovery is much reduced.

This long-lived memory response can last a lifetime for some viruses such as measles.

Read more: Explainer: how does the immune system learn?

But how long for COVID?

We have two main parts of our adaptive immune response: B cells and T cells. Both of these cells can generate “memory”.

We’ll talk about B cells first. They make antibodies, which latch onto and destroy disease-causing agents such as viruses and bacteria.

A team of researchers from Australia, led by Menno van Zelm at Monash University, published a preliminary study last week showing the body can generate memory B cells specific to SARS-CoV-2. The research showed these cells last at least eight months, and likely even longer. This means these memory B cells could still rapidly produce antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 eight months post-infection, if the person were to be exposed to the virus again (although this work has not yet been peer-reviewed so should be treated with caution).

Other researchers from the United States showed memory B cells lasted at least six months, in a preliminary study also released last week.

Read more: What you need to know about how coronavirus is changing science

While the researchers from Australia saw a drop in circulating antibodies against the virus after two months in the blood of the 25 patients they looked at, they found memory B cells against two important parts of the virus: the spike protein (what most vaccines are designed to target) and the “nucleocapsid”, another structural protein of the virus.

They say this should give long-lasting immunity.

But we can’t directly prove this, because that would involve reinfecting patients, which would be unethical. So to study this further, we have to rely on natural reinfections.

There have been just 26 confirmed cases of reinfection reported worldwide so far, according to a COVID reinfection tracker by Dutch news agency BNO News (although the true tally is likely higher). With 60 million people infected globally so far, reinfection therefore seems to be a very rare event.

What about T cells? These are cells that bind directly to infected human cells within the body and destroy them. All infected cells smuggle out bits of the invading pathogen onto their surface, as a kind of “SOS” signal that allows T cells to find the hidden enemy.

Researchers from the University of Oxford published a study in September showing memory T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2. This means certain T cells could remember how to respond to virus-infected cells, long after the initial infection was cleared —although there was no data on how long this may last.

A more recent study, published as a preliminary report last week from researchers in China and Germany, answers this question.

They studied patients from Wuhan, where the first reported COVID cases occurred, and who therefore have the oldest immune responses. They showed T cell memory responses were still present nine months after infection.

So what does this all mean going forward?

It would seem SARS-CoV-2 is not like its normal common cold coronavirus cousins. People’s immune responses to common cold coronaviruses typically don’t last very long, meaning we typically get reinfected by 12 months.

But it’s clear people’s immune systems can “remember” and respond to SARS-CoV-2. Interestingly, more severe coronavirus infections SARS and MERS appear to elicit longer-lasting responses up to three years.

So, people who’ve been naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 can expect reinfection to be rare. If it does occur it will probably result in very mild disease, but otherwise they should be fully protected for at least eight or nine months after their first infection.

But we still don’t know what would happen if someone was re-exposed after this timeline — only time will tell.

– ref. New research suggests immunity to COVID is better than we first thought – https://theconversation.com/new-research-suggests-immunity-to-covid-is-better-than-we-first-thought-150645

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Romane H. Cristescu, Posdoc in Ecology, University of the Sunshine Coast

Federal environment minister Sussan Ley this week announced A$2 million for a national audit of Australia’s koalas, as part of an A$18 million package to protect the vulnerable species.

The funding might seem like a lot – and, truth be told, it is more than most threatened species receive. But the national distribution of koalas is vast, so the funding equates to about A$1.40 to survey a square kilometre. That means the way koalas are counted in the audit must be carefully considered.

Koalas are notoriously difficult to detect, and counts so far have been fairly unreliable. That can make it hard to get an accurate picture of how koalas are faring, and to know where intensive conservation effort is needed – especially after devastating events such as last summer’s bushfires.

Methods for counting koalas range from the traditional – people at ground level looking up into the trees – to the high-tech, such as heat-seeking drones. So let’s look at each method, and how we can best get a handle on Australia’s koala numbers.

Why we need to know koala numbers

Gathering data about species distribution and population size is crucial, because governments use it to assess a species’ status and decide what protection it needs.

In announcing the funding, Ley said the new audit aims to fill data gaps, identify where koala habitat can be expanded, and establish an annual monitoring program.

Read more: Koala-detecting dogs sniff out flaws in Australia’s threatened species protection

So far, population estimates for koalas at the state and national level are rare and highly uncertain. For example, the last national koala count in 2012 estimated 33,000-153,000 in Queensland, 14,000–73,000 in NSW and 96,000-378,000 in the southern states.

This uncertainty can make it hard to detect changes in population trends quickly enough to do something about the threat, such as by limiting development or logging. However, the new audit can use methods not available in 2012, which should help with accuracy.

So how do you actually count koalas?

Finding a koala can be difficult. There may be few individuals spread over large areas. And koalas are well camouflaged and quiet, unless bellowing. Finally, they can sit high in the tree canopy.

In numerous research and management programs, we have observed that even the most experienced koala spotter may only see 20–80% of koalas present at a site, especially if the vegetation is thick or the terrain difficult to move through.

Making the job even harder, existing koala habitat maps can be highly inaccurate and miss unexpected hotspots. However, computer modelling using the latest methods, if carefully validated on the ground, can produce more accurate maps.

Traditional surveys involve multiple people independently searching the same area, and correcting counts based on the number of koalas each observer sees. This helps account for the difficulties in koala counting, but it’s hard, slow and costly work.

Searching for koala scat (poo) also is a common method of determining koala habitat – wherever koalas spend time, they will leave scats. However, the small brown pellets are easily missed, and large surveys for scats are time consuming.

Detection dogs have been trained to locate koala scats: in one study, dogs were shown to be 150% more accurate and 20 times quicker than humans.

And because male koalas bellow during the breeding season, koalas can also be detected with acoustic surveys. Audio recorders are left at a survey sites and the recordings scanned for bellows to determine whether koalas are present.

Recently, heat-seeking drones have also been used to detect koalas. This method can be accurate and effective, especially in difficult terrain. We used them extensively to find surviving koalas after the 2019-20 bushfires.

Citizen scientists can also collect important data about koalas. Smartphone apps allow the community to report sightings around Australia, helping to build a picture of where koalas have been seen. However, these sightings are often limited to areas commonly traversed by people, such as in suburbia, near walking tracks and on private property.

Getting the koala count right

All these methods involve a complex mix of strengths and weaknesses, which means the audit will need input from koala ecologists if it’s to be successful. Survey methods and sites must be chosen strategically to maximise the benefits of the funding.

Robust research data exists, but is patchy across the koala’s entire range. The first step could include collating all current data, including community sightings, to determine where additional surveys are needed. This will allow for funding to be prioritised to fill data gaps.

It is promising that the announcement includes monitoring over the long term. This will help identify population trends and better understand the response of koalas to ongoing threats. It will also reveal whether actions to address koala threats are working.

Finally, while threats to koalas are generally well understood, they can vary between populations. So the audit should allow for “threat mapping” – identifying threats and looking for ways to mitigate them.

Saving an iconic species

Last summer’s bushfires highlighted how koalas, and other native species, are vulnerable to climate change. And the clearing of koala habitat continues, at times illegally.

Government inquiries and reviews have shown state and federal environment laws are not preventing the decline of koalas and other wildlife. The federal laws are still under review.

However, the new funding underpins an important step – accurate mapping of koalas and their habitat for protection and restoration. This is a crucial task in protecting the future of this iconic Australian species.

