Are you surrounded by screens?

Today, we rely on technology to do everything from sending emails to ordering food. But being constantly connected can leave us physically and mentally exhausted.

That’s why some people are doing “digital detoxes”, the practice of staying away from devices and social media for a set period of time.

The concept is gaining traction online, with supporters spruiking the health benefits of the “analogue lifestyle”. Some are even paying big bucks to go on “digital retreats”, with the aim of becoming healthier and happier.

But do digital detoxes actually work, or are they just another wellness trend?

What is a ‘digital detox’?

The term “digital detox” stems from detoxification, the process of safely getting a person off an addictive substance such as alcohol or drugs. This is usually done with support from a health-care professional.

So the idea of a digital detox is to step away from technology, to instead experience life with fewer distractions and foster relationships offline.

The trouble with tech

On average, young people in Australia look at screens for nine hours a day. Research suggests adults aren’t much better, with Australians aged between 45 and 64 spending up to six hours each day on screens.

As a result, more people are experiencing information overload, the idea of being physically and emotionally overwhelmed by an immense amount of data. A related concept is social media fatigue, a consequence of being constantly connected through online platforms.

But there are signs people are resisting the pull of technology. Some younger people are swapping screens for hands-on hobbies such as knitting, and joining chess clubs and other offline social activities.

They are also driving trends such as “raw-dogging boredom”, the practice of sitting through long haul flights without headphones. And friction-maxxing, the idea you can become a better, more resilient person by doing tasks that involve some level of difficulty, is also gaining traction online.

So in a sense, digital detoxes are just the latest online trend.

Do ‘digital detoxes’ work?

Current research suggests digital detoxes may have some benefits. But the evidence is far from conclusive.

One 2025 meta-analysis examined 20 randomised controlled trials, all looking at the effects of social media detoxes. It found taking a short break from social media had a small but positive effect on people’s feelings of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Participants also reported feeling less anxious, depressed and lonely.

In another 2025 study, researchers blocked participants’ smartphones so they could only receive calls and texts, over a two-week period. The results were striking. The researchers found this intervention had a greater positive effect on participants’ mental health than antidepressants. Importantly, this was because participants spent less time on their phones, but also spent this time doing beneficial activities such as socialising in person, exercising and being in nature.

Not for everyone

Digital detoxes may impact people differently, due to various factors.

One is cultural context. Research suggests people using social media in collectivist cultures such as Turkey may experience more social pressure to respond quickly and maintain extensive networks, compared to those in more individualistic societies. So people in collectivist cultures may benefit more from taking a break from social media.

Another is gender. Research suggests women mainly use social media to maintain relationships, and that they compare their physical appearance to others. This means they may benefit more from a digital detox, compared to men. One 2020 study found women who took a one-week break from Instagram felt significantly more satisfied with their life than women who stayed on it. However, the researchers did not see the same effect in men.

All about the approach

Current research suggests doing a digital detox may improve your mental health. But the way you approach it matters.

You shouldn’t just go cold turkey on technology. That’s because you’re less likely to sustain that change. One 2023 study found people who reduced their daily smartphone use by one hour experienced stronger and more lasting mental health benefits, compared to those who quit entirely.

Here are some tips to make your digital detox last:

• identify any unhelpful habits, for example checking your phone too often or bringing it everywhere

• make a plan to change those habits, for instance setting app time limits or only checking messages at certain times

• set specific goals, such as taking a break from Instagram for one week

• share your goals with family and friends, both so they can support you and understand why you may not reply to their messages

• monitor your progress, for example by reflecting on whether you feel less anxious or are sleeping better.

It’s hard to stay present and connected in our increasingly digital world. But doing a digital detox could help. Importantly, the aim is not to eliminate technology from your life, but to use it in a more conscious, deliberate way.

– ref. What is a ‘digital detox’ and will it make me healthier? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-digital-detox-and-will-it-make-me-healthier-280135

Imagine trying to build a house without a blueprint, find a shortcut through an unfamiliar city without a map, or govern a large organisation with no leaders and no meetings.

It sounds impossible. Yet tiny-brained ants, working without leaders or blueprints, have been solving problems like these for millions of years – and no, the queen isn’t the boss telling them what to do.

By almost any measure, ants are a wildly successful group of animals – there’s an estimated 20 quadrillion of them on Earth and they thrive on every continent but Antarctica.

How have these minuscule animals managed to take over the world (and our kitchens)? The answer is teamwork.

Bustling colonies

Ants are social animals that live in colonies ranging from a few individuals to vast continent-spanning supercolonies containing billions of ants.

Bustling ant colonies display many of the features we associate with human societies, including:

In humans, this level of social complexity usually involves clear governance hierarchies, with leaders and middle managers directing our activities.

But ants don’t work that way. So who is in charge in an ant colony?

The answer is simple: no one.

The queen isn’t in charge

Ant colonies are a classic example of a self-organised system, where complex behaviour emerges from the combined actions of many ants. Each follow relatively simple rules while communicating and interacting with each other.

The human brain works in a similar way: individual neurons have simple behaviours and cannot think on their own, but together they give rise to the full range of human thought and behaviour.

The queen, whom many people assume is in charge, has little involvement in decision-making or leadership.

Instead, her role is to maintain the colony’s workforce by producing new ants.

In some ant species, workers will even kill their queens under particular conditions, such as declining productivity!

By working together, ant colonies are capable of complex behaviours and problem-solving skills far exceeding the abilities of an individual ant.

For example, some ant species run sophisticated transportation networks linking their colony to many food sources.

When a foraging worker finds a good source of food, such as some crumbs in your kitchen, she lays down drops of attractive chemicals called “pheromones” as she walks home.

Other ants in the colony are attracted to the trail, reinforcing it with more pheromones as they go. As a result, the colony can rapidly deploy large numbers of workers to quickly collect food.

While an individual ant is only aware of the foods she herself has visited, the trail network allows the colony as a whole to be “aware” of many foods.

Should a food source disappear or decline in quality, the colony can quickly refocus its efforts.

Ants can also optimise their trail networks by finding shortcuts.

Since pheromone trails evaporate over time, shorter paths that are traversed more quickly get reinforced more often. Longer paths, by contrast, receive less traffic and get reinforced less often, which in turn causes the pheromone trail to fade and become less attractive.

This simple feedback loop allows the colony to “discover” shorter routes that take less time to traverse while eliminating longer routes.

The resulting transportation network can be remarkably efficient.

Remarkable architects

Nest construction is another impressive example of the power of self-organisation.

Ant nests can be vast and intricately structured, with chambers for raising the young, food storage, and waste.

Yet no ant has a blueprint for the final nest design, nor is a boss ant in charge of directing construction activities.

Instead, ants use simple rules to create their remarkable nest architecture.

For example, in the black garden ant Lasius niger, nest building ants excavate soil and form it into small pellets.

These pellets carry chemical cues making other ants more likely to deposit their own pellets nearby.

Over time, this leads to the formation of structures such as pillars, walls, and eventually roofs, without any ant understanding the overall design.

This process, where individuals respond to cues left behind by other individuals, is called “stigmergy” and it underpins the construction of other insect-built structures such as termite mounds and honeycomb.

More humans, more problems – but not so for ants

The use of simple behavioural rules enables ants to coordinate remarkably effectively as a group.

In a study where groups were tasked with moving a T-shaped object through a tight space, human performance did not improve with group size.

When participants were instructed not to speak, performance actually declined as groups got bigger.

Similarly, it has long been known that as human group size increases, the performance of individual team members tends to decrease, a phenomenon known as the Ringelmann effect.

Ants, by contrast, showed the opposite pattern: as group size increased, their performance actually improved.

So next time you see a line of ants marching around your house, resist the urge to spray or whack them away.

Instead, take a moment to appreciate these tiny masters of teamwork.

– ref. In an ant colony, the queen isn’t in charge. So who is? – https://theconversation.com/in-an-ant-colony-the-queen-isnt-in-charge-so-who-is-278196

Meetings between Chinese and American leaders are not exactly routine, but few are historically groundbreaking.

The exceptions include the very first visit by a sitting U.S. president to China, when Richard Nixon met with Chairman Mao Zedong in Beijing in February 1972 – at a time when America did not even formally recognize the People’s Republic of China. Deng Xiaoping’s visit to the U.S. in 1979 generated a similarly iconic moment when the reformist Chinese leader donned a Stetson at a Texas rodeo, a sign that he would be willing to engage with America in a way that Mao contemplated only near the end of his life.

Donald Trump may harbor hopes that his upcoming visit, slated for May 14-15, 2026, could have similar historical significance to those moments half a century ago. It will, after all, be the first face-to-face meeting of U.S. and Chinese leaders in Beijing since Trump’s own visit nearly a decade ago in 2017.

Yet the outcomes of this Trump summit with Xi Jinping are likely to be vague because the goals for both leaders are also only partially evident. The visit is being driven by trade imperatives, but there are other issues that threaten U.S.-China relations in the longer term.

It will be extremely hard for the two sides to address these more deep-rooted divides. Indeed, as an analyst of U.S.-China relations, I believe the world’s two largest economies will have an essentially competitive relationship for years to come, and areas of plausible cooperation – whether on climate change or AI regulation – are increasingly hard to find.

Taiwan: A change in US position?

One area that has been a source of contention for quite some time is Taiwan. Xi has made it clear that the unification of the island with the mainland cannot be left to “another generation” but has left it vague – up to now – as to how that goal will be achieved.

The summit has been preceded by lots of chatter about U.S. preparedness to honor its somewhat ambiguous promise to defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion – with Chinese analysts concluding that the war in Iran has severely weakened Washington’s capabilities on this front.

