Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ari Mattes, Lecturer in Communications and Media, University of Notre Dame Australia

Investing in film and TV productions is a risky venture. Even the best directors and producers are just a flop away from ruining their careers.

So if a company owns the intellectual property to a popular material, or if that material enters the public domain, these companies – risk-averse entities, to be sure – will hastily retread their tyres for another lap of the track. This is partly why you’ll see well-worn stories from your childhood told over and over onscreen, even now.

But if the new version is too similar to the old, people will cynically roll their eyes. Enter Disney, which has perfected the strategy over the past few decades of retelling the same stories from different characters’ perspectives – a gambit that seems to strike people as inherently interesting.

Maleficent, for example, is Sleeping Beauty from the perspective of the evil queen. Although this kind of fairytale revisionism goes back to Angela Carter’s best-selling feminist fiction, Disney has, more than any other corporation, become an expert at co-opting social movements in pursuit of profits.

The latest revisionist work set to be distributed by Disney+ was Nautilus. The series filters the story of Jules Verne’s inimitable maritime adventure novel 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea through the lens of Captain Nemo, framed as a prequel to the original.

The fact that Disney+ dropped Nautilus before its release (it has been picked up by Prime in the UK and Ireland and Stan in Australia) immediately stoked my interest. This is particularly notable because, with a budget of A$300 million, it’s the most expensive series ever made in Australia (filmed mainly on the Gold Coast).

Alas, after restlessly sitting through all ten episodes, I understand Disney’s decision.

Diluting a powerful message

Where Verne’s novel (and to a lesser extent, the 1954 Disney live action film) effortlessly creates an authentic world, which is absolutely critical to the effectiveness of any fantasy work, Nautilus seems painfully contrived from its opening.

It’s the kind of show where all the British soldiers and East India Company men speak in toffee accents and spout horrifically ruthless commands between sips of tea.

The Nautilus’ crew is made up of a miscellany of virtuous victims of the company (and thus of the British empire): a wealthy British woman being forced into an arranged marriage, an old Chinese worker, a Māori cook, a trader from Zanzibar and ex‑slave Indians.

The characters frequently pontificate about the value of freedom, the evils of slavery and the glory of the environment. In one particularly ludicrous scene early on, Nemo jumps onto a whale’s back to remove a harpoon.

In the novel, Nemo’s romantic alienation perfectly complements his maniacal drive, interspersed with Verne’s faux-scientific descriptions of the submarine, giant squid and other objects.

Similarly, here, Nemo is presented as being far from mercenary; hounded to the north seas by the British, he’s seeking treasure in order to bring the company down. But lead Shazad Latif’s delivery is monotonous and strained, as though even he doesn’t buy it.

The idea that this is some kind of “fresh” (read “politically correct”) re‑imagining of the world of the novel is strange in the first place, given the original story (although narrated by Professor Aronnax) is already closely anchored to Nemo’s point of view.

Verne clearly presents Nemo as a kind of eco-warrior responding to the brutalities of colonialism. If anything, the original message is diluted in this adaptation as it implies Nemo’s quest is mainly personal – that he simply wants vengeance for what the company did to his family – rather than political.

At the same time, I sense the creators are going for some kind of psychological realism by painfully spelling out that Nemo had bad things done to him by the British. But this didacticism causes the spirit of adventure to suffer, so we’re left with something both silly and not particularly exciting.

A big fish isn’t always a good fish

The show’s production design and cinematography (some of the most important components in this kind of adventure epic) seem flat, too. The sets, though colourful, look decidedly artificial. The synthesis of CGI elements with filmed footage is far from smooth.

And the odd colour grade makes the characters’ skin look hyper-artificial. This was surely the intention, but why? It is distracting in every closeup.

Not to single out any particular department, every aspect of the production seems dialled in, including the score, which sounds like something hastily composed using AI software.

Of course, one could talk about the production’s benefits to the Australian industry, but this seems like a hapless argument if the work is no good. How many low-budget films could have been made with $300 million? 100? 150? Those would have also invested money in the industry, while developing local talent.