Read more: Stopping koala extinction is agonisingly simple. But here’s why I’m not optimistic

– ref. Drones, detection dogs, poo spotting: what’s the best way to conduct Australia’s Great Koala Count? – https://theconversation.com/drones-detection-dogs-poo-spotting-whats-the-best-way-to-conduct-australias-great-koala-count-150634

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jago Dodson, Professor of Urban Policy and Director, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University

The South Australian and Victorian governments have announced, and New South Wales is considering, road user charges on electric vehicles. This policy has drawn scorn from environmental advocates and motor vehicle lobbyists who fear it will slow the uptake of less-polluting vehicles. But, from a longer-term transport policy perspective, a distance-based road user charge on electric vehicles is an important step forward.

Superficially, a charge on electric vehicle use seems misguided. Road sector emissions are the worst contributors to climate change. Electric vehicles powered by clean energy offer the promise of near-zero emissions.

Read more: Transport is letting Australia down in the race to cut emissions

As electric vehicle and renewable energy costs decline we can expect a shift to full electrification of urban vehicles over the next 30 years. Surely accelerating this transition is an urgent climate task?

The downside lies not in the carbon benefits of these vehicles, but in their use as private passenger transport in congested urban areas and the costs this use imposes on cities. As renewable energy becomes cheaper, the marginal cost of every kilometre driven is likely to decline. As driving becomes cheaper, more of it is likely to occur.

More driving means more congestion. Inevitably, that increases demand for increasingly expensive road projects, such as Sydney’s WestConnex, or Melbourne’s Westgate Tunnel and North East Link. It certainly will run against the recognition in urban plans such as Plan Melbourne that we must shift to alternative transport modes.

If we don’t have a pricing regime that accounts for the cost of car use in cities, the transition to electric vehicles is likely to work against the wider goals of urban and transport policy.

Read more: Cars rule as coronavirus shakes up travel trends in our cities

How would distance-based charging work?

Many urban transport policy advocates have called for distance-based road-user charging to be imposed on all vehicles in cities. This sounds great in theory, but in practice is difficult for technical and political reasons of privacy and surveillance. Such concerns will diminish over time as cars increasingly incorporate automated telematics that necessarily track their movement.

Distance-based road-user charging efficiently matches road use to its costs – of infrastructure, congestion, noise, pollution and deaths. It improves on fuel excise, which drivers can nearly completely evade by using a highly efficient vehicle. It also goes beyond tolling to fund major roads, which typically apply only to specific links.

Second, road-user charging can be varied in response to demand that exceeds road capacities. Higher rates can be applied at peak times to ensure free-flowing traffic and shift travel to other times and modes. Various taxation reviews, including the 2009 Henry Taxation Review and Productivity Commission reports, have promoted such policies.

Read more: Road user charging belongs on the political agenda as the best answer for congestion management

Exactly how big would the disincentive be?

Would imposing such charges on electric vehicles retard their uptake?

Based on our work with ABS Census journey-to-work data, in Melbourne the average daily round-trip commuting distance by car is about 25 kilometres. The proposed Victorian charge is 2.5 cents per kilometre. Thus, in Melbourne the average daily commuter’s road user charge is likely to be 63 cents – $3.13 for a typical five-day working week. Over a 48-week working year that totals A$150, hardly a large sum for most people.

By comparison, a commuter in a conventional vehicle with the average current fuel efficiency of 10.9 L/100km will use about 2.73 litres of fuel on which they pay 42.3 cents per litre in fuel excise. That’s about $1.15 a day, or $5.75 a week.

The average tax saving for electric vehicles compared to conventional vehicles will be about 2.1 cents per kilometre. Electric vehicle drivers will be taxed about 53 cents a day, or $2.64 a week, less for their car work travel. They’ll be about $126 a year better off.

Commuting trips make up about 25% of car use, so electric car users’ overall savings are likely to be even greater.

It is difficult to see how such savings on excise tax are a disincentive to electric vehicle uptake. Fears of a “great big new tax”, as the Australia Institute puts it, seem unfounded, as are concerns that road-user charges would “slam the brakes on sales”.

Let’s be clear, the big barrier is the upfront cost of electric vehicles, about $10,000 more than their conventional equivalents. Advocates for electric vehicles should focus on that difference, and the failures in Australian government policy, not state road-user charges.

Read more: Electric car sales tripled last year. Here’s what we can do to keep them growing

Why taxing actual road use matters

It needs to be recognised that, with lower marginal costs, electric vehicles are likely to be used more than conventional cars. That would increase pressure on urban road capacity. So while the new road-user charge of 2.5 cents per kilometre is flat across the time of day or the route driven, this will likely need to change.

Distance-based road-user charges have been politically controversial. Imposing a tiny charge on a minority vehicle type is an expedient way of introducing a needed reform. Fewer than 1.8% of vehicles in Australia are currently electric or hybrid. But as all cars become electric, distance-based road charges will become an increasingly powerful policy tool.

Thanks to advancing telematics, transport planners will eventually be able to impose variable road-user charging by time of day and route, similar to ride-hailing companies’ “surge” pricing. We could then apply novel approaches such as a cap-and-trade system. A city could allocate its motorists an annual kilometres quota, which is then traded to create a market for excess urban road use.

The private car could also be integrated into mobility-as-a-service models.

Road-user charges could be regressive for people with few alternatives to the car. But telematic tracking could allow for lower charges for less affluent households in dispersed outer suburbs with few other options.

Beyond fuel, private cars have high environmental costs in steel, plastic, aluminium, glass and rubber use. And about one-third of our increasingly valuable urban space is given over to cars in the form of roads and parking.

Read more: Freeing up the huge areas set aside for parking can transform our cities

To reduce this demand on resources and space, car use could be priced to shift travel to, and fund, more sustainable and city-friendly modes such as public transport, walking and cycling. We could even price the car out of cities completely. The most environmentally sustainable car, after all, is no car at all.

– ref. Think taxing electric vehicle use is a backward step? Here’s why it’s an important policy advance – https://theconversation.com/think-taxing-electric-vehicle-use-is-a-backward-step-heres-why-its-an-important-policy-advance-150644

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Smithson, Professor, Australian National University

There is no doubt the COVID-19 crisis has incurred widespread economic costs. There is understandable concern that stronger measures against the virus, from social distancing to full lockdowns, worsen its impact on economies.

As a result, there has been a tendency to consider the problem as a trade-off between health and economic costs.

This view, for example, has largely defined the approach of the US federal government. “I think we’ve learned that if you shut down the economy, you’re going to create more damage,” said US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin in June, as the Trump administration resisted calls to decisively combat the nation’s second COVID wave.

But the notion of a trade-off is not supported by data from countries around the world. If anything, the opposite may be true.

Data from 45 nations

Let’s examine available data for 45 nations from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, using COVID-19 data and economic indicators.

The COVID-19 statistics we’ll focus on are deaths per million of population. No single indicator is perfect, and these rates don’t always reflect contextual factors that apply to specific countries, but this indicator allows us to draw a reasonably accurate global picture.

The economic indicators we’ll examine are among those most widely used for overall evaluations of national economic performance. Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is an index of national wealth. Exports and imports measure a country’s international economic activity. Private consumption expenditure is an indicator of how an economy is travelling.

Effects on GDP per capita

Our first chart plots nations’ deaths per million from COVID-19 against the percentage change in per capita GDP during the second quarter of 2020.

The size of each data point shows the scale of deaths per million as of June 30, using a logarithmic, or “log”, scale – a way to display a very wide range of values in compact graphical form.

If suppressing the virus, thereby leading to fewer deaths per million, resulted in worse national economic downturns, then the “slope” in figure 1 would be positive. But the opposite is true, with the overall correlation being -0.412.

The two outliers are China, in the upper-left corner, with a positive change in GDP per capita, and India at the bottom. China imposed successful hard lockdowns and containment procedures that meant economic effects were limited. India imposed an early hard lockdown but its measures since have been far less effective. Removing both from our data leaves a correlation of -0.464.