However, there are plenty of signs that Xi would rather find peaceful means to unite with Taiwan that avoid all-out war, particularly as the examples of Russia in Ukraine and the U.S. in Iran show that the outcomes of wars are not predictable.

Instead, China has seemingly concentrated its efforts on influencing the upcoming January 2028 Taiwan presidential election. The leader of the island’s major opposition Kuomintang party, Cheng Li-wun, recently visited the mainland and had a photo op with Xi – a sign that she thinks dealmaking with China might just be acceptable to the Taiwan electorate despite its deep distrust of Beijing.

To further fuel the narrative of a seemingly inevitable path toward unification, it would be helpful for Xi to have signals that the U.S. is no longer committed to defending Taiwan.

China will push for a change from the official position that the U.S. “does not support Taiwan independence” to “the U.S. opposes Taiwan independence.” The latter change sounds minor but would have great significance, as it would essentially be an acknowledgment that the U.S. recognizes unification, by some means, as a legitimate goal in its own right.

Trump has kept his own position ambiguous: He has noted more than once that Taiwan is very close to China and very far from the U.S., but he has also authorized major arms sales to the island that have infuriated Beijing.

Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party does not specifically endorse independence, as it knows that’s a red line for Beijing, but it would regard this change in American language as a serious blow to its position. It’s unlikely that the U.S. would make such a major concession during Trump’s visit – but that won’t stop Beijing from asking for it.

AI: The battle for global leadership

A more tentative but increasingly important area for discussion during the Xi-Trump summit is technology in general and AI in particular.

Just three years ago, the attitude of the U.S. government was summed up in the phrase of then national security adviser Jake Sullivan: “small yard, high fence.”

In other words, there would be only a few restricted areas of technology, but they would be fiercely guarded.

In 2026, things have changed. In some areas, tech restrictions have just become looser; the U.S. government now permits the sale to China of some high-specification, American-manufactured chips that were previously restricted. That policy was probably driven by the sense that China was developing its own domestic alternatives anyway and that the U.S. was losing market share.

Yet there is growing concern both in the U.S. and China that AI developments are moving too fast for governments – or companies – to know fully what the technology is capable of doing, let alone being able to regulate it.

China and the U.S. both desire to dominate AI and set the global norms and standards surrounding it. But they are also aware that AI has the potential to cause immense damage.

There has been loose discussion of whether any joint form of supervision or regulation of AI between the U.S. and China might be possible. And that could well form part of the discussions during the leaders’ summit.

But realistically, both sides see themselves in fierce competition, and the likelihood that either American or Chinese companies would restrain themselves may be fanciful.

The trade elephant in the room

The most substantial achievements of the summit, however, are likely to be in the least glamorous area: remedying the trade deficit.

Trump’s tariffs aim to make the United States’ global trade partners pay a higher price for entry to the American market, and China’s persistent and massive trade surplus has been a prime target for the U.S. president.

While there are many American products that China would like to buy, most of them are not products that the U.S. government is willing to let them have, including high-tech equipment that could be used for military purposes.

Instead, the key products are likely to be agricultural, including U.S. soybeans and beef. Look out for concessions from China that would benefit farmers in key Republican states, such as Iowa.

The current tariff dispute between the U.S. and China has frozen into a standoff: The U.S. has agreed to allow China’s goods into its immense market at manageable tariff rates, and China has – mostly – agreed to allow critical minerals and rare earths to flow to U.S. manufacturers.

That truce lasts until October, but the summit may see it extended.

Neither side is keen to restart the trade war that marked the summer of 2025, when Trump announced tariffs of over 100% on China and the U.S. was in danger of having key mineral supplies cut off as a result.

Summit to talk about? Perhaps not

So how consequential will the Trump-Xi summit be? Well, don’t expect another “Nixon meets Mao” moment.

The circumstances more than a half-century on are also remarkably different. Today’s China, unlike in 1972, has an economy and military second only to the U.S. and a central position in global organizations, from the United Nations to the World Trade Organization, particularly as the U.S. retreats from such institutions.

Both the U.S. and Chinese sides know that they can expect limited cooperation at best from their opponent.

But after a period, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, when communication between the countries atrophied, it’s still important that they are talking at all.

– ref. Trump-Xi summit will be no ‘Nixon in China’ moment – that they are talking is enough for now – https://theconversation.com/trump-xi-summit-will-be-no-nixon-in-china-moment-that-they-are-talking-is-enough-for-now-282295

We have been on a years-long campaign of satellite remote sensing of the vast desert landscapes in Eastern Sudan.

This involved using satellite aerial imagery to systematically and painstakingly search for archaeological features in Atbai Desert of Eastern Sudan, a small part of the much larger Sahara.

Our team – which includes archaeologists from Macquarie University, France’s HiSoMA research unit, and the Polish Academy of Sciences – wanted to tell the story of this desert region between the Nile and the Red Sea, without having to excavate.

One mysterious archaeological feature stood out. We kept finding large, circular mass graves filled with the bones of people and animals, often carefully arranged around a key person at the centre.

Likely built around the fourth and third millennia BCE, all these “enclosure burial” monuments have a large round enclosure wall, some up to 80 metres in diameter, with humans and their cattle, sheep and goats buried inside.

Our new research, published in the journal African Archaeological Review, reveals how we found 260 previously unknown enclosure burials east of the Nile River, across almost 1,000km of desert.

Who built them?

Already known from a few excavated examples in the Egyptian and Sudanese deserts, these large circular burial monuments have long puzzled scholars.

What seemed once isolated examples emerge now as a consistent pattern. It is suggestive of a common nomadic culture stretching across a vast stretch of desert.

Most are within the borders of modern Sudan on the slopes of the Red Sea Hills. Unfortunately, satellite imagery alone cannot communicate the whole story of these enclosure burial builders.

The carbon dates and pottery from the few excavated monuments tell us these people lived roughly 4000–3000 BCE, just before Egyptians formed a territorial kingdom we know of as Pharaonic Egypt.

But these “enclosure burial” nomads had little to do with urbane and farming Egyptians.

Living in the desert and raising herds, these were Saharan desert nomads through and through.

A new elite?

Some enclosures show “secondary” burials arranged around a “primary” burial of a person at the centre – perhaps a chief or other important member of the community.

For archaeologists, this is important data for discerning class and hierarchy in prehistoric societies.

The question of when Saharan nomads became less egalitarian has plagued archaeologists for decades, but most agree it was around this time of the fourth millennium BCE that a distinctive “elite” class emerged.

This is still a far cry from the sort of huge divisions between ruler and ruled as seen in societies such as Egypt, with its pharaohs and farmers. However, it ushers in the first traces of inequality.

Animals held in high esteem

Cattle seem very important to these prehistoric nomads (a theory also supported by ancient local rock art in the area).

Burying themselves alongside their herd, these nomads show they held their animals in esteem.

Thousands of years later, local nomads chose to reuse these now “ancient” enclosures for their burial plots – sometimes almost 4,000 years after they were first built.

In other words, the prehistoric nomads created cemetery spaces that lasted for millennia.

What happened to these people?

No one can say for sure.

The few dates we have for these monuments cluster between 4000–3000 BCE, nearing the end of a period when the once-greener Sahara was drying, a phase scientists call the “African Humid Period”.

From north to south, the summer monsoon gradually retreated, reducing rainfall and shrinking pastures. This led nomads to abandon thirsty cattle, increase the mobility of their herds, migrate to the south or flee to the Nile.

The monuments are overwhelmingly located near what were then favourable watering spots; near rocky pools in valley floors, lakebeds and ephemeral rivers.

This tells us that when the monuments were being built, the desert was already quite challenging and dry.

At some point, as grass and bush made way for sand and rocks, keeping their prized cattle became unsustainable.

Having large herds of cattle in this desert, at this period, may have been a way of showing off an expensive and rare possession – a prehistoric nomad’s equivalent to having a Ferrari. This may help explain why cattle were frequently buried alongside their owners in enclosure burial monuments.

A bigger story

These enclosure burials are only one part of the greater story of human adaptation to climate change across North Africa.

From the Central Sahara, to Kenya and Arabia, keeping cattle, goats and sheep transformed societies. It changed the food they ate, the way they moved around, and community hierarchies.

It’s no coincidence communities changed how they buried their dead at the same time as they adopted herding lifestyles.

These burial enclosures tell us even scattered nomads were extremely well-organised people, and expert adapters.

Our discovery reshapes the story of the Sahara deserts and the prehistory of the Nile.

They provide a prologue for the monumentalism of the kingdoms of Egypt and Nubia, and an image of this region as more than pharaohs, pyramids and temples.

Sadly, many of these enclosure monuments are currently being destroyed or vandalised as a result of unregulated mining in the region. These unique burials have survived for millennia, but can disappear in less than a week.

Maria Gatto (Polish Academy of Sciences) was an author on our paper. We also want to acknowledge Alexander Carter, Tung Cheung, Kahn Emerson, Jessica Larkin, Stuart Hamilton and Ethan Simpson from Macquarie University for their contribution. We are also grateful to the National Corporation of Antiquities and Museums (Sudan).

– ref. We found hundreds of huge ancient mass graves hidden in the Sahara desert – https://theconversation.com/we-found-hundreds-of-huge-ancient-mass-graves-hidden-in-the-sahara-desert-281978

Australia’s Health Minister Mark Butler has declared reducing specialists’ fees will be his next key focus of health policy reform.