Not camp enough, yet not careful enough

If it were camper, Nautilus could have acquired the cult value of a great cinematic fiasco such as Renny Harlin’s 1995 film Cutthroat Island. All the actors seem to be trying hard, and the writers clearly laboured away at the story.

Perhaps this is the problem. Like so many new commercial works, Nautilus tries so hard to please everyone it ends up pleasing no one. The wider the appeal, the greater the risk mitigation, apparently.

But given it actually tries to embed the story in a sense of history, its sins seem greater than mere televisual boredom for the viewer. The series presents a monolithic and simplistic image of the way colonialism and capitalism are intertwined.

At best, this is naïve – one could argue, “who cares, it’s just a silly fantasy series”. At worst, however, it is actively destructive of historical consciousness. And that’s not smooth sailing.

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

– ref. At $300m, Jules Verne-inspired Nautilus is the most expensive Australian-made show. But Disney+ was right to dump it – https://theconversation.com/at-300m-jules-verne-inspired-nautilus-is-the-most-expensive-australian-made-show-but-disney-was-right-to-dump-it-241583

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Blair Aitken, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University of Technology

You had a great night out, but the next morning, anxiety hits: your heart races, and you replay every conversation from the night before in your head. This feeling, known as hangover anxiety or “hangxiety”, affects around 22% of social drinkers.

While for some people, it’s mild nerves, for others, it’s a wave of anxiety that feels impossible to ride out. The “Sunday scaries” may make you feel panicked, filled with dread and unable to relax.

Hangover anxiety can make even simple tasks feel overwhelming. Here’s why it happens, and what you can do about it.

What does alcohol do to our brains?

A hangover is the body’s way of recovering after drinking alcohol, bringing with it a range of symptoms.

Dehydration and disrupted sleep play a large part in the pounding headaches and nausea many of us know too well after a big night out. But hangovers aren’t just physical – there’s a strong mental side too.

Alcohol is a nervous system depressant, meaning it alters how certain chemical messengers (or neurotransmitters) behave in the brain. Alcohol relaxes you by increasing gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), the neurotransmitter that makes you feel calm and lowers inhibitions. It decreases glutamate and this also slows down your thoughts and helps ease you into a more relaxed state.

Together, this interaction affects your mood, emotions and alertness. This is why when we drink, we often feel more sociable, carefree and willing to let our guard down.

As the effects of the alcohol wear off, your brain works to rebalance these chemicals by reducing GABA and increasing glutamate. This shift has the opposite effect of the night before, causing your brain to become more excitable and overstimulated, which can lead to feelings of anxiety.

So why do some people get hangxiety, while others don’t? There isn’t one clear answer to this question, as several factors can play a role in whether someone experiences hangover-related anxiety.

Genes play a role

For some, a hangover is simply a matter of how much they drank or how hydrated they are. But genetics may also play a significant role. Research shows your genes can explain almost half the reason why you wake up feeling hungover, while your friend might not.

Because genes influence how your body processes alcohol, some people may experience more intense hangover symptoms, such as headaches or dehydration. These stronger physical effects can, in turn, trigger anxiety during a hangover, making you more susceptible to “hangxiety.”

Do you remember what you said last night?

But one of the most common culprits for feeling anxious the next day is often what you do while drinking.

Let’s say you’ve had a big night out and you can’t quite recall a conversation you had or something you did. Maybe you acted in ways that you now regret or feel embarrassed about. You might fixate on these thoughts and get trapped in a cycle of worrying and rumination. This cycle can be hard to break and can make you feel more anxious.

Research suggests people who already struggle with feelings of anxiety in their day-to-day lives are especially vulnerable to hangxiety.

Some people drink alcohol to unwind after a stressful day or to make themselves feel more comfortable at social events. This often leads to heavier consumption, which can make hangover symptoms more severe. It can also begin a cycle of drinking to feel better, making hangxiety even harder to escape.

Preventing hangover anxiety

The best way to prevent hangxiety is to limit your alcohol consumption. The Australian guidelines recommend having no more than ten standard drinks per week and no more than four standard drinks on any one day.

Generally, the more you drink, the more intense your hangover symptoms might be, and the worse you are likely to feel.