Exports and imports

Our second chart shows the relationship between deaths per million and percentage change in exports.

If there was a clear trade-off between containing the virus and enabling international trade, we would see a positive relationship between the changes in exports and death-rates. Instead, there appears to be no relationship.

Our third chart shows the relationship between deaths per million and percentage change in imports. As with exports, a trade-off would show in a positive relationship. But there is no evidence of such a relationship here either.

Consumer spending

Our fourth chart shows the relationship between deaths per million and percentage change in private consumption expenditure. This complements the picture we get from imports and exports, by tracking consumer spending as an indicator of internal economic activity.

Again, no positive relationship. Instead, the overall negative relationship suggests those countries that succeeded (at least temporarily) in suppressing the virus were better off economically than those countries adopting a more laissez-faire approach.

National wealth

As a postscript to this brief investigation, let’s take a quick look at whether greater national wealth seems to have helped countries deal with the virus.

Our fifth and final chart plots cases per million (not deaths per million) against national GDP per capita.

If wealthier countries were doing better at suppressing transmission, the relationship should be negative. Instead, the clusters by region suggest it’s a combination of culture and politics driving the effectiveness of nations’ responses (or lack thereof).

In fact, if we examine the largest cluster, of European countries (the green dots), the relationship between GDP per capita and case rates is positive (0.379) – the opposite of what we would expect.

Read more: Vital Signs: the cost of lockdowns is nowhere near as big as we have been told

It’s not a zero-sum game

The standard economic indicators reviewed here show, overall, countries that have contained the virus also tend to have had less severe economic impacts than those that haven’t.

No one should be misled into believing there is zero-sum choice between saving lives and saving the economy. That is a false dichotomy.

If there is anything to be learned regarding how to deal with future pandemics, it is that rapidly containing the pandemic may well lessen its economic impact.

– ref. Data from 45 countries show containing COVID vs saving the economy is a false dichotomy – https://theconversation.com/data-from-45-countries-show-containing-covid-vs-saving-the-economy-is-a-false-dichotomy-150533

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Georgina Heydon, Associate professor, RMIT University

If you’re an avid viewer of crime shows, you’ve probably come across cases in which an expert, often a psychologist, is called in to help solve a crime using their language analysis skills.

However, in real life it’s the job of forensic linguists like myself to provide such evidence in courts, here in Australia and around the world.

Forensic linguists can provide expert opinion on a variety of language-related dilemmas, including unattributed voice recordings, false confessions, trademark disputes and, of course, a fair share of threatening letters.

But what do we look for when doing this?

Reading between the lines (and everything else)

Linguistics is the scientific study of language. Thus, linguists are uniquely placed to provide expert opinions on how language is used. Linguists study:

• grammatical structures, wherein changes in punctuation patterns between texts can signal different authors

• semantics, which explores how speakers and listeners form meaning, such as when making sense of a written text

• phonetics and phonology, which refer to the sounds of language. We can recognise subtle differences in the sound of a vowel when produced by different speakers, or by speakers of different dialects and languages.

• sociolinguistics, which looks at how language use varies across different social groups. For example, we can identify when someone from a non-English language background might misunderstand a question. This is because the variety of English they’re familiar with would differ, in small but notable ways, from native English speakers.

Since the first known forensic linguistic case in 1953, all of the above abilities have proven invaluable in courts time and time again. Yet the work done by forensic linguists seems to largely elude members of the public.

A widely misunderstood field

Ironically, a big problem for forensic linguists (and linguistics in general) relates to language. It comes down to how we use the word “linguist”.

Some people think this refers to a person who speaks many different languages, or is particularly fluent in their speech or writing. These non-technical interpretations are easy to conflate with the academic discipline of linguistics.

But apart from causing linguists a headache at dinner parties, does it really matter if people misunderstand what linguists do?

It seems so. Widespread ignorance on the vitality of forensic linguistics has led to some of the most egregious miscarriages of justice in Australian history.

In 2018, the Western Australia Court of Appeal overturned the conviction of manslaughter for Gene Gibson, an Aboriginal man with a cognitive impairment for whom English was a third language.

Police interviewed Gibson without an interpreter, assuming one wasn’t needed to assess his English fluency. This neglect resulted in Gibson spending nearly five years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit.

People who speak English as an additional language sometimes don’t know their legal rights in situations such as police interviews.

In the past, these defendants or witnesses have been treated as though they understood complex legal English simply because they could chat about the weather, or their family. Such casual conversations are not a suitable test for language fluency.

The verbose wild west of the web

Another example where linguistics intersects with criminals is found in the rapid increase in crimes involving digital communication. These online offences are made easy by the anonymity and reach allowed on social media platforms.

Correctly identifying individuals who post threatening, defamatory or false messages online is of chief importance for investigators as it can help protect those targeted.

This task, carried out by forensic linguists, is known as “authorship attribution”. It relies on correctly grouping together texts produced by the same author, by isolating textual features specific to that author.

These features are usually related to grammatical structure and are deeply embedded in each person’s individual authorial style. They are difficult to manipulate by would-be imposters.

Authorship attribution is certainly challenging, as there’s no “text fingerprint” or distinct pattern of language use that can be allocated to each of us. Still, big data analysis, combined with linguistic theory, is getting us closer to a reliable system.

Read more: Forensic linguists explore how emojis can be used as evidence in court

A “stylistics” approach, featured in one Australian Story episode last month, describes patterns of language that are similar or different between two specific texts.

But this approach makes no attempt to calculate how common these patterns might be in any other authored text. This oversight is typical of non-linguists attempting to undertake linguistic analysis, as they often don’t know what constitutes a common feature of language.

For instance, if two documents feature the word “cant” (“can’t” without an apostrophe), a non-expert may see this as a strong indicator of a common author.

But according to the Birmingham Blog Corpus — a collection of almost 630,000,000 words taken from blogs — this word is spelled without an apostrophe about 3.6% of the time.

Technology-facilitated analysis

More reliable methods of identifying authorship, or identifying a speaker in a voice recording, are possible with both specialised linguistic knowledge and computer processing power.

Advancing this field doesn’t require any fancy new technology. It requires more investment in Australia’s capacity for forensic linguistic research. In an increasingly digital world, in-depth research on text authorship and voice identification will prove crucial to future law enforcement.

It’s also important we increase awareness of the power (and limitations) of linguistic analysis among the general public, and especially among officers of the law and judiciary.

Bringing more linguistics into schools, such as with Victoria’s VCE English Language subject, would be a great way to equip the next generation of these experts.

Read more: Can criminal suspects be identified just by the sound of their voice?

– ref. Forensic linguists can make or break a court case. So who are they and what do they do? – https://theconversation.com/forensic-linguists-can-make-or-break-a-court-case-so-who-are-they-and-what-do-they-do-149920

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shaun Rosier, Practice-based PhD Researcher in Landscape Architecture, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

New Zealand has more than 1,100 registered quarries. Some of these mined sites are small, rural operations, but a significant number are large and complex, and within a city’s urban boundaries.

As part of the resource consent application for a mining project, quarry operators are usually issued with a quarry management plan, which outlines what needs to happen to the landscape once mining has finished.

Most local government bodies require quarry operators to do little more than smooth the altered landscape, redistribute topsoil across these slopes, plant some new vegetation, and manage any onsite waterways to prevent surface erosion.

But restoring the ecology of an extracted site isn’t enough any more.

My research at the Horokiwi Quarry in Wellington explores how design-led remediation projects can restore the ecology of a mined landscape as well as creating new public landscapes that can be used for recreation.

Conditions of remediation

Quarry management plans currently pay attention to returning the topography of a mined site to a “natural” condition during the remediation. Quarries and mines extract material from the earth, and by necessity alter the surface dramatically.