Doctors are currently free to set their own fees and many have rapidly increased them over the past 15 years. The average out-of-pocket cost for a non-bulk billed specialist consultation increased from A$46 in 2009–10 to $126 in 2024–25, or 11.9% per year. These are averages, so actual fees can be much higher and vary by specialty.

As a result, non-GP specialists have the highest incomes in the country and run the most profitable businesses.

So what has the government done so far to get specialist fees under control? And what options are left for reform?

Starting the reform process

This year the government introduced legislation to enable the publication of fees for individual specialists. The Medical Cost Finder website will show what individual specialists charge, rather than regional averages. This will better facilitate choice of doctor.

A Senate committee has also been set up to investigate access to and affordability of medical specialists which will report in late 2026.

Read more: No control, no regulation. Why private specialist fees can leave patients with huge medical bills

The committee is likely to hear that high fees, and uncertainty about what fee will be charged, means people are less likely to attend appointments. This can mean a choice between poor health and potential financial hardship.

Each year, almost 1 million people report avoiding seeing specialists because of the cost.

High fees also skew incentives for doctors who may prefer to work in high-fee specialties rather than in specialties where population needs are higher, further reducing access for populations in greatest need.

Can’t we just increase competition?

Economists argue more competition in the market can help reduce market power and reduce fees.

However, our research has shown more competition (measured by more specialists of the same specialty in an area) has no impact on fees.

Increasing the supply of specialists might increase competition. But this already occurred in the 2000s when the number of medical graduates doubled and the number of specialists increased exponentially.

However, fees continued to rise higher and faster than inflation.

Competition can also be increased through more consumer information and choice, the focus of the current legislation.

However, our research and review of previous studies suggests fee transparency through the government’s existing Medical Cost Finder may not work, unless GPs have this information available during consultations when referring patients. Even then, patients have no objective information on quality.

Patients don’t have the same information or knowledge as doctors about diagnosis or which treatments provide most value. More information for patients won’t necessarily address this, as patients don’t have medical degrees to interpret it.

Patients may also be vulnerable, and motivated by fear and hope, and not in a position to make clear and rational decisions.

Four options for reining in fees

If increasing competition can’t bring fees down, the only options are direct fee regulation, additional government spending, or both. This could involve:

1. Legally enforceable price caps

Doctors have traditionally relied on a clause in the constitution to argue against direct regulation of fees. But the minister seems willing to legally test this. And doctors have lost previous legal tests of this clause.

Read more: The federal government is considering capping specialists’ fees. Is that constitutional?

Direct fee controls could make it illegal to charge above a certain amount, and caps could vary by individual Medicare items or by episode of care.

An independent body could be established to set these caps and Medicare rebates, based on submitted evidence on how costs vary across regions and patients’ needs. However, doctors with fees below the caps could increase them.

2. Pay Medicare rebates only if fees are below a certain cap

An alternative to testing the constitution is to make the payment of Medicare rebates conditional on doctors charging a fee below a certain cap.

If doctors charged above the cap, this would remove the Medicare rebate for patients so could potentially increase out-of-pocket costs for patients.

Since some patients regard higher fees as an indicator of high quality, this increased out-of-pocket cost might not reduce demand for everyone.

Some very high-fee doctors would not change their fees at all and the services they provide would become fully private. Skewed incentives would remain.

3. Increase Medicare rebates

Doctors groups argue that Medicare rebates should be increased, as this would lower fees charged.

However, previous experience with the Medicare Safety Net found strong evidence doctors may not reduce fees but, rather, take the extra rebate, or a proportion of it, as extra income.

This could reduce the growth of fees but discretion remains with the doctor on what to charge and the out-of-pocket cost.

This could be combined with fee caps or rules that prevent doctors from increasing fees if they accept the higher rebate. This would guarantee that the rebate increase would reduce out-of-pocket costs.

4. Standardising gap cover arrangements across health insurers

For services provided in private hospitals (and to private patients in public hospitals), health insurers use gap cover arrangements to help keep out-of-pocket costs down.

Doctors who choose to have an agreement with a health insurer can then choose whether a patient pays any out-of-pocket costs if their fee is equal to or less than the fee schedule determined by health insurers.

Patients can pay no out-of-pocket cost (“no gap” cover) or a known out-of-pocket cost (“known gap” cover) or pay the full out-of-pocket cost if the fee is above the known gap amount. Each insurer uses a different fee schedule which adds to the variation in out-of-pocket costs.

Read more: ‘No gap’ private health insurance can save you money. But there’s a catch

This scheme could be strengthened and fee variations reduced by requiring all insurers to use the same fee schedule.

It could also be mandated that all doctors accept the insurers’ fee as full payment.

Where to next?

These options require careful thought to determine which might be more effective in reducing fees and out-of-pocket costs. Some involve further government spending or impose costs on health insurers, while others involve changes in legislation and rules.

Some combination of both is likely to make this work. But reducing out-of-pocket costs while maintaining doctors’ earnings is likely to be expensive.

– ref. Specialist doctors are charging too much. 4 options to rein in excessive fees – https://theconversation.com/specialist-doctors-are-charging-too-much-4-options-to-rein-in-excessive-fees-281986

Australia is in the grip of a record-breaking battery rush.

Last week Energy Minister Chris Bowen announced that more than 380,000 home batteries have been installed since July last year. That’s over 100,000 more than the total installed between 2020 and mid-2025. The reason for the rush: government subsidies, which cut the upfront cost by about 30%.

While the federal government has described the Cheaper Home Batteries program as an “unprecedented success”, it has also been criticised for unfairly allowing wealthier households to reap the benefits.

Our working paper, released this week but not yet peer reviewed, shows a disproportionate increase in the installation of batteries and rooftop solar in wealthier postcodes.

The program has now been redesigned, with two major revisions that took effect this month. The upfront subsidy now available will be lower than previously advised across all battery sizes. The subsidy will also differ based on the size of battery installed.

Will this be enough to better target the scheme? That’s not clear. We found similar issues occurred when rooftop solar subsidies were changed in 2011. These should be a cautionary example of policies that entrench energy inequality. They show a need to move away from first-come, first-secured schemes.

Wealthy households were first for subsidies

We looked at the number of batteries installed between July 2025 and March 2026 across all Australian postcodes.

Compared with a middle socio-economic group, there have been 912 more batteries installed in the richest major city postcodes with high solar installations.

This corresponds with 3.6% more households installing a battery and an additional 36 megawatt-hours of capacity in each of these more wealthy postcodes, compared with the middle socio-economic group.

Our research shows households that could move quickly have been able to secure a higher subsidy before changes to the program came into effect at the start of May 2026. For the period between December 2025 and March 2026, battery installations are estimated to have increased by ten per month in more prosperous postcodes. But this is likely to be an underestimate, with data still to be released and revised by the Clean Energy Regulator.

We found many of these fast movers also locked in a larger subsidy by installing a bigger battery. There had been a 4.5 kilowatt-hour (kWh) to 9.5kWh increase in the average capacity of batteries installed since December 2025.

Impact on rooftop solar

Because households must have solar installed to get a battery subsidy, there has also been an increase in solar installations.

We found there was a doubling of rooftop solar capacity installed in more prosperous postcodes, compared with the 12 months before the Cheaper Home Batteries program was announced.

Repeating mistakes of the past

In 2011, a similar inequitable pattern occurred for rooftop solar – households in more wealthy postcodes were able to lock in a high upfront subsidy or a higher feed-in tariff.

Households in South Australia and Queensland that got rooftop solar installed before policy changes in 2011 still receive a 40–44 cent/kWh feed-in tariff, and will continue to do so until mid-2028. Most solar households receive much less: 10c/kWh or lower.

Our research, which focuses on revisions to both household solar and battery programs, shows we have repeated the mistakes of the past.

Taking equity seriously

Household technology subsidies that use first-come, first-secured financial support are likely to favour households with greater financial resources and a greater tolerance of financial risk.

Australia’s battery subsidy is set to decrease each year, no matter how many batteries are installed. The subsidy does not vary by postcode, wealth or income.

But future household programs could be designed differently, with the aim of more equitable support during the early stages of adoption.

For example, a Californian solar scheme reduced its subsidy based on how many batteries had already been installed. And while research shows savvy households anticipated the changes and installed more rooftop solar in the months before subsidies decreased, it provides an example of what could be done.

Australia’s battery program could have set subsidies based on how many batteries had been installed in each postcode. Greater allocations could also be provided to higher-priority areas.

This means higher subsidies would be distributed more evenly across the country and not centred in major cities. It would also reserve more funding for lower-income households in areas where battery installations have not kept up.

How to avoid a two-speed energy transition

The home battery rush is a cautionary example of policy design that has entrenched inequality through first-come, first-secured subsidies. We need to do more to ensure everyone is part of the energy transition.

Our findings raise questions about the aims of household solar and battery subsidy programs. Does equity across socioeconomic groups matter? Should we have a more targeted approach? Should we prioritise areas with weaker or more remote sections of the grid?

When announcing the revisions to the Cheaper Home Batteries program, Bowen noted the previous success of rooftop solar across Australia. He said: “We want to match that success with home batteries to cut bills for everyone, for good.”

We are still a long way from an equitable transition, where people from all walks of life have access to rooftop solar and home batteries.

– ref. Like solar, most of the first home battery subsidies went to the wealthy. We need a fairer approach – https://theconversation.com/like-solar-most-of-the-first-home-battery-subsidies-went-to-the-wealthy-we-need-a-fairer-approach-282495

As Year 12 students pass the halfway point of their final year, the question of “what next?” can start to loom large. Some students have a clear plan: a course they want to get into, a trade they want to start, or a gap year they are saving for.