Mixing other drugs with alcohol can also increase the risk of hangxiety. This is especially true for party drugs, such as ecstasy or MDMA, that give you a temporary high but can lead to anxiety as they wear off and you are coming down.

If you do wake up feeling anxious:

• focus on the physical recovery to help ease the mental strain

• drink plenty of water, eat a light meal and allow yourself time to rest

• try mindfulness meditation or deep breathing exercises, especially if anxiety keeps you awake or your mind races

• consider journalling. This can help re-frame anxious thoughts, put your feelings into perspective and encourage self-compassion

• talk to a close friend. This can provide a safe space to express concerns and feel less isolated.

Hangxiety is an unwelcome guest after a night out. Understanding why hangxiety happens – and how you can manage it – can make the morning after a little less daunting, and help keep those anxious thoughts at bay.

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

– ref. Why do I get so anxious after drinking? Here’s the science behind ‘hangxiety’ – https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-get-so-anxious-after-drinking-heres-the-science-behind-hangxiety-240991

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Waters, Professor of Zoology, University of Otago

As we continue to change the planet, scientists are worried we might also be altering the evolutionary trajectories of the species that live alongside us, perhaps even including some irreversible shifts.

Certainly, the evidence for change is everywhere. As the planet warms, species’ ranges are shifting and their life cycles are changing. As we harvest the largest fish in the ocean, the species affected are now maturing at smaller sizes.

But are these shifts we observe in wild populations underpinned by genetic changes (mutations in the DNA) or are they simply flexible responses to environmental change? If the changes are genetic, how are they happening?

So far, researchers have observed fewer clear-cut examples of human-induced evolution in the wild than one might imagine. But our new study may provide a new “textbook” case of human-driven evolution in wild insects.

Our findings are centred on an intriguing case of “mimicry” from New Zealand, in which a harmless insect has evolved to mimic the warning colours of a highly toxic species.

Forest removal drives colour shift

Convincingly demonstrating “evolution in action” involves finding the agents of natural selection (environmental factors driving the change) and discovering the genetic mechanism.

Until now, the peppered moth was the “classic” example of human-driven evolution. Dark-coloured specimens of the moth suddenly appeared during the 19th century. It was a likely response to industrial pollution which meant light-coloured individuals were no longer blending in to the increasingly sooty British environment. Despite its broad appeal, some aspects of even this famous case have been criticised as unclear and anecdotal.

We worked on stoneflies and the impact of deforestation.

The black stonefly Austroperla lives in forests. It produces cyanide to deter potential predators, and to advertise its toxicity this species has high-contrast black, white and yellow markings, reminiscent of wasp colouration.

The non-toxic Zelandoperla stonefly has evolved astonishingly similar warning colouration, apparently to trick predators (forest birds) into assuming that it, too, is toxic. The intricate and unique ecological interactions between these insects and their predators have apparently evolved together over millions of years.

Where do humans come into this story? Aotearoa New Zealand was the last major landmass to be colonised by people. In many places the human impacts on its ecosystems have been devastating.

In addition to species extinctions, New Zealand has lost much of its original native forest cover in just a few centuries. This deforestation has wiped out countless populations of forest birds, along with the poisonous, forest-dependent Austroperla.

Our study reveals this widespread deforestation has also proven a game changer for the stonefly “mimic”. As its predators and the poisonous species it mimics have vanished from many regions, there is no longer much point in displaying warning colouration.

In an astonishing about-turn, Zelandoperla populations from deforested habitats have quickly lost their spectacular “mimic” colouration. It turns out that the production of this intricate colouration was costly, and when no longer essential, evolution rapidly removed it – in a case of “use it or lose it”.

Genetic change

In our study, we compared insect populations across several parts of the South Island. We found a remarkably consistent picture. The removal of forest has driven similar colour shifts across different deforested regions.

The finding that evolutionary change can be “predictable” offers hope that scientists can use evolutionary theory to predict future biodiversity shifts.

How do we know birds have played a key role in this rapid colour change? By placing stonefly models of different colours in a variety of habitats, we were able to demonstrate that birds only avoid attacking stoneflies with the “warning” colouration when they are in forests.