Read more: Afterlife of the mine: lessons in how towns remake challenging sites

Often a large amount of material has to be removed first to access the desired aggregate material or rare mineral. Once remediation begins, this material is spread across the site to create a natural appearance, suitable for revegetation. The landscape is smoothed over, pits filled in, and topsoil distributed.

Likewise, the revegetation strategy remains relatively simple. Most remediation projects rely on spraying a seed-fertiliser-mulch mix over these freshly contoured slopes. In difficult conditions, this is often paired with manual planting to establish cover for pioneer species.

These strategies typically use regionally specific plants, ideally sourcing the seed stock from the area to help establish a robust and appropriate ecology.

Read more: The uranium mine in the heart of Kakadu needs a better clean up plan

Nature and culture

These processes are all used to restore a site back to a “natural character”, but what this means is left undefined. The Resource Management Act (RMA), under which mining resource consent applications have to be made, says miners have:

…a duty to avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effect on the environment arising from an activity.

While the RMA does not define this natural character condition that is to be preserved or restored, it provides some guidance in the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement.

Here, natural character is determined to be underpinned by natural processes, elements and patterns. But as some planners and designers have made clear, this is still an unclear position.

It relies on a problematic distinction between nature and culture, where nature is something different and unaltered from humans. Or, as US environmental historian William Cronon writes:

The place where we are is the place where nature is not.

Problematic results

Most remedial works are successful from a biological point of view, leading to full or partial restoration of ecological processes. For example, the limestone quarry at Cape Foulwind has been relatively successful in its biophysical remediation. But the site is close to local communities and on a major tourist route, and could play a bigger role as a public space.

On the other hand, the remediation of the Mikonui Valley mine, on conservation land on the West Coast, has arguably been a failure, described as a “moonscape” by conservationists. The company paid a bond to the Department of Conservation to allow it to mine on public land, but it has not remediated the land to an acceptable degree, and likely never will.

Behind this is the larger issue that remediation was only seriously considered at the end of the extraction process. Doing so left little room for other design options.

Read more: Mining powers modern life, but can leave scarred lands and polluted waters behind

Another approach to remediation

Recent research has called for a different approach, especially for quarries and mines within urban areas where landscape architects are involved throughout the entire extraction process.

Using their knowledge and skill sets could bring the extracted landscape significantly closer to a desirable outcome. It would also allow for new spaces, including parks, housing, recreation or ecological reserves.

This is an important shift for urban quarry sites. Establishing a design process that works in parallel with the extraction process would allow sites such as the Horokiwi Quarry to play a role in the public life of a city.

This large aggregate quarry has a remaining lifespan of 20-30 years, and presents an ideal case to develop remediation techniques that can bring the most out of this landscape.

The design proposal builds on the experience of a landscape of extreme scale and mass. Facilities such as sports fields, gathering spaces, relaxation and a mix of pathways all feed off the experience of the landscape.

At the same time, new ecological sites are established where appropriate to create a different relationship between visitors and the landscape.

Turning post-extraction landscapes such as the Horokiwi Quarry into public spaces confronts us with their scale and otherworldliness. It can change how we relate to the environment.

We have to remediate these sites in a way that moves us to recognise our relationship with extraction and consumption. This might not be pretty, but it is necessary.

– ref. Mining companies are required to return quarried sites to their ‘natural character’. But is that enough? – https://theconversation.com/mining-companies-are-required-to-return-quarried-sites-to-their-natural-character-but-is-that-enough-149814

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Keating, Visiting Fellow, College of Business & Economics, Australian National University

From the 1980s right through to the global financial crisis, the standard response in Australia and elsewhere to too weak or too strong an economy has been monetary policy — the manipulation of interest rates by a central bank, in our case the Reserve Bank.

Rates can be moved quickly, and central banks are seen to be independent and to behave responsibly, while governments are seen as making decisions for political rather than economic reasons.

But since the global financial crisis (in much of the world) and since COVID (in Australia) managing the economy has come to be seen once again as the role of the government through spending and tax decisions — so-called fiscal policy.

One reason is interest rates have fallen so low there’s been little left to cut.

After the 1990s recession, the Reserve Bank cut its cash rate from 17% to 7.5%. After the financial crisis it cut it from 6% to 3.25%. By the time COVID came around the rate was already at a record low of 0.75%

The bank did cut, as much as it could — first to a new record low of 0.5%, then to 0.25% and now to 0.1%, but there’s little more it can do, at least with the cash rate.

Rate cuts have been used up

And there’s little that whatever cuts it could make could do to boost the economy. Their immediate impact would be to push up the prices of houses and other assets and worsen inequality.

So the government has turned to fiscal policy. Since the onset of the pandemic the Commonwealth has provided A$257 billion in direct economic support; about 13% of GDP.

By comparison, in response to the global financial crisis it spent $72 billion; about 6% of GDP.

It will help, but it will do little about the underlying reason why rate cuts have become ineffective, which is an excess of savings over opportunities to invest them.

We’re in a savings glut

As far back as the mid-2000s the then chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, was talking about a savings glut: too many savings chasing too few opportunities to invest.

For a while the US and other economies remained strong as the downward pressure of excess savings on demand was held at bay by households borrowing ever increasing amounts in order to spend.

That escape valve closed after the global financial crisis, and numerous (mostly American) economists began talking about ongoing slow economic growth, which they described as “secular stagnation”.

There are two suggested explanations. One involves supply. It might be that the ability of the economy to supply more of what we want is slowing.

The other involves demand. It might be that we not demanding enough of the things the economy can produce.

Potential supply might be slowing because modern-day technological progress, principally in the form of information and communications technology, is having less of an impact than previous new technologies such as electricity, the internal combustion engine or the automated production line.

Read more: Why zero interest rates are here to stay

Australia’s treasury has also suggested the Australian economy might be less dynamic, with lower levels of firm entry and job switching, slower adoption of frontier technologies and processes, and less labour reallocation of resources from low to high productivity firms.

It is these supply-side constraints that have captured the attention of the Australian authorities.

On the other hand, in the US, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers has pointed out that if supply-side constraints were the principal problem, inflation would have been expected to accelerate as capacity to supply fell short of demand, whereas in fact it has decelerated.

Low spending means low investment

What’s more likely is there’s insufficient demand for the goods and services the economy is able to supply.

This would explain why firms are reluctant to invest (and invest in new technology) to make more goods and services, a reluctance that might itself be slowing technological progress and the rate of increase in potential supply so that it better matches the slow increase in demand.

It would also explain why interest rates have been falling. Businesses don’t need funds to invest on the scale they once would have, however widely available those funds are.

According to Australia’s treasury secretary Steven Kennedy, this savings glut is the reason the neutral interest rate (the real cash rate that is neither expansionary or contractionary) has been falling over the last 40 years.

He attributes these lower rates to “some combination of population ageing, the productivity slowdown and lower preferences for risk among investors”.

Given the international literature, it is surprising he hasn’t also identified changes in the distribution of incomes.

As is well known, higher income families tend to have a higher propensity to save than low income families.

Our incomes are becoming more skewed

This means changes in the distribution of incomes can drive changes in demand.

In Australia’s case — and Australia is far from the worst among the advanced economies — over each of the decades in the 1990s and 2000s male real earnings grew by about 30% at the top of the distribution, while at the bottom of the distribution they grew not at all in the 1990s only by 10% in the 2000s.

For females, real earnings grew by about 15% for women on below median earnings in each of the decades, while at the top of the distribution, female real earnings grew by 25% in the 1990s and 35% in the 2000s.

Read more: What the Bureau of Statistics didn’t highlight: our continuing upward redistribution of wealth

Although the available data doesn’t show any further increase in income inequality during the 2010s, it shows the previous increases haven’t been reversed.