But many find the question daunting, because the answer is, “I have no idea”.

If this is you, the first thing you need to hear is – not knowing is very normal. The second thing is – you do not need to know or decide your final destination now (or even soon).

Right now, you are being asked to make huge life decisions when you are still learning what you enjoy, what you are good at, the type of people you hope to work with, and what kind of life you want to build.

It is not realistic to think you will know all the answers to these questions at 17 or 18. These answers are supposed to reveal themselves over time, and they will.

Our research points to some strategies that may prove useful in moving forward, even if you don’t know exactly where you’re going yet.

Is my passion important?

One common approach you’ve probably tried is to ask yourself: what am I passionate about?

Personal interest can be a good starting point, but research suggests it’s not the whole picture.

All jobs have good and bad parts, and all futures have ups and downs. So the aim is not to expect constant enjoyment or getting everything you want. It’s to choose a next step that gives you a good chance of building toward a life that is meaningful, energising and right for you.

Our research finds this kind of life tends to emerge when three basic psychological needs are supported. These are:

1. autonomy – feeling like you’re in the driver’s seat of your life

2. competence – feeling like you can build skills and accomplish what needs to be done

3. relatedness – feeling connected to and valued by people you care about.

Everyone experiences the satisfaction of these needs differently, so you need to gather evidence about what satisfies yours.

What makes you feel capable and in control?

So, the task is not to find your passion. The task is to create good evidence about yourself.

Instead of asking “what job title do I want forever?”, ask:

• what kinds of tasks make me feel more capable after I do them?

• when do I feel curious rather than just compliant?

• what environments make me shut down or tune out?

• what kind of people do I want around me all day?

These questions matter because they will point you towards the kinds of experiences you want to have every day. Hopefully, this gives you a practical way to think about next year and a way to talk to people about it too.

Parents, teachers, career advisers, family friends, older students, and people working in fields you’re curious about are all a good start.

But remember, you need to feel in charge of your life. Bring them in on your evidence gathering rather than asking them to decide for you. Saying something like, “I’m open to advice. But I need support to do my own thinking,” might help.

As your time allows, try new things and be open. This might involve taking a class, getting a casual job, volunteering or joining a team. Pay attention to what leaves you feeling more skilled, connected and in control.

It’s OK not to know

My own career trajectory has been far from linear. I had many (many!) jobs across three full-time careers before I discovered my current career in academic research satisfies my needs. All the dots connected in the end, none of my previous experience was wasted.

I use myself as an example to show how the next step will not make or break your whole life.

So choose a next step that is realistic, builds skills, and is most likely to support those basic psychological needs.

The form of that choice matters less than whether it gives you room to grow, build confidence, meet people, and gather better information about yourself.

– ref. Help! I’m almost finished school but don’t know what I want to do next – https://theconversation.com/help-im-almost-finished-school-but-dont-know-what-i-want-to-do-next-282363

Crafting a federal budget is never easy. Tonight’s budget is harder than most.

The government faces irreconcilable pressures: spend more to meet community demands, spend less to keep inflation down.

The Reserve Bank is concerned about inflation. Governor Michele Bullock has signalled a preparedness to drive Australia into recession rather than let inflation get out of control.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers and his advisers are well aware that increased government spending will push up inflation. It is not the main driver at present – that dubious honour goes to the impact of the Iran war on global prices – but it does contribute.

The government therefore has to keep a lid on spending, or increase taxes – or most likely do both – to reduce the likelihood of further interest rate increases.

Here’s a rundown of what to expect in tonight’s federal budget.

Tax changes are coming

Tax will be the centrepiece of the budget. The government has signalled it intends to reduce:

There are two good reasons for this – to help the budget bottom line, and intergenerational equity.

The Parliamentary Budget Office has estimated the combination of the CGT discount and negative gearing of residential property cost the budget A$13.4 billion in lost revenue this year.

Equity arguments apply especially to the CGT discount. Young people are being locked out of home ownership as house prices rise due to the favourable treatment of property investors.

The details of how this will be implemented, to be revealed on budget night, are crucial to whether the changes have any significant impact on the budget bottom line or on housing affordability.

“Grandfathering” changes (not applying them to people’s current assets) could take many forms. Options include no grandfathering at all; having changes apply from budget night; or exempting any current assets until they are eventually sold.

The third option could tempt the government. It means the change will not take full effect for years, or in many cases decades.

But exempting current assets would deliver less revenue for the budget and is bad economics. It would create an incentive for people to hold on to assets that have a CGT discount attached. This means those assets are not used in the most productive manner.

However, budgets are always political as well as economic. An economically poor option for grandfathering is a distinct possibility.

Read more: Negative gearing tax breaks could finally be tightened in the May budget. What options are on the table?

A long list of extra spending

At the same time, cost of living pressures are hurting voters. The government will be looking for ways to respond and assist without a spending blowout.

This means cost-of-living assistance should be tightly targeted to those in greatest need, while the government will have to make savings in other programs. There is speculation assistance could be in the form of a one-off tax cut.

The government has also promised more spending, totalling more than $60 billion, including:

Savings to be made

Last week, in a warning to the government, RBA Governor Bullock said:

it doesn’t take much additional spending to make the job of returning inflation to target more challenging.

The treasurer now has even more reasons to find savings.

Most of this has been foreshadowed, with savings of $64 billion announced. The government has predicted large savings from sweeping reform of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

The risk here is that savings – based on changes to eligibility criteria, assessments on evidence and cracking down on fraud – are uncertain. They rely on assumptions about how people will respond, and whether the government can control fraud.

Unfortunately, history tells us that smart operators often find ways to exploit a government entitlement program, no matter how tight the guardrails.

There are other savings in the wind. For example, government departments are reportedly expecting cuts in departmental expenses. Some are offering staff redundancy packages now (paid for out of this year’s budget, naturally) to lower costs next year. These will cause pain in the public service, but are small by comparison with NDIS savings.

A slowing economy

One variable that affects how much room the government has for spending is its economic forecasts.

Although some commentators predict higher global commodity prices will boost the budget bottom line, Chalmers is not so optimistic. A small reduction in deficits is expected.

A key determinant of the budget is economic growth. When the economy slows, the budget deficit increases for two main reasons: lower income and company tax receipts, and higher Jobseeker payments.

If the likely economic downturn is bad enough, this effect will outweigh gains from commodity prices. We are not in a recession yet, but could be if the RBA raises interest rates further.

Budgets never forecast a recession. That would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, causing a loss of confidence in the community and a slump in investment.

However, if the budget forecasts are too optimistic on growth, the likely result is that the mid-year review in December will show the budget bottom line in a much worse state.

This budget has to strike just the right balance: doing more to support Australians in a global crisis, without doing too much and triggering further interest rates hikes.

– ref. In this year’s budget, Chalmers has to keep a lid on spending – or risk stoking inflation – https://theconversation.com/in-this-years-budget-chalmers-has-to-keep-a-lid-on-spending-or-risk-stoking-inflation-281875

For women in Iran, life changed dramatically after the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

The new Islamic Republic of Iran enforced compulsory veiling, legalised polygamy, severely restricted women’s rights to divorce and child custody, lowered the minimum marriage age for girls, and gave husbands legal authority over their wives’ movements and sexual autonomy.

These conditions led to the 2022 Zan, Zendegi, Azadi (Woman, Life, Freedom) movement, triggered by the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini. Amini died in September 2022 while in the custody of Iran’s morality police, after being detained for allegedly violating hijab regulations.

For more than 40 years, Iranian women filmmakers have documented and protested against these conditions. These seven film are essential viewing to understand their experiences, and the broader systems that enable them.

1. The Day I Became a Woman (2000)

Marzieh Meshkini shot her debut film, The Day I Became a Woman, more than 20 years before the Women, Life, Freedom movement.

Presented as a timeless contemporary tale, the film tells the stories of three Iranian women at different life stages – each constrained by the system at every turn.

A nine-year-old girl named Hava (Fatemeh Cherag Akhar) can no longer play with her male friend because Islamic law now considers her a “woman”.

A young wife, Ahu (Shabnam Tolouei), enters a bicycle race in defiance of her husband, and is pursued on horseback by the men of her tribe. This is among the most cinematically potent images in the Iranian feminist film movement: women on bicycles move forward through the asphalt of the modern world, while men on horses thunder across the sand behind them. During the film’s production, there were ongoing discussions regarding the permissibility of women cycling in public.

The third is an elderly woman, Hoora (Azizeh Sedigh), who finally spends her savings on all the household items and domestic goods she was denied throughout her life as a wife, mother and subordinate.

She displays them publicly, an act that turns the private domestic space inside out. Later, we see her drift out into the open sea on a makeshift boat – symbolising her departure from societal constraints.

The Day I Became a Woman is a masterwork, charting the female life cycle under an oppressive patriarchy.

2. Women’s Prison (2002)

Set across 1984, 1992 and 2001, Manijeh Hekmat’s Women’s Prison is a fictional work inspired by real testimonies covering three decades of post-revolutionary Iran.

It follows the lives of incarcerated women in a Tehran jail. Many of these women are inside because they violated moral codes, held political convictions, or simply existed in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The film is a powerful, politically sharp portrait of post-revolutionary Iran. It covers crime, political conviction, prostitution, drug addiction, homosexuality and the Iran–Iraq War bombing raids — all from within prison walls.

Hekmat was denied a director’s certificate for the film and had to use her husband’s permit to make it. The film was banned from Iran’s 2002 Fajr Film Festival, after which Hekmat was threatened with arrest for attempting a private screening.