Another challenge was to show that this colour change represents evolution at the DNA level rather than a flexible response to environmental change. We looked at genetic variation across the Zelandoperla genome and found that just a single gene – ebony – is almost completely responsible for this colour evolution.

Our study also reveals the pace of evolutionary change. By comparing regions deforested soon after human arrival (for example Central Otago, which was deforested around 600 to 700 years ago) with those cleared much more recently (Otago Peninsula, 150 years ago), we show that evolution has proceeded steadily yet inexorably over this human timeframe.

On the positive side, the finding that at least some of our native species can adapt in the face of rapid environmental change suggests ongoing resilience of our native biodiversity. However, our results also highlight how quickly the intricate interactions that have evolved among native species over millennia can be lost from disturbed ecosystems.

These new findings raise tantalising questions about the potential to reverse the negative impacts of deforestation on our native biodiversity. In particular, our increasing focus on reforestation and ecological restoration provides hope for restoring the complex ecosystems we have inherited.

Jonathan Waters receives funding from the RSNZ Marsden Fund.

Graham McCulloch receives funding from the RSNZ Marsden Fund

– ref. Stoneflies change colour in response to deforestation, suggesting humans can alter evolution – new research – https://theconversation.com/stoneflies-change-colour-in-response-to-deforestation-suggesting-humans-can-alter-evolution-new-research-242008

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

The current inquest into the worshippers killed in the Christchurch mosque attacks has been examining gun laws at the time of the 2019 atrocities, and how lax controls helped the terrorist acquire his weapons.

Inevitably, it has also put the spotlight on the coalition government’s proposed changes to the Arms Act, and how changes to licence vetting procedures and regulation might affect public safety.

Firearms control is a complex and contentious issue – but New Zealand can learn from other countries’ experience. It may surprise many, but one such country is the United States, where gun rights and restrictions are perennially – and often tragically – political.

Of course, there are fundamental differences between the US and New Zealand when it comes to the regulation of firearms. For Americans, the possession of guns is a right. For New Zealanders, it is a privilege. This has resulted in very different approaches to regulation, with the US undoubtedly more liberal – for which it pays a heavy price.

But it would also be wrong to assume New Zealand has nothing to learn from the US. Paradoxically, a more liberal approach to firearms ownership can produce tighter specific laws and regulations as a result.

There are four areas where New Zealand might learn from this as the government seeks to rewrite the Arms Act.

Some crimes should not be forgotten

The Americans take the position that anyone convicted of a crime punishable for a prison term exceeding one year (a “felony”) forfeits their right to possess a firearm.

Unless that right is restored, typically by petition or pardon (agreeing the person is no longer a risk), there is a strong presumption this is a permanent ban. Supplementary state prohibitions ensure this law is generally enforced properly, keeping convicted criminals away from firearms.

(Even Donald Trump fell foul of this law because of his conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records during the 2016 presidential election.)

In New Zealand, the list of legal and other reasons to deny a firearms licence is growing. But such disqualifications typically only extend back ten years from the application date, and are not indefinite.

Take ‘straw buying’ seriously

A “straw purchase” is when someone who is legally entitled to purchase or possess a firearm provides a weapon to someone prohibited by law from possessing one.

A 2023 federal report showed 54% of the guns US police recovered at crime scenes in 2021 had been bought within the previous three years. This suggested straw purchasing or illegal trafficking was a significant problem.

Lawful owners illegally providing firearms to those who should not have them (including gang members) is also a problem in New Zealand.

Recently, in a remarkable piece of policing, NZ officers trawled through three years of hand-written records for more than 360,000 individual gun sales across 390 stores. This appears to have set the scene for the arrests of nearly 40 people, including two former gun store employees, on charges of illegally on-selling guns.

Read more:
American gun culture is based on frontier mythology – but ignores how common gun restrictions were in the Old West

In the US, the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act made gun trafficking and straw purchasing federal crimes for the first time. Until then, only light penalties applied. But the new law allows for prison sentences of up to 15 years – or up to 25 years if the firearm was used in more serious crimes, such as terrorism or drug trafficking.