In addition, the unequal distribution of wealth has worsened dramatically.

For fiscal policy to be effective from here on it will need to be directed toward Australians with high propensity to spend and away from Australians with a high propensity to save. This means it will have to adopt as a goal a more egalitarian distribution of incomes, and perhaps wealth.

We’ll need to boost low incomes

So far, the government response to the COVID crisis has been good in this respect.

JobKeeper and the Coronavirus supplement for job seekers have both been of most benefit to lower income Australians.

Looking to the future, a sustained recovery in demand is unlikely to come from extra spending on infrastructure. These projects typically employ few people and have either no business cases or business cases of dubious value.

Nor will it come from general fiscal support, including income tax cuts for high earners with high propensities to save.

Long-term, it will have to involve boosting the earning potential of low earners.

Education and services are the places to start

This will mean, as a first priority, boosting spending on education and training in order to improve skills and earning power and better suit skills to needs.

The second priority has to be improving the quality of and access to government services.

Services such as aged care have suffered from under-funding, denying employment opportunities to low earners and denying others support.

Read more: If we have the guts to give older people a fair go, this is how we fix aged care in Australia

In addition, cutting the cost of childcare and a revamping its means tests would encourage many women to increase their hours of work and thus their family income, as well as creating more jobs for carers.

One of the great benefits of fiscal policy is that it can be targeted in this way, refashioned to improve income distribution and consumer demand.

It is another reason for preferring it over monetary policy for some time to come.

– ref. From here on our recovery will need more than fiscal policy, it’ll need redistribution – https://theconversation.com/from-here-on-our-recovery-will-need-more-than-fiscal-policy-itll-need-redistribution-150081

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amanda Laugesen, Director, Australian National Dictionary Centre, Australian National University

Women have had a fraught historical relationship to swearing. Long regarded as guardians of morality and respectability, their use of swear words has been policed and punished in various ways. Yet women have a rich history of using such language as a means of challenging oppression.

These tensions have been evident in Australia since the time of colonisation. Convict women were likely to be labelled as “whores” and “strumpets”. Colonial commentators and figures of authority often questioned the moral character of these women; their use of insulting language was taken as confirmation of immorality.

Yet convict women used such language to mock and defy authority. When one woman in the colony of Sydney was threatened with being flogged for using obscene language towards her master, she replied to his threat using more bad language.

Read more: Whores, damned whores and female convicts: Why our history does early Australian colonial women a grave injustice

While convicts could be punished for “insolent” language, by the middle of the 19th century, vagrancy laws were used to control the use of “profane” and “obscene” language in public. Colonial newspapers and court records reveal a large number of such cases were brought before police magistrates. And many of those charged were women.

One called her husband a “bloody bugger” while in a pub. Another called her female neighbour “a bloody whore and a bloody bitch”.

While men swore often, women’s bad language was far more likely to be of concern. An 1850 commentary, published in the Moreton Bay Courier, called on husbands to exercise their authority and prevent wives from publicly using “obscene and filthy language”.

Women could also be charged as being “common scolds”, a common-law charge originating in English law often used to control those considered to be “public nuisances”. Colonial newspapers reveal that many of the cases involving these charges were disputes between neighbours.

In 1849, for instance, two women were accused of being common scolds by their neighbours because of their constant quarrelling and use of the “most obscene and blasphemous language”.

A question of class

Women charged with these kinds of offences were predominantly working class. Alana Piper and Victoria Nagy’s study of female prisoners in Australia from 1860 to 1920 reveals the bulk of women’s offences were minor, and included “disorderly, indecent or riotous behaviour” and obscene and abusive language.

Middle-class women’s speech was not publicly policed. It was, rather, contained through the norms of respectability. An 1885 Australian etiquette manual instructed women to avoid “vulgar exclamations”.

Yet popular culture embraced a masculinist mythology of Australian swearing. By the end of the 19th century, swearing could be a source of humour and even seen as something acceptable if used by certain types, such as the bullock driver (notorious for his swearing), and the bushman.

The hard work required of these men excused such language. This justification (and even embrace) of male swearing culminated in the first world war “digger”.

The bad language of the larrikin digger ranged from the more acceptable “bloody” and “bastard” to words such as “bugger” and “fuck”. The Australian soldier was renowned for his swearing as well as his slang.

Read more: From ‘Aussies’ to ‘Whizz-bangs’: the language of Anzac

Liberating language

If the first wave of Australian feminists sought to operate from a position of respectability, second wave feminists embraced the possibilities offered by flouting such respectability.

Amid the counterculture of the 1960s and 1970s, and the associated women’s liberation movement, bad language was used to challenge prevailing social and cultural norms. Women such as journalist and activist Wendy Bacon and feminist author and academic Germaine Greer became known for (and even subject to charges for) their bad language.

Bacon was charged initially as an editor of an edition of the UNSW magazine Tharunka that had included the poem “Cunt is a Christian word”.

She protested the trial wearing a sign reading, “I have been fucked by God’s steel prick” and was charged for wearing an obscene publication. She was ultimately sentenced to eight days in prison.

Greer was convicted for saying “bullshit” and “fuck” during an Auckland Town Hall meeting in 1972.

But if words such as “fuck” and “cunt” could be used to shock, they were also part of a feminist reclamation as women claimed control over their bodies and their sexuality.

Swearing today

Swearing today can still be seen as more easily claimed by men than women, but this has slowly shifted.

Women comedians, writers, and activists have all played a role in claiming a right to use bad language. For example, women comedians such as Kitty Flanagan and Jane Turner and Gina Riley (best known as Kath and Kim) have made clever use of swearing in their performances.

The use of swearing by women in public has been increasingly normalised. Yet women are still more likely to be judged for swearing, which can still be seen as “unladylike”. And for some, the swear words themselves can be problematic with their references to women’s body parts and objectification of women as sex objects.

Read more: Wordslut: a new book aims to ‘verbally smash the patriarchy’, but its argument is imprecise

Today, women (and even more so, women of colour) are disproportionately the targets of bad language, slurs, insults, and threats on social media.

If a woman’s swearing can be an act of empowerment, it also continues to risk punishment.

– ref. From ‘common scolds’ to feminist reclamation: the fraught history of women and swearing in Australia – https://theconversation.com/from-common-scolds-to-feminist-reclamation-the-fraught-history-of-women-and-swearing-in-australia-150615

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

Scott Morrison has encouraged federal public servants to engage with their Chinese counterparts, saying these are important connections particularly given the tensions in the bilateral relationship.

Answering a question during a virtual forum on Wednesday with federal bureaucrats, Morrison said officials were not burdened like ministers or prime ministers with “the overlays of the international relations”.

“One of the advantages that you would have is to be able to engage on the technical, on the direct, leverage on the relationships that you already have.

“I would see that as an important connection, particularly at a time when there are tensions – and of course there are tensions,” Morrison said. “In those circumstances, we rely more on these official engagements.”

Australia’s trading relationship with China is presently bedevilled by the imposition of impediments on a range of Australian exports; Trade Minister Simon Birmingham and other ministers have not been able to get their phone calls returned by their Chinese counterparts.

Speaking earlier this week, Morrison emphasised that Australia “desires an open, transparent and mutually beneficial relationship with China as our largest trading partner”.

The Secretary of the Foreign Affairs Department, Frances Adamson, said in a Wednesday speech that China may now wrongly believe it can largely set its terms of future engagement with the world.

Adamson said with its rising economic weight “unsurprisingly … China wants to set, rather than merely adopt, international standards. China wants to lead, rather than simply join, international institutions.”

China’s economic recovery from the COVID crisis would be important in how the region and the world came out “from what threatens to be a long and uneven recovery from the COVID-recession,” she said.