A cinema was set on fire in protest when the film was eventually released.

3. Nargess (1992)

Rakshan Bani-Etemad’s Nargess won the best director prize at the 1992 Fajr Film Festival.

The film follows a love triangle between a petty thief named Adel (Abolfazl Poorarab) and two women: Afagh (Farimah Farjami), his older lover and partner in crime, and Nargess (Atafeh Razavi), the young woman he becomes obsessed with.

The film interrogates the Shi’a legal practice of siqeh, where a couple agrees to a temporary marriage for a specific duration, formalised by a contract that can range from minutes to years. In the context of Islam, temporary marriages are intended to be short-lived. They are often viewed as a way to engage in casual (yet legally sanctioned) sexual relationships.

The practice is highly contentious, due to reports of underage girls being coerced into such agreements. This loophole has also facilitated underage prostitution and human trafficking, while providing a legitimate avenue for married men to engage in extramarital affairs.

Through her film, Bani-Etemad exposes the practice as exploitation dressed in the language of religious permissibilty.

4. Hush! Girls Don’t Scream (2013)

From director Pouran Derakshande, this is the angriest film on the list – and the most direct. It shows how the Iranian legal system is not designed to hear women.

Arrested on her wedding night for murder, Shirin’s (Tannaz Tabatabayi) only defence lies in a childhood trauma (sexual assault) no one believes. Her lawyer uncovers a cycle of systemic failure — from a mother who looked away, to a teacher who stayed silent.

But Shirin didn’t just kill a man; she stopped a predator. Now, the court must decide if she is a cold-blooded killer or the only person brave enough to do what the adults in her life wouldn’t.

On October 25 2014, 26-year-old Iranian Reyhaneh Jabbari was executed after stabbing a man she said had tried to rape her. Her self-defence plea was rejected without thorough inquiry.

Hush! Girls Don’t Scream feels less like a film and more like a grim prophecy, made in haunting anticipation of the death of Jabbari and the many others the nation chose to ignore.

5. Track 143 (2014)

Narges Abyar’s Track 143 tells the story of Olfat (Merila Zarei), a widowed single mother whose son, Younes, volunteers to fight in the Iran–Iraq war and disappears.

The film spans more than a decade of Olfat waiting, listening obsessively to the radio for news from the front, weaving a carpet with threads that mark the passage of time. She refuses to accept what she can’t prove.

Adapted by Abyar from her own novel, Track 143 is a devastating portrait of what the war actually cost Iranian women.

6. Tatami (2023)

From Iran’s Zar Amir Ebrahimi and Israeli filmmaker Guy Nattiv, Tatami follows an Iranian judoka (judo practitioner) named Leila.

Leila is at the world championships in Georgia, on course to win — until her government orders her to fake an injury, rather than face an Israeli opponent. The story is based on a 2019 incident in which Iranian judo champion Saeid Mollaei was ordered to forfeit matches at a tournament to avoid facing a rival from Israel.

The film was shot outside Iran during the 2022 Women, Life, Freedom uprising.

Tatami is a reminder that, for Iranian women, the fight for freedom isn’t metaphorical. It has a scoreboard, a deadline and consequences that follow you home.

Inspired by Mollaei, Tatami’s story has since found an uncanny echo in another sport. In March, members of the Iranian women’s football team stood silent during their national anthem at the Women’s Asian Cup in Australia, and were immediately branded “wartime traitors” by Iranian state media.

Seven sought asylum. Five ultimately returned after their families were threatened.

7. Women Without Men (2009)

Shirin Neshat’s Women Without Men is set during the 1953 CIA-backed coup that overthrew elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh.

Four women from different social backgrounds find their way to a garden outside Tehran: a prostitute haunted by visions; a devout woman hoping for marriage; a wealthy married woman suffocating in her social position; and Munis, a political activist.

Fleeing lives that have been defined entirely by men, the garden becomes their sanctuary, a space outside patriarchal control where they can reclaim their identities.

The film is as much an elegy for an Iran that could have been as it is a portrait of four women who deserve more freedom than they have.

Neshat made this film from New York, where she has lived since leaving Iran in 1979. She brings an exilic consciousness to the film, which won her the Silver Lion Award at the Venice Film Festival in 2009. It remains banned in Iran.

– ref. 7 films to help you understand Iranian women’s fight for freedom – https://theconversation.com/7-films-to-help-you-understand-iranian-womens-fight-for-freedom-282057

As Treasurer Jim Chalmers prepares to hand down another federal budget, attention is once again turning to one of Canberra’s most tightly controlled democratic traditions: the budget lock-up.

For decades, journalists from legacy media organisations have gathered in a secure room, phones confiscated, to scrutinise the government’s fiscal blueprint before its public release.

Last year, this norm was disrupted. The 2025 budget lock-up was unprecedented because the Albanese government invited digital creators (so-called “influencers”) into the room alongside legacy media mastheads.

Some saw inviting digital creators into the budget lock-up as a political strategy in the lead-up to the 2025 federal election. For others, it was an acknowledgement that communicating fiscal policy to young Australians requires a shift towards the platforms, formats and voices they already trust.

The shift was not without controversy. Some outlets falsely suggested creators were paid or sponsored, portraying them as “self-obsessed and self-promoting Gen Z and Millennial influencers” who had merely “scored an invite”, diminishing their journalistic rigour and independence.

Despite attempts by creators such as Milly Rose Bannister to push back on these criticisms with wit and substance, the episode points to a deeper tension between legacy media and raises a key question: who deserves a seat in the room where it happens?

Institutional gatekeeping and the budget lock-up

In this year’s budget, content creators can again attend the lock-up. However, while last year featured 13 creators, the number attending this week remains unclear. This time, though, there are stricter access requirements, highlighting persistent gatekeeping and unequal treatment compared with traditional outlets.

This year’s expression-of-interest process for creator lock-up access signals that new media is here to stay. What remains unresolved is how to balance inclusivity with accountability – particularly as social-first news brings genuine risks around misinformation circulating without appropriate safeguards.

Our research examines the inclusion of social media content creators who attended the federal budget lock-up last year. Our interviews with these creators reveal a more complex picture than headlines suggest.

In defence of ‘influencers’ in a room with no wi-fi

Many of the creators attending the budget lock-up are trained journalists or have academic backgrounds in law, media and communications. Outlets such as The Daily Aus and Missing Perspectives exemplify this hybrid newsroom model, combining traditional reporting practices and ethics with digital-first storytelling.

Importantly, these creators operate with editorial independence. Their inclusion is not about promotional access but about expanding the diversity of voices interpreting the budget.

As highlighted in the 2025 Digital News Report, these new media content creators wield significant influence, particularly among younger people who are increasingly disengaged from traditional media.

Australians are increasingly turning to social media as their primary source of news. One in four say social media is their main source of news, with Instagram (40%) and TikTok (36%) the top two platforms for news among 18–24-year-olds.

The rise of digital creators must also be understood in the context of changing media consumption habits. Younger audience habits mean platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and podcasts are not optional extras – they are essential channels for democratic engagement.

Creators bring three key strengths to budget coverage: trust, transparency and relevance. Their established relationships with audiences enable them to communicate complex information in a way that feels accessible and credible.

For many Australians, the federal budget process has long been seen as complex, opaque and difficult to digest. In our interview with Bannister, she explained:

the economy feels like this abstract thing and it’s difficult for young people to see how the economy is working for them, they are more sceptical of the political framing. It needs to be broken down in a way that is closer to their lived reality.

Rather than lengthy analysis, creators produce concise, platform-specific content. The Daily Aus, for example, breaks the budget into digestible segments such as tax cuts, HECS, housing and rent, highlighting real-world impacts.

As cofounder Sam Koslowski explains:

We’re doing more “how the sausage is made” content to demystify journalism. By explaining what to expect from the budget beforehand, audiences better understand our reporting when it lands – and that builds trust.

Their newsletter pulled back the curtain on the budget, explaining what it is, why young people should care about economic policy that can often seem distant from their lives, and how it reflects government priorities and election promises.

Digital creators also play a key role in highlighting issues often underrepresented in mainstream coverage. Platforms such as @womensagenda, @cheekmedia.co and @missingperspectives use their access to foreground topics affecting marginalised communities, from First Nations issues to climate, mental health and the cost-of-living crisis.

As the 2026–27 budget is unveiled, the lock-up is no longer just a closed-off room limited to elites. It is being unlocked across digital platforms where young Australians engage with policy in everyday terms.

– ref. How the federal budget became unlocked – and allowed the digital world in – https://theconversation.com/how-the-federal-budget-became-unlocked-and-allowed-the-digital-world-in-282357

A great Tyrannosaurus rex strides through the conifer trees of her territory, sniffing the air. She picks up the scent from the carcass of a dead horned dinosaur, Triceratops, that she was feeding on yesterday. She walks over and strips off some more shreds of meat, but the smell is foul even for her.

She goes down to the lake to drink and small crocodiles and turtles scuttle into the water. But she hardly sees them. Of more interest is an armoured dinosaur, Ankylosaurus, lurking nearby. However, she knows this dinosaur won’t be an easy kill and she isn’t desperate enough for food to risk a fight. Little does she know there are bigger dangers ahead. She looks up and sees a bright light racing downwards accompanied by faint crackling and sizzling noises.

Our T. rex has excellent hearing for low frequency sounds and she is disturbed by the vibrations she can feel. But her upset only lasts for a moment. In a flash, she has been burnt to a crisp and her world changed forever.