In New Zealand, by contrast, selling or supplying restricted firearms to unauthorised people carries a jail penalty of up to three years in jail. The illegal sale of prohibited firearms or magazines (such as the type used in the Christchurch terror attack) carries a penalty of up to five years. The prison sentence for supplying someone subject to a firearms prohibition order can now be up to seven years.

These changes, made in the aftermath of the Christchurch attacks, are at least an improvement. In 2018, the man who supplied Quinn Patterson with the military-style weapons he used to murder two people received only 12 months’ home detention.

Minimum amounts of metal in all firearms

A particularly clever US law – renewed four times since it was first signed by Ronald Reagan in 1988 – is the Undetectable Firearms Act. This makes it illegal to manufacture, import, sell, possess, transfer or receive any firearm not detectable by walk-through security systems.

Every gun must contain enough metal to set off X-ray machines and metal detectors. Also prohibited are any firearms with major components that do not generate an accurate image in standard airport imaging technology.

Although this alone won’t prevent the problem of unauthorised 3D printing of firearms, it is a step in the right direction for enhancing security in places such as court houses and airports. New Zealand has no similar law.

Mandatory reporting of firearms injuries

While firearms homicides are well recorded and shared with the police, there are often significant gaps in the data due to firearms injury reporting being optional.

Health professionals in New Zealand are only required to report an injury if they believe someone has a health condition that should prevent them holding a firearms licence.

But mandatory reporting of firearm injuries by medical professionals is common in a number of comparable countries. In the US, there are reporting requirements in 48 out of 50 states.

Mandatory reporting of all firearms injuries helps authorities track the extent and nature of wrongful firearms use. It can also prompt police visits and checks on the gun owner to ensure they are still “fit and proper” since their last licence renewal.

Despite these benefits – and the fact that mandatory reporting of firearms injuries by health professionals was recommended by the royal commission into the Christchurch terror attack – the government declined to take the matter further.

Revisiting the Arms Act presents a unique opportunity to make New Zealand safer. The first step is to look at what other countries can teach us. And while it may seem counterintuitive, and despite all the faults in its very liberal system, the US still has some ideas we should consider adopting.

Alexander Gillespie is a member of the Ministerial Arms Advisory Group (MAAG). He is also the 2024 recipient of the Borrin Justice Fellowship, and is researching revision of the NZ Arms Act. His views and opinions here are independent of both the MAAG and the Borrin Foundation.

– ref. What can the US teach NZ about gun control? More than you might expect – https://theconversation.com/what-can-the-us-teach-nz-about-gun-control-more-than-you-might-expect-242020

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Buxton, Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Carleton University

More than five million Canadians — approximately one in eight of us — are living with a mood, anxiety or substance use disorder. The prevalence of mental disorders is on the rise, with a third of those with a disorder reporting unmet or partially met needs for mental health-care services.

The stresses of the city, where more than 70 per cent of Canadians now live, can increase the risk of poor mental health even further.

When most people think about caring for their mental health, they may think about getting more exercise, getting more sleep and making sure they’re eating healthy. Increasingly, research is showing that spending time in nature surrounded by plants and wildlife can also contribute to preventing and treating mental illness.

Our research focuses on the importance of birds and trees in urban neighbourhoods in promoting mental well-being. In our study, we combined more than a decade of health and ecological data across 36 Canadian cities and found a positive association between greater bird and tree diversity and self-rated mental health.

The well-being benefits of healthy ecosystems will probably not come as a great surprise to urban dwellers who relish days out in the park or hiking in a nearby nature reserve. Still, the findings of our study speak to the potential of a nature-based urbanism that promotes the health of its citizens.

Read more:
How the health of honeybee hives can inform environmental policies in Canadian cities

Birds, trees and human connection

Across cultures and societies, people have strong connections with birds. The beauty of their bright song and colour have inspired art, music and poetry. Their contemporary cultural relevance has even earned them an affectionate, absurdist internet nickname: “birbs”.

There’s something magical about catching a glimpse of a bird and hearing birdsong. For many urbanites, birds are our daily connection to wildlife and a gateway to nature. In fact, even if we don’t realize it, humans and birds are intertwined. Birds provide us with many essential services — controlling insects, dispersing seeds and pollinating our crops.