“But the questions around China are much more wide-ranging than simply its economic approach. No power this large and globally integrated can escape scrutiny or debate,” she said.

“The rest of the world has done a lot of thinking about China’s power and what it means.

“But it is less apparent that China has carefully considered other countries’ reactions to its conduct internationally. China may have reached a point where it believes that it can largely set the terms of its future engagement with the world.

“If it has, it is mistaken – and that is because there is far more to be gained for China, and for everyone else, through working constructively and collaboratively within the international system, without resort to pressure or coercion.”

At the public service forum, the CEO of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Wez Norris, said for those in the “weeds” of Australia’s administrative dealings with China “there doesn’t appear to be a lot of consistency in … how we go about trading off things like domestic commercial interests against our wider trade and relationship interests”.

Morrison said in his reply that the Chinese government had said publicly that “they are not engaging in any sort of political activity in relation to these quite specific issues that are arising in trade.

“Well, we take that at face value, but that is a line and a position that I would have thought that officials can actually repeat in being able to engage on the technicalities.

“Whether it’s dealing with issues on barley or fisheries or any of these sorts of things where there are technical matters being raised … we’ve just got to work the problem.

“That’s what I’m relying on officials to do. I’m not asking officials to solve the international relations issue, that falls to me and ministers and others.”

Morrison said it was “a complex and … difficult environment”. His message to the officials was “keep up the connections and do all you can to improve them and keep the dialogue going at that level, because business and industry are relying on that to enable us to try and mitigate the impact of some of these measures that are being introduced” by the Chinese.

The “stuff” that went on between politicians and leaders was “not something that should have to trouble the working relationship that you’re engaged in”.

Labor’s foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong said Morrison should do more to seek to resolve the problems in the trading relationship with China “at leadership level”.

– ref. Officials’ engagement with China especially important in tense times: Morrison – https://theconversation.com/officials-engagement-with-china-especially-important-in-tense-times-morrison-150857

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

The increase in the compulsory superannuation contribution, legislated to rise next July from 9.5% to 10%, is being fiercely debated following the release of the retirement income report.

In this podcast we hear the views of Brendan Coates, Director of the Household Finances Program at the Grattan Institute and Greg Combet, former Labor minister, and chair of Industry Super Australia.

Coates, who opposes the July and later scheduled rises, says ultimately the money comes out of the worker’s pay because employers will increase wages more slowly.

Coates argues the present superannuation arrangements are adequate for most retirees who own their homes, and will be in the future.

Although he says retirees potentially face financial stress if renting, Coates wouldn’t favour letting people dip willy nilly into their super for a deposit on their first home. But “if the rate of compulsory super goes to 12% as legislated, I think the right answer is not … to let them take out their super for housing, it’s to let them take out anything above 9.5% each year” for any purpose.

Combet flatly opposes the use of super accounts for housing.

“If we are concerned about housing affordability and trying to lift the level of home ownership in the country, you don’t go and cannibalise another part of the retirement income system, the superannuation system.

“You address the issues of housing supply. You address the issues of housing affordability, and you can take some specific public policy measures for helping first home buyers.”

In response to the criticism that higher contributions will diminish wage growth, Combet says: “Let’s go back to the 90’s. Paul Keating promised to get to a 12% super guarantee. John Howard froze it… No compensating pay rises that are discernible anywhere.”

Additional audio

A List of Ways to Die, Lee Rosevere, from Free Music Archive.

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: two views on increasing the super contribution – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-two-views-on-increasing-the-super-contribution-150846

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Armstrong, Senior Lecturer in Special and Inclusive Education, RMIT University

The Victorian government has announced an investment of nearly A$1.6 billion for public schools to ensure students with disability are supported in the classroom.

The money will double the number of students with disability receiving extra support to 55,000.

Further detail on the funding is imminent. But this seems to be news of a major upskilling (up to 1,730 jobs across the state by 2025) of the Victorian school workforce and a move towards a higher quality, inclusive school system.

But making Victorian schools truly inclusive involves changing the prevailing culture. A 2019 report highlighted multiple barriers to ensuring students with disability were included in in Australian schools.

They included widespread discrimination towards children with disability, and under-trained teachers.

Over the past decade, a rising number of children with disability in Australia have attended special schools — the opposite of inclusive schooling.

When the Victorian government announced the new funding, it said:

A world-leading pilot in more than 100 schools will now be rolled out across the state, to identify and respond to the needs of students with disability.

We don’t know anything else yet about this pilot but the fact this basic knowledge has to be gained by a new initiative shows how much change is needed in schools to even approach inclusion.

Recently I gave evidence at the Disability Royal Commission and heard sadly familiar stories from families and students. Young people with a disability described how a “one size fits all” education failed to meet their needs.

The stories revealed that flexibility, empathy and compassion from teachers would have often made a huge difference. Vulnerable kids often become angry, demotivated and disengaged in classrooms with standardised teaching. This is because their needs are not being met or because often they simply can’t attain the same academic level as kids who don’t have a disability.

Worse still, when kids have misbehaved they are often “managed” or “disciplined”, or suspended and expelled. This pushes students with disabilities out of mainstream schools, into limbo or special provision — ultimately reducing their opportunities later in life.

So, how can Victorian schools use this investment?

1. Help teachers know how to best help students with disability

This is a golden opportunity for a socially just and quality education system in Victoria.

But schools and the state government should acknowledge the scale of challenges involved. They should reflect this in their planning, underpinned by funded research.

One challenge, for instance, is a chronic lack of knowledge among many teachers in regular schools about how to help students with disabilities learn, make friends and be part of the life of the school. This includes taking part in school performances and excursions.

Read more: Students with disabilities need inclusive buildings. We can learn from what’s already working

Often, even if students are physically present, teachers don’t know how to adapt the curriculum (what subject content needs to be taught) so students with disability can make progress in mathematics or literacy for example.

Funded, evidence-based and accredited professional learning for Victorian teachers, accompanied by high quality applied examples, can help address this gap in knowledge. This will also provide professionals with confidence that inclusion can succeed.

2. Address the systemic dysfunction that blocks inclusion

Some education policies work against inclusion. For instance, policies like NAPLAN act as disincentives for schools to enrol students with disabilities if they believe they won’t attain strong test results. Such beliefs can prompt illegal gate-keeping practices such as those highlighted at the recent Disability Royal Commission.

Read more: Excluded and refused enrolment: report shows illegal practices against students with disabilities in Australian schools

Applied research, which asks professionals what’s preventing inclusion and what can be done to address cultural or systemic barriers, would help make smart decisions on spending this funding.

International studies reveal many educational initiatives falter over time. Schools quietly drop newly learned practices and return to custom, however ineffective or unjust. For example, Positive Behaviour Interventions and Support is an effective program tens of thousands of US schools have used to help students with social, emotional and behaviour issues. Unfortunately the program seems to be faltering in some US schools. This is because schools have returned to their punitive approach (three strikes, you’re out) to problem behaviours.

Studies have identified steps to avoid this problem. The first step is having a thorough, research-based assessment around the needs and resources necessary. It’s not clear if the Victorian government has completed this step.

3. Target the funding

Targeted initiatives can make the most of Victoria’s investment. A funded travelling behaviour roadshow, staffed by behaviour specialists, could provide mobile advice statewide for parents and schools on how to improve young people’s behaviour — avoiding the use of suspension or expulsion from school.

Expert advice and support could be provided on-site to help teachers use effective and evidence-based strategies.

Research has suggested promising new approaches to behaviour, which are already successfully used in health and psychology but need to be adapted to use in schools. Cognitive behavioural therapy is one example.

Read more: NSW wants to change rules on suspending and expelling students. How does it compare to other states?