This all happened 66 million years ago, when a huge asteroid famously hit the Earth in the area of what is now the Caribbean. At the end of the Cretaceous period, sea levels were 100–200 metres higher than today, so the shores of the Caribbean lay far inland over eastern Mexico and the southern United States. The impact happened entirely within these waters.

The event triggered instant changes to our planet and its atmosphere and led to the extinction of the dinosaurs and about half Earth’s other species. But what would it have been like to experience such a gargantuan impact? What would you have seen, heard or smelled? And how would you have died – or survived?

The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.

As experts on meteoritics and palaeontology, respectively, we’ve created a detailed timeline, based on decades of research, to take you right there. So let’s start by travelling back in time to the very last day of the Cretaceous.

T-minus one day

All is calm and the Cretaceous day proceeds as usual. In what will soon be ground zero, it is pleasantly warm, about 26°C, and wet. It often is. For about a week, the asteroid has been visible only at night. Because the giant rock is heading straight towards Earth, it looks like a motionless star. There is no dramatic tail; this is a rocky asteroid rather than a comet.

In the last 24 hours, the light becomes visible during the daytime. But it still looks like a star or planet, getting brighter in the final few hours before impact.

T equals 0: the impact

If you were close by, you would first have experienced a brief light and sound show. Minutes to seconds before the impact, you’d have seen the bright fireball, and its accompanying crackling or fizzing noises. This sizzling sound is a result of the photo-acoustic effect: the intense light of the fireball warms the ground, which then heats the air above it, causing pressure waves, or sound.

Next, a deafening sonic boom, which occurs because the asteroid is travelling faster than the speed of sound. But the asteroid is so huge, perhaps 10km in diameter, that it almost certainly hits the ground before any living creature near the impact zone has time to run for cover.

The asteroid’s enormous energy forms a crater through a series of processes that together take only a few seconds. As the asteroid collides with the surface, its kinetic (movement) energy is instantly transferred to the surface as a combination of kinetic, thermal (heat) and seismic energy (released during earthquakes). This results in a series of shock waves that heat and compress both the asteroid and its target.

As the shock waves propagate, rocks fracture, break up and are ejected, producing a bowl-shaped depression, or transient cavity, about ten seconds after impact. The heat and compression also melt and vaporise large volumes of material, including the asteroid itself, releasing a fountain of incandescent vapour (its temperature is more than 10,000 K, or 9726.85°C).

Over the next few seconds, the cavity increases in size to many times the diameter of the original asteroid. Simulations suggest that around 20 seconds after impact, the transient cavity is at least 30km deep – deeper than the deepest depth currently known on Earth, the 11km Challenger Deep valley, part of the Pacific Ocean’s Marianas Trench. The rim of the crater is over 20km high – more than twice the height of 8,900m Mount Everest.

But this enormous feature lasts for less than a minute before it starts to collapse. Within three minutes of the impact, the centre of the crater has rebounded to form a peak several kilometres high. The peak only lasts about two minutes before collapsing back into the crater.

Whether a dinosaur or a dung beetle, if you were near the transient cavity you would have been incinerated instantly by the blast. But even if you were up to 2,000km from the epicentre, you’d likely have been killed quickly by the thermal radiation and supersonic winds now spreading out from the impact site.

T-plus 5 minutes

Five minutes after the impact, the winds have “eased” to those of a category 5 hurricane, flattening everything within about 1,500km of the impact. Destroying everything, that is, which has not already been burnt. Atmospheric temperatures in the region rise to over 500K (226.85°C). This would feel like being inside an oven – causing burns, heatstroke and death. Wood and plant matter ignite, creating fires everywhere.

Because the asteroid struck the sea, the atmosphere is also filled with super-heated steam, making the hurricane-force winds even deadlier.

Next come the tidal waves, triggered by the vast quantities of displaced rock and water. These 100-metre megatsunamis first strike the shores of what is now the Gulf of Mexico, engulfing the land before depositing huge amounts of debris as they retreat.

By now, the crater has almost reached its final dimensions – 180km across and 20km deep. But making an enormous hole in the ground isn’t the only outcome of the impact. All the rock and vapour displaced during the collision has to go somewhere. Several locations in Northern America show that metre-sized blocks of debris from the impact were thrown distances of hundreds of kilometres.

So if you were 2,000km to 3,000km from the epicentre and survived the first few seconds, you’d most likely die from overheating, earthquakes, hurricanes, fires, tsunami-driven floods or being hit by impact melt.

But what is happening much further away? In the first five minutes after impact, dinosaurs roaming the Cretaceous forests of what are now China or New Zealand are so far undisturbed.

But it won’t be long before that changes.

T-plus one hour

Shockwaves on land and sea are only minor inconveniences compared with the fire that is still radiating down from the sky. Some of the impact energy has been transferred into the atmosphere, heating the air and dust to incandescence.

An hour after impact, a belt of dust has circled the globe. Deposits of solidified molten droplets (impact spherules) and mineral grains have been found in numerous locations from New Zealand in the south to Denmark in the north. In these locations, you would not have been aware of the tsunamis around the Americas or the wildfires, but the skies would certainly have begun to darken.

T-plus one day

By now, huge tsunamis are moving east across the Atlantic and west across the Pacific, entering the Indian Ocean from both sides.

They are still around 50m high – causing death and destruction across many coasts around the world. By comparison, the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami reached heights of up to 30 metres. Tsunamis kill fishes and marine life that are washed high on the shore and then dumped, just as they kill coastal trees and drown land animals. But the tsunamis gradually fade away and probably don’t wipe out any entire species – at least on their own.

The hurricane force winds have also died down, but tropical storm strength winds are whipping up debris and causing further chaos and destruction across the tsunami-affected areas. The burning sky is also triggering wildfires across the globe – which, in turn, carry ever more soot into the atmosphere. The sooty signature of these wildfires has been found deposited as carbon particles in sediments from the K-Pg boundary – a 66-million-year-old thin clay layer.

Further away, in what is modern Europe and Asia, the skies continue to fill up with dust and soot, as they do everywhere. Temperatures start to drop as sunlight is blocked. Trees and plants in general, including phytoplankton, close down as if for winter, unable to photosynthesise. Any animals that rely on warm conditions ultimately hunker down and die.

T-plus one week

It’s getting darker and darker. Simulations of solar radiation reaching the Earth’s surface following the impact indicate that, after about a week, the solar flux (the amount of heat and light per a certain area) is just one thousandth of that prior to the impact. This is caused by particles of dust and soot in the atmosphere.

The continued decrease in light levels is accompanied by a global drop in surface temperatures of at least 5°C. This means that most of the dinosaurs and other large flying and swimming reptiles probably die from freezing within the course of this first week (smaller reptiles with slower metabolisms or more flexible diets could survive longer). Cooling temperatures and cloud cover also lead to rain. But not just any rain. Storms of acid rain fall across the Earth.

Two separate mechanisms generate acid rain. The first is down to the geology of the impact region. The asteroid happened to hit an area of sediments rich in sulphur, which vaporised and caused sulphur oxides (acidic and pungent gas compounds composed of sulphur and oxygen) to be part of the plume of plasma blasted into the atmosphere. Second, the energy of the collision was sufficient to turn nitrogen and oxygen into nitrogen oxides – highly reactive gases that can form smog.

The dropping temperature ultimately allows water vapour to condense into drops, and the sulphur and nitrogen oxides dissolve to form sulphuric and nitric acids. This is sufficient to generate a rapid drop in pH. Early models suggest that the pH of the rain might be as low as 1 – the same acidity as battery acid.

At this point, Earth is not a great place to be. Rotting vegetation, choking smoke and sulphur aerosols combine to make the planet stink. Plants and animals on land and in shallow seas that have survived the darkness and cold succumb to the corrosive acid rain and ocean acidification. Acid rain also kills trees by leaching nutrients such as calcium, magnesium and potassium from the soil. Shallow marine shellfish, crustaceans and corals also die as acid seawater destroys their skeletons.

T-plus one year

Winds die down, wildfires are extinguished and the oceans are once again calm. It might appear that the asteroid collision is just a scar on the ocean floor. But its effects are still destructive. The atmosphere is still filled with dust and the Sun hasn’t shone for a year. Temperatures have continued to drop, with the average surface temperature now 15°C lower than before the impact. Winter has come.

Any dinosaurs or marine reptiles that survived the first week of freezing conditions would have died very soon after. A year after the impact, only rotted skeletons of these behemoths remain. Here and there, smaller animals like mammals the size of rats and insects would be nestling in crevices, barely surviving on their reserves and decaying plants.

Indeed, it has not been a good year for life on Earth: over 50% of plants have died out because of the cold and lack of sunlight. And similar losses have occurred among terrestrial animals and species in the acidified, shallow sea waters.

While most plant groups and many of the modern groups of insects, fishes, reptiles, birds and mammals recover reasonably rapidly, things don’t look great for other species. Dinosaurs and pterosaurs living on land are extinct, as are many marine reptiles, ammonites, belemnites and rudist bivalves in the oceans. Ammonites and belemnites are high in their food chains, and so suffer not only from the cold and acidification but also from the loss of abundant food resources, such as smaller marine organisms.

T-plus ten years

The Earth is still in the grip of a fierce winter. Although most of the sulphur has rained out of the atmosphere, dust and soot particles remain. The average surface temperature is still about 5°C lower than before the impact. The main oceans have not frozen, but inland lakes and rivers around the world are iced over.

Clearly, there were no humans about at this time – there weren’t even any larger mammals. But given the only species that survived were those that could burrow or live below water, it is unlikely that you could have survived this long.