People have similarly intimate connections with trees. The terms tree of life, family trees, even tree-hugger all demonstrate the central cultural importance trees have in many communities around the world. In cities, trees are a staple of efforts to bring beauty and tranquility.

When the Australian city of Melbourne gave urban trees email addresses for people to report problems, residents responded by writing thousands of love letters to their favourite trees. Forest bathing, a practice of being calm and quiet among trees, is a growing wellness trend.

Birds and trees as promoters of urban wellness

Contact with nature and greenspace have a suite of mental health benefits.

Natural spaces reduce stress and offer places for recreation and relaxation for urban dwellers, but natural diversity is key. A growing amount of research shows that the extent of these benefits may be related to the diversity of different natural features.

For example, in the United States, higher bird diversity is associated with lower hospitalizations for mood and anxiety disorders and longer life expectancy. In a European study, researchers found that bird diversity was as important for life satisfaction as income.

People’s connection to a greater diversity of birds and trees could be because we evolved to recognize that the presence of more species indicates a safer environment — one with more things to eat and more shelter. Biodiverse environments are also less work for the brain to interpret, allowing restoration of cognitive resources.

To explore the relationship between biodiversity and mental health in urban Canada, we brought together unique datasets. First, we collected bird data sourced from community scientists, where people logged their bird sightings on an app. We then compared this data with tree diversity data from national forest inventories.

Finally, we compared both of these data sets to a long-standing health survey that has interviewed approximately 65,000 Canadians each year for over two decades.

We found that living in a neighbourhood with higher than average bird diversity increased reporting of good mental health by about seven per cent. While living in a neighbourhood with higher than average tree diversity increased good mental health by about five per cent.

Importance of urban birds and trees

The results of our study, and those of others, show a connection between urban bird and tree diversity, healthy ecosystems and people’s mental well-being. This underscores the importance of urban biodiversity conservation as part of healthy living promotion.

Protecting wild areas in parks, planting pollinator gardens and reducing pesticide use could all be key strategies to protect urban wildlife and promote people’s well-being. Urban planners should take note.

Read more:
Eco-anxiety: climate change affects our mental health – here’s how to cope

We’re at a critical juncture: just as we are beginning to understand the well-being benefits of birds and trees, we’re losing species at a faster rate than ever before. It’s estimated that there are three billion fewer birds in North America compared to the 1970s and invasive pests will kill 1.4 million street trees over the next 30 years.

By promoting urban biodiversity, we can ensure a sustainable and healthy future for all species, including ourselves.

Rachel Buxton receives funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, National Institutes of Health, and Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Emma J. Hudgins received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Fonds de Recherche du Québec – Nature et Technologies for this work. She currently receives funding from Plant Health Australia.

Stephanie Prince Ware has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

– ref. Want to build healthier cities? Make room for bird and tree diversity – https://theconversation.com/want-to-build-healthier-cities-make-room-for-bird-and-tree-diversity-235379

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Troy McEwan, Professor of Clinical and Forensic Psychology, Swinburne University of Technology

New data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) reveals one in seven adult Australians have been stalked in their lifetime: one in five women and one in 15 men.

While shocking to many, for those of us who work in the field, there is nothing surprising about these figures.

The ABS has conducted similar surveys roughly every five years since 2005, which reveal basically the same results each time.

About 3-4% of women and 1-2% of men are victims of stalking every year.

These rates are consistent with those reported in research from the United Kingdom and United States, with small variations depending on definition.

Stalking rates have remained stubbornly consistent despite the same ABS survey showing reductions in the rates of intimate partner violence and general violence over the past decade.

The reasons for this are unclear, though there are obvious differences in the level of government and community investment in countering intimate partner violence versus awareness of and attention to stalking.

What exactly is stalking?

Stalking is a pattern of repeated and unwanted behaviour in which one person pushes their way into the life of another where they have no legitimate right to be, causing the target distress and fear.

The most common methods are unwanted communication (by phone or digital media) and unwanted contacts (such as following someone or loitering nearby).

Threats of violence and assault occur in at least a quarter of cases.

Stalking that persists for more than two weeks is more likely to continue and cause significant harm.

The impact of stalking

Victims of persistent stalking