Such approaches should be developed with this funding, showcasing Victoria as a world-leading knowledge producer in furthering educational inclusion.

Read more: Students with disabilities need inclusive buildings. We can learn from what’s already working

A direct investment approach like this avoids paying expensive private consultants and commercial organisations out of public funding to implement change. This is a common problem affecting public educational initiatives.

4. Ensure these changes are sustained

To ensure the education system sustains these changes, our future teachers need to be included. The state government should partner with organisations offering teacher education in Victoria.

Students who may have previously been ineligible for targeted support — such as those with autism, dyslexia or complex behaviours — are included in the funding announcement.

Successful initiatives in England have targeted dyslexia and funded accredited postgraduate programs for teachers providing the advanced knowledge required to identify and support students with dyslexia. Teachers gained specialist teacher status.

Universities offering teacher education programs and the state government can work together to ensure the content of teacher education programs is tweaked to reflect this priority and fully prepares the school workforce.

– ref. Victoria is boosting disability support in schools by A$1.6 billion. Here are 4 ways to make the most of it – https://theconversation.com/victoria-is-boosting-disability-support-in-schools-by-a-1-6-billion-here-are-4-ways-to-make-the-most-of-it-150633

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Power, Associate Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University

Many of us are aware of the enormous threat of antibiotic- (or “antimicrobial”) resistant bacteria on human health. But few realise just how pervasive these superbugs are — antimicrobial-resistant bacteria have jumped from humans and are running rampant across wildlife and the environment.

My research is revealing the enormous breadth of wildlife species with superbugs in their gut bacterial communities (“microbiome”). Affected wildlife includes little penguins, sea lions, brushtailed possums, Tassie devils, flying foxes, echidnas, and a range of kangaroo and wallaby species.

Read more: Speaking with: Dr Mark Blaskovich on antibiotic-resistant bacteria and the threat of superbugs

To combat antibiotic resistance, we need to use “One Health” — an approach to public health that recognises the interconnectedness of people, animals and the environment.

And this week’s appointment of federal Environment Minister Sussan Ley to the world’s first One Health Global Leaders Group on Antimicrobial Resistance, brings me confidence we’re finally heading in the right direction.

Where we’ve found superbugs

Tackling antimicrobial resistance with One Health requires studying resistance in bacteria from people, domesticated animals, wildlife and the environment.

Humans have solely driven the emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, mainly through the overuse, and often misuse, of antibiotics.

The spread of superbugs to the environment has mainly occurred through human wastewater. Medical and industrial waste, which pollute the environment with the antibiotics themselves, worsen the issue. And the ability for antibiotic-resistant genes to be shared between bacteria in the environment has propelled antimicrobial resistance even further.

Read more: How antibiotic pollution of waterways creates superbugs

Generally, wildlife closer to people in urban areas are more likely to carry antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, because we share our homes, food waste and water with them.

For example, our recent research showed 48% of 664 brushtail possums around Sydney and Melbourne tested positive for antibiotic-resistant genes.

Whether animals are in captivity or the wild also plays a role in their levels of antimicrobial resistance.

For example, we found only 5.3% of grey-headed flying-foxes in the wild were carrying resistance traits. This jumps to 41% when flying-foxes are in wildlife care or captivity.

Likewise, less than 2% of wild Australian sea lions we tested had antibiotic-resistant bacteria, compared to more than 40% of those in captivity. We’ve found similar trends between captive and wild little penguins, too.

And more than 40% of brush-tailed rock wallabies in a captive breeding program were carrying antibiotic resistance genes compared to none from the wild.

So why is this a problem?

An animal with antibiotic-resistant bacteria may be harder to treat with antibiotics if it’s injured or sick and ends up in care. But generally, we’re yet to understand their full impact – though we can speculate.

For wildlife, resistant bacteria are essentially “weeds” in their microbiomes. These microbial weeds may disrupt the microbiomes, impairing immunity or increasing the risk of infection by other agents.

Another problem relates to how antimicrobial-resistant bacteria can spread their resistant genes to other bacteria. Sharing genes between bacteria is a major driver for new resistant bacterial strains.

We’ve been finding more types of resistant genes in an animal’s microbiome than we do in comparison to commonly studied bacteria, such as Escherichia coli. This means some wildlife bacteria may have acquired resistance genes, but we don’t know which.

Many of the wildlife species we’ve examined also carry human-associated bacterial strains — strains known to cause, for instance, diarrhoeal disease in humans. In wildlife, these bacteria could potentially acquire novel resistance genes making them harder to treat if they spread back to people.

This is something we found in grey-headed flying-fox microbiomes, which had new combinations of resistant genes. These, we concluded, originated from the outside environment.

How do we mitigate this threat?

Antimicrobial stewardship — using the best antibiotic when a bacterial infection is diagnosed, and using it appropriately — is a big part of tackling this global health issue.

This is what’s outlined in Australia’s National Antimicrobial Resistance Strategy: 2020 & Beyond, which the federal government released in March this year.

The 2020 strategy builds on a previous strategy by better incorporating the environment, in what should be a true “One Health” approach. The World Health Organisation’s appointment of Ley supports this.

Antimicrobial stewardship is equally important for those in veterinary fields as well as medical doctors. As Australia leads the world in wildlife rehabilitation, antimicrobial stewardship should be a major part of wildlife care.

For the rest of us, preventing our superbugs from spilling over to wildlife also starts with taking antibiotics appropriately, and recognising antibiotics work only for bacterial infections. It’s also worth noting you should find a toilet if you’re out in the bush (and not “go naturally”), and not leave your food scraps behind for wild animals to find.

Read more: ‘Deeply worrying’: 92% of Australians don’t know the difference between viral and bacterial infections

The 2020 strategy recognises the need for better communication to strengthen stewardship and awareness. This should include education on the issues of antimicrobial resistance, what it means for wildlife health, and how to mitigate it.

This is something my colleagues and I are tackling through our citizen science project, Scoop a Poop, where we work with school children, community groups and wildlife carers who collect possum poo around the country to help us better understand antimicrobial resistance in the wild.

The power of working with citizens to better the health of our environment cannot be overstated.

Read more: Explainer: what are superbugs and how can we control them?

– ref. Humans are polluting the environment with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and I’m finding them everywhere – https://theconversation.com/humans-are-polluting-the-environment-with-antibiotic-resistant-bacteria-and-im-finding-them-everywhere-150744

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Subhadra Evans, Senior lecturer, Psychology, Deakin University

Parents have faced unprecedented stress during the pandemic as they care for children while juggling paid work from home.

However, very little research so far has focused on family well-being during the pandemic.

So we asked more than 2,000 parents to tell us in their own words about the pandemic’s impact on their families. We did this in April 2020, during Australia’s first lockdown. Our published study is the largest of its kind in Australia, and one of very few internationally looking into families’ experiences of the pandemic.

Families’ responses followed six key themes.

1. Boredom, depression and mental health

Parents reported a spectrum of emotions. They said they and their children were stressed, trapped and bored. New and existing mental health conditions also challenged the equilibrium in a number of families. One mother of two children said:

My mental health has taken a really bad hit and I’m struggling to support my children.

2. Families missed things that keep them healthy

Families missed sport, extracurricular activities, visits with family and friends, playgrounds, places of worship, trips to connect with the natural world, and other family supports. A mother of three children said:

We used to see family, friends, go to church and do kids’ activities like playgroup a lot […] Cutting all of that out to stay home has been hard. We miss being able to see our family and friends, to do activities outside of home that are more than a walk around the block. We’re all tense and exhausted.

3. Changing family relationships

Family relationships changed, which we called the “push-pull of intimacy”.

Strained relationships were common, including increased conflict and arguments between parents, parents and children, and between siblings.