Surviving plant and animal groups such as turtles, smaller crocodiles, lizards, snakes, some ground-dwelling birds and small mammals repopulate the Earth at this point. But they are forced back to limited areas of relative safety a long way from the impact site. These areas are now receiving sufficient sunlight for plants and phytoplankton to photosynthesise again. As leaves and seeds provide the basis for the food chains on land and in the sea, life begins to rebuild.

Eventually, life returns to the devastated landscapes, but ecosystems are very different and the dinosaurs are no more.

T-plus 66 million years

Today, 66 million years after the impact, the scars of the collision are hidden within geological strata – and scientists have started deciphering them. It was in 1980 that researchers first reported evidence of the impact. In their classic paper, Luis Alvarez, a Nobel-prize-winning physicist, and co-authors, described a sudden enrichment in the element iridium in a specific clay layer in Denmark and in Italy.

Iridium is rare in surface rocks because most of it was sequestered in Earth’s core when the planet first formed. However, iridium is found in meteorites, and Alvarez and colleagues inferred that the rate of accumulation of the metal in the sediments was so high that it could only have been produced by impact of a gigantic meteorite.

Because the scientists had only observed the iridium spike in two locations, the impact hypothesis was rejected by many scientists at the time. However, through the 1980s, iridium spikes were identified in clay layers at more and more locations – in muds laid down on land, in lakes, in the sea.

Support for an impact hypothesis strengthened when a crater of the correct age was found in 1991. The crater is buried beneath younger rocks, but clearly visible in geophysical surveys, lying half on land in the Yucatán Peninsula of Mexico, and half offshore. Since 1990, evidence for the impact has increased, not least when scientists discovered that there was indeed a sharp cooling event at the end of the Cretaceous.

In total, it is estimated that half the species of plants and animals alive at the end of the Cretaceous disappeared. It was once thought that surviving groups such as many plants, insects, molluscs, lizards, birds and mammals somehow escaped unscathed. But detailed study shows that this is not the case – they were all hit hard.

But, by chance or luck, enough individuals and species were able to survive the cold and absence of food, or were in parts of the world where the effects were less extreme. As the world returned to normal, they had the opportunity to expand rapidly into their old niches, but also to occupy the space vacated by extinct groups. In fact, one important consequence of the extinction of the dinosaurs, apex predators in their heyday, was the successful spread and evolution of mammals.

When Alvarez and colleagues first described the drop in temperature following the impact, they called it a “nuclear winter”, reflecting the political climate of the early 1980s. Now we might be more inclined to describe the effects as a global climate change – similar events are currently resulting from increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (flooding, temperature fluctuations).

It is salutary to think that without the asteroid collision, primates might never have reached the level we are at today. But it is equally salutary to consider that modern humans are causing some of the same changes to the atmosphere that ultimately killed our reptilian forbears and may one day also lead to our own demise.

For you: more from our Insights series:

To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.

– ref. What it would have been like to experience the dinosaur-killing asteroid armageddon: a blow-by-blow account – https://theconversation.com/what-it-would-have-been-like-to-experience-the-dinosaur-killing-asteroid-armageddon-a-blow-by-blow-account-271786

The rise of One Nation may seem sudden. In the 2025 Australian federal election, Pauline Hanson’s party received only 6.4% of the national vote. A year later, One Nation has surpassed the Liberal Party in the polls, received more votes than the Liberals in the South Australian election, and won their first seat in the House of Representatives in the Farrer by-election.

Similarly, the movement of independent candidates seemed to emerge rapidly. At the 2019 federal election, independent candidates won just three seats. By 2022, this had multiplied to 10 independents winning seats in the House of Representatives, six of which were previously safe Liberal seats.

While these major shifts in voter behaviour seem to have appeared suddenly, the conditions underlying the rise of minor parties and independents have been building gradually over decades.

How did we end up here?

Our new podcast (Apple | Spotify) traces the unlikely story of Australia’s most controversial minor party.

For thirty years, it’s honed its tactics and now its upending politics as we know it.

The Australian Election Study, a major survey of Australian voters that has been fielded after every federal election since 1987, tracks long-term shifts in Australian political attitudes and behaviour. These surveys show the gradual transformation of Australian voters and their preferences, which has created opportunities for smaller parties and independents.

The first major shift is what is known as “partisan dealignment” – growing voter detachment from political parties. This means there are fewer voters “rusted on” to the major parties than there used to be.

Back in 1987, 84% of Australians reported feeling close to one of the two major political parties. By 2025, this had declined to just 55%. For the first time on record, the proportion of non-partisans in the electorate, surpassed the number of Liberal partisans (Figure 1).

Other indicators similarly reflect this growing disaffection with the major parties. The popularity of both Labor and the Liberals has declined, reaching a record low for Labor in 2013, following the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years. The Liberals hit a record low in 2025, following their historic election defeat.

The second shift, related to this detachment from political parties, is growing voter volatility. In the 1960s, over 70% of voters would vote for the same party in every election. This has gradually declined over time, with just 34% of voters reporting that they always voted the same way in 2025 (Figure 2).

This growing electoral volatility is reflected in a range of indicators. These include more voters considering changing their vote during election campaigns and more voters deciding their own vote preference order rather than following a how-to-vote card (Figure 3).

Taken together, these results show Australian voters have become detached from major political parties. They are also increasingly likely to change their vote from election to election. This weakens the influence of long-term factors driving the vote, such as social position and party attachments. It increases the importance of short-term factors such as election issues, the campaign, and the party leaders.

Partisan dealignment on its own is not enough for a minor party or independent to win a seat. But it does create an opportunity for alternative actors to mount competitive campaigns that tap into voters’ frustrations with the major parties. In many recent cases, these campaigns have been successful.

Australia’s unique electoral system creates both challenges and opportunities for non-major party actors. On the one hand, single-seat electorates in the House of Representatives have typically made it hard for minor parties or independents to compete with the dominance of the two major parties. On the other, preferential voting can encourage voting for minor parties and independents as voters can do so without the risk of a lost vote. Compulsory voting further mobilises non-partisans, who might be less likely to participate if voting were voluntary.

The recent electoral success of independents and One Nation in Australian politics may appear to be a new phenomenon, but the changes within the electorate underlying this shift have gradually emerged over decades.

– ref. One Nation’s rise may seem sudden, but it follows long-term voter trends – https://theconversation.com/one-nations-rise-may-seem-sudden-but-it-follows-long-term-voter-trends-282580

Four percent of Americans – roughly 12 million people – believe that “lizard people” secretly control the Earth. At least, that was the finding of an infamous 2013 public opinion survey.

Do so many people really believe such outlandish claims? Or do results like these partly reflect people giving silly answers or deliberately skewing surveys for fun?

US psychiatrist Alexander Scott believes the latter plays a significant role.

Using the survey as an example, he coined the term “the Lizardman constant” to describe the idea that a certain amount of noise and trolling will always exist in surveys about unusual beliefs.

As Scott warned: “Any possible source of noise – jokesters, cognitive biases, or deliberate misbehaviour – can easily overwhelm the signal.”

As researchers who study uncommon beliefs such as conspiracy theories, we wanted to investigate how this kind of cheeky trolling can muddy the waters.

Trolls and true believers

Building on earlier Australian research, we surveyed New Zealanders to test how common dishonest or joking responses were in conspiracy theory surveys.

We did this in two ways. First, we directly asked people a yes/no question at the end of the survey:

“Did you respond insincerely at any earlier point in this survey? In other words, did you give any responses that were actually just joking, trolling, or otherwise not indicating what you really think?”

Second, we included in the survey a “conspiracy theory” so ridiculous we could assume most, if not all, people who said they believed it were taking the mickey.

We asked them if they believed:

The Canadian Armed Forces have been secretly developing an elite army of genetically engineered, super intelligent, giant raccoons to invade nearby countries.

In our representative online sample of 810 New Zealanders, 8.3% of respondents confessed to being insincere in the survey.

Another 7.2% said they thought the Canadian raccoon army theory was probably or definitely true. That proportion – similar to findings from Australia – would equate to more than 300,000 adult New Zealanders.

To complicate things slightly, there was some overlap between those admitting to insincere answers and those claiming to believe the raccoon conspiracy. Combined, 13.3% of respondents fell into one or both groups – roughly one in eight people not appearing to take the survey seriously.

Importantly, these respondents were also much more likely to endorse other conspiracy theories, inflating estimates of how widespread those beliefs really are.

For instance, 6.5% of the full sample endorsed the claim that governments around the world are covering up the fact that 5G mobile networks spread coronavirus.

But once we removed the insincere responders, that figure dropped by more than half to 2.7%.

Across 13 different conspiracy theories, the estimated proportion of believers fell substantially once those respondents were excluded.

Another interesting insight from our study was that people endorsing contradictory conspiracy theories were much more likely to show signs of responding insincerely.

Previous studies have found some people appear to believe conspiracy theories that directly contradict each other. In our survey, for example, some participants agreed both that COVID-19 is a myth and that governments are covering up the fact that 5G networks spread the virus.

But nearly three-quarters of those respondents also showed signs of joking or dishonest answers.

This suggests genuinely believing contradictory conspiracy theories may be less common than previously thought.

Not every conspiracy believer is joking

Our findings add further weight to the idea that surveys may overestimate how many people truly believe some conspiracy theories – thanks, in part, to trolls.

But does that mean all conspiracy theory research is bunk?

Fortunately not. Most research in this area is not focused on counting conspiracy believers, but on understanding why people hold these beliefs and what effects they can have.