The demands of caring for children was a source of discord, requiring more from already exhausted parents or creating tension in the family as a result of bickering and fighting as a result of being “cooped up”. One mother of two said:

We have too much time together. We are often irritable with each other. My child wants more social interaction from me that I can’t give.

For many, there was a sense that goodwill between family members was “wearing thin”. But in some families, closer bonds emerged. A father of three said:

It’s been great. Lots of quality time together.

4. The unprecedented demands of parenthood

The loss of important structures in the community, particularly schools, reveals the extent to which such institutions play a pivotal role in raising healthy families and children, with parents alone unable to provide the proverbial village that children need. A mother of three said:

COVID-19 had turned me into a stay-at-home mum, primary teacher, speech therapist, occupational therapist, strict budgeter, with no social outlet or relief. And I’m doing this alone with my health-care worker husband being overworked.

5. The unequal burden

For people with physical or mental health conditions, lockdown restrictions were especially hard to endure. A father of one child told us about his family’s experience of being confined to a small space:

My wife is on the spectrum which makes being in a confined space with others quite difficult for her — and those around her. Confined space gives her little room for calming, so her anger events have increased.

Families living in small apartments with limited outdoor space were also highly challenged, using words such as “suffocating” and “going insane”. Families facing economic worries were also a group in need. A single mother of two children said:

Shopping alone is now a huge stress as I don’t want to expose my babies […T]he price rise in food has caused us now to only be able to buy enough food for a week so we are having less in each meal to ensure the children eat three meals a day. Most days I now miss meals so they can eat.

6. Holding on to positivity

Parents told us the pandemic provided an opportunity to cultivate “appreciation”, “tolerance and understanding” as well as “learning to cope and develop patience”.

Some parents said they were grateful for what they had and were relatively fortunate compared with others.

Parents were also grateful for access to the internet, a safe space to call home, enough food to eat, time to spend together, good health, financial stability and “having enough”. One mother of two children said:

I was quite panicked to begin with, but the kids love being with us all the time and are building relationships with each other.

Read more: It’s OK to be OK: how to stop feeling ‘survivor guilt’ during COVID-19

Why these findings matter

Our large, diverse sample of Australian parents captured a range of experiences. Although more than 80% of our participants were mothers, we also heard fathers’ experiences.

Some of these experiences are likely to be similar to those of families around the world. However, the Australian experience may also be unique. Coming out of a tragic season of bushfires, many families may have already had stretched emotional and financial resources to handle another crisis.

The unique experiences of Victorian families, who endured a second period of longer and harsher lockdown, are worthy of follow-up research, as their resilience was likely pushed to the limit.

COVID-19 is not over, and we need to continue to ask parents and individuals how they are doing. Studies like ours, together with those comparing family experiences around the world, will also help researchers, policymakers, and service providers understand how to preserve community and family supports if we have future lockdowns or pandemics.

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

– ref. We asked over 2,000 Australian parents how they fared in lockdown. Here’s what they said – https://theconversation.com/we-asked-over-2-000-australian-parents-how-they-fared-in-lockdown-heres-what-they-said-150545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harriette Richards, Honorary (Fellow) Cultural Studies, University of Melbourne

As Australian consumers step out of their loungewear post-lockdown, many might be looking to buy new clothes for themselves or as gifts.

Whether you’re buying sweatpants or sequins, online or in-store, ethical fashion shopping can be confusing. There are so many terms, certifications, and accreditation systems — not to mention the marketing spin and corporate greenwashing — to navigate.

Our recent research examined the impact modern slavery laws have had on consumer awareness about ethical fashion, as part of a larger project on modern slavery.

We surveyed over a hundred participants, conducting additional interviews with 22 of them via Zoom during July and August 2020. They told us that although they felt well informed about the broader issues, they struggled with knowing what was truly ethical or sustainable at the point of purchasing an item.

Our work coincides with research, released by Oxfam today, showing big Australian fashion brands entrench worker inequality and poverty — especially for women — with unethical businesses practices.

Modern slavery

The introduction of the Modern Slavery Act in 2018 made Australia one of only a handful of places with legislated reporting requirements on modern slavery practices. The Act requires large companies to report on the supply chains that sustain their businesses. It also potentially serves to reassure consumers about where and how their clothes are made. Or does it?

Many of our research participants felt overwhelmed when trying to locate and interpret information about where, how and by whom their garments are made. One interviewee said:

I feel really conflicted because [Japanese megastore] Uniqlo is so good for basics and often they’re made out of good materials like linen but I know that they are not great, not very sustainable, not very ethical … it’s hard.

Those wanting to be “conscious consumers” find that they need to get acquainted with accreditation and certification systems, stay up to date with ethical shopping guides, and know what it means for garment workers to receive a living wage or be a union member.

Participants also recognised that the time, energy and resources necessary to make informed decisions are not available to everyone.

Read more: Is the dress green or red? Planet-friendly couture won’t be for everyone but it can lead the way

Wary of spin

Many participants were deeply sceptical of the corporate packaging of sustainability and ethical production. The renewed popularity of secondhand and vintage fashion indicates some consumers are mitigating confusion by opting out of buying new things altogether.

Nevertheless, there is considerable trust for flagship eco-brands such as Patagonia, as well as smaller labels that connect consumers with the garment maker or material sourced. The shoppers we interviewed said they trusted local fashion labels such as Arnsdorf and online marketplaces such as Well Made Clothes over larger corporate entities.

The fashion industry’s big retailers promote products that meet ethical or sustainable standards, such as David Jones’ Mindfully Made collection, the Iconic’s Considered Edit, and Kmart’s partnership with the Better Cotton Initiative.

Very few participants were aware of the Australian Modern Slavery Act. Most believe that “modern slavery” refers only to “off-shore” production, not garment workers in Australia. In fact, the Act requires Australian businesses to report on modern slavery risks in both global and domestic operations.

Read more: Why you should stop buying new clothes

Three good sources of information for conscious shoppers:

• Ethical Fashion Australia provides ethical certification for Australian-manufactured fashion

• The Baptist World Aid Fashion Report includes rankings of how fashion brands have responded to COVID-19

• Oxfam has previously published an annual Naughty or Nice List. Oxfam has released a new report and company tracker to show how big brands and their factories rate in terms of providing a living wage to workers — who are mostly women. Poor purchasing practices included aggressive price negotiation, inaccurate forecasting of orders, short lead times and last-minute changes to orders — all of which can make working conditions tougher.

Oxfam found that H&M Group performed relatively well on ratings by factories. Big W, Kmart and Target Australia were close behind, followed by Cotton On, Inditex (Zara) and Myer. The survey results show that factories rated The Just Group and Mosaic Brands as the worst performers.

Read more: Time to make fast fashion a problem for its makers, not charities

What about when you really want it though?

Our Modern Slavery consumer research indicates that shoppers recognise the challenges of conscious consumption and their own tendency to “suspend their ethics” when they feel overwhelmed by information, judge their need for an item as “urgent”, or are simply seduced by an appealing garment.

The last thing I bought was actually totally different to my usual shopping habits … I bought a fast fashion thing [online], which I never do!

Many shoppers reported buying consciously for themselves but giving up when it came to purchasing clothes for their children or other family members.

I would say the vast majority of what I buy for the kids is definitely not ethical.

Recognising consumers’ challenges and good intentions is crucial if we are to improve the ethics of the global fashion system.

Rather than simply increasing the number of certifications or accreditations brands should adhere to, our research suggests we would do better to increase consumer knowledge of those that already exist — and what they mean in practice.

– ref. Ethical fashion is confusing — even shoppers with good intentions get overwhelmed – https://theconversation.com/ethical-fashion-is-confusing-even-shoppers-with-good-intentions-get-overwhelmed-145935