We tested several well-established findings from earlier conspiracy theory research to see whether they still held up once insincere respondents were removed from the data.

For example, previous studies have found that people who endorse conspiracy theories are more likely to see the world as a dangerous and threatening place.

We found the same pattern. In fact, removing insincere respondents made little difference to the broader relationships identified in earlier research.

Nevertheless, we recommend that future surveys include ways to gauge whether respondents are answering sincerely and account for this in the analysis. At the very least, researchers should acknowledge that trolls and joking responses can distort their results.

While our research suggests some people are taking the mickey in surveys, it also shows a significant minority genuinely appear to believe some of these claims.

In some cases – such as believing authorities are covering up the fact that the Earth is flat – this may be relatively harmless. But other conspiracy beliefs can lead to real-world harm.

Good-quality research is essential for understanding how sincere believers end up down these rabbit holes, and how those beliefs influence real-world behaviour.

Research into why people embrace conspiracy theories – and the real-world consequences of those beliefs – remains important.

But when surveys suggest millions may believe in lizard overlords or genetically engineered raccoon armies, it is also worth remembering the “Lizardman constant”: some respondents may simply be having us on.

The authors acknowledge the contributions of Rob Ross, Mathew Ling and Stephen Hill to this article.

– ref. Conspiracy theories: do 300,000 Kiwis really believe Canada is building an army of mutant super-raccoons? – https://theconversation.com/conspiracy-theories-do-300-000-kiwis-really-believe-canada-is-building-an-army-of-mutant-super-raccoons-282478

Every morning in Accra, Ghana’s capital, thousands of commuters sit in traffic while minibuses and taxis compete for limited road space.

More than 70% of Ghanaians rely on informal public transport, predominantly minibuses (trotros) and taxis, for their daily mobility. About 84% of passenger trips in Accra are made using these modes (a 2017 estimate). Precise counts of vehicles are not available due to the informal nature of the sector, but thousands of taxis and trotros are active on Accra’s roads each day.

Despite the constant movement, the traffic’s progress is slow. Ghana’s cities are moving, but not efficiently.

Taxi and minibus services are essential. They provide flexible, relatively affordable mobility and reach areas that formal systems do not. For millions of people, they are the backbone of daily travel.

Yet surprisingly little is known about their diversity and characteristics.

I research how urban transport systems can be made more efficient and climate-friendly, particularly in rapidly growing cities where there are mobility challenges.

In my recent study of commercial vehicle models in Ghana’s urban transport system, I identified 52 different types of taxis and trotros currently in operation. This diversity reflects a system shaped more by market demand than by coordinated, large-scale planning.

My findings show a highly diverse fleet structure, with differences in vehicle capacity and service patterns across the fleet. There’s a strong reliance on conventional fuels and older vehicles. These patterns suggest a fleet that has developed gradually over time, rather than through deliberate and structured modernisation. The result is traffic congestion, higher fuel consumption and increased emissions.

I argue that a more structured approach to urban transport could allow cities to move more people with fewer vehicles, reduce overlapping low-occupancy trips, and improve fleet regulation and planning.

Why efficiency is a growing problem

Most taxis, which are typically sedan cars, carry only a few passengers per trip and operate over short distances. Trotros seating about 10-20 people carry more passengers and travel longer routes. But they still fall short of the capacity offered by larger buses used for mass transit, which can carry 50 or more passengers per trip.

This means more vehicles are required to move the same number of passengers.

In Accra alone, roughly one million passenger trips are made daily using these modes. As demand increases, the system responds by adding more vehicles, not by increasing capacity per vehicle.

This pattern is evident in the the city’s rapid motorisation: vehicle ownership rose from about 40 per 1,000 people in 1990 to 260 per 1,000 in 2015. This highlights how growing mobility demand has largely been met through more vehicles on the road, rather than through more efficient, higher-capacity transport.

The result is growing congestion, longer travel times and increasing pressure on already limited road infrastructure.

For commuters, this means more time spent in traffic. For cities, it means declining transport efficiency.

Environmental costs of low-capacity transport

The dominance of low-occupancy vehicles also affects the environment.

Vehicles that carry fewer passengers generally consume more fuel and generate higher emissions per passenger-kilometre compared to higher-capacity modes of transport. For example, one study on urban transport found that transit buses can reduce emissions by 82%-94% relative to sedan cars.

The cumulative effect of a large fleet of low-occupancy vehicles in Accra contributes to higher overall fuel consumption and increased urban emissions.

Expanding and strengthening high-capacity public transport systems is not only a transport issue, but also an environmental one.

Economic implications for cities and commuters

Inefficiency in transport systems has direct economic consequences.

Higher fuel consumption increases operating costs for drivers, which can eventually translate into higher fares. Congestion slows down the movement of people and goods, reducing productivity and increasing the cost of doing business in urban areas.

Efficient transport systems support economic growth by improving reliability and reducing delays. As Ghana’s cities expand, these efficiencies become even more critical.

Why the current system persists

Despite these challenges, taxis and trotros continue to dominate for good reason.

They are flexible, adaptable and responsive to demand. Routes can change quickly, and services can reach areas that formal systems often overlook. The relatively low cost of entry also allows many individuals to participate in the sector.

This flexibility has made the system resilient. But it has also limited large-scale coordination.

The case for high-occupancy transport

Improving urban mobility is not just about increasing the number of vehicles, it is about moving more people with fewer vehicles.

High-occupancy transport systems, particularly Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), a system that uses larger buses operating along dedicated corridors, carry more passengers per trip. A single high-capacity bus can replace multiple taxis or minibuses.

This does not mean eliminating existing transport modes. Taxis and trotros can play a complementary role as feeder services, connecting passengers to main transit routes. This integrated approach combines flexibility with efficiency.

Ghana has already made attempts to introduce BRT systems. But partial implementation has limited their impact. For such systems to succeed, they require dedicated lanes, consistent policy support, and long-term investment.

A critical moment for Ghana’s cities

Urbanisation in Ghana is accelerating. As more people move into cities, demand for transport will continue to rise.

If current trends continue, the number of low-capacity vehicles will increase further, worsening congestion and environmental pressures. Over time, this could reduce the overall effectiveness of urban transport systems.

Ghana now faces a choice: continue expanding a vehicle-intensive system, or move towards higher-capacity models that prioritise efficiency and sustainability.

What needs to change

Addressing these challenges requires coordinated policy action.

Transport planning must move beyond reactive, market-driven growth, towards long-term system design. This includes integrating informal transport operators into structured frameworks while investing in infrastructure that supports high-capacity movement.

In my view, priorities should include:

• full implementation of Bus Rapid Transit systems with dedicated lanes

• investment in high-capacity buses and supporting infrastructure

• integration of informal operators into formal planning systems

• gradual reduction of low-occupancy vehicles along major corridors

• stronger institutional coordination and long-term planning.

These steps can help create a more flexible and efficient, balanced system.

The future of Ghana’s cities will depend on a simple shift where more people, not more vehicles, are moved.

– ref. Ghana’s transport system is chaotic: how it can move more people with fewer vehicles – research – https://theconversation.com/ghanas-transport-system-is-chaotic-how-it-can-move-more-people-with-fewer-vehicles-research-278810

Despite a trade-related controversy that erupted last week between the governments of Vanuatu and New Caledonia, the French territory’s freight vessel MV Karaka began a new service to Port Vila and Luganville.

Last week, New Caledonia’s territorial government announced it had suspended all trade cooperation with Vanuatu after Port Vila hosted the leader of New Caledonia’s pro-independence FLNKS group — a move seen as a lack of respect by the government in Nouméa.

It followed with the top French diplomat in Port Vila, Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer, making multiple Facebook posts on the issue, including his meeting with Vanuatu Foreign Affairs Minister Marc Ati to clear misunderstanding and promote the notion of “constructive dialogue”.

However, the Vanuatu’s Foreign Affairs Ministry described Vilmer’s decision “to go public through social media platforms” as “extremely unfortunate”.

“The Ambassador’s posts on social media have unnecessarily provoked public misunderstanding and divided national opinions on the actual state of play,” it said in a statement on Friday.

It added that “matters relating to sovereignty and bilateral relations are best addressed through established diplomatic channels”.

But despite the diplomatic spat, the Nouméa-based vessel MV Karaka, which is normally dedicated to a connection between Nouméa and New Caledonia’s Loyalty Islands group (north-east of the main Island, Grande Terre), made its maiden voyage to Vanuatu.

Port Vila service
The MV Karaka is now starting to service the capital Port Vila, as well as Luganville, on the northern island of Espiritu Santo.

Vanuatu authorities held official welcoming ceremonies on Friday to launch the service in Port Vila in presence of French Ambassador Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer.

The ceremony was also attended by Vanuatu ministers Samson Samsen (Trade) and Johnny Koanapo Rasou (Finance), the Vanuatu Daily Post reports.

They were quoted as stressing that even though “issues remained” between France and Vanuatu, they “do not affect “friendship, partnership and diplomatic ties” between the two countries.

The new maritime service, operated by French company CMI (Compagnie Maritime des Îles), is transporting close to 300 tonnes of freight from New Caledonia for export to Vanuatu.

On the way back to Nouméa, it is expected to carry a freight of products for sale in the French Pacific territory, CMI general manager Thomas Quiros told media earlier last week.

The MV Karaka is planning to operate the Vanuatu route once a month.

The service was described by Samsen as “an important connection” to develop new opportunities on both sides in terms of investment, trade and even tourism developments.

Generally, it is also perceived as an instrument to boost the volume of trade between New Caledonia and Vanuatu, an aim that was perceived as shared by both countries.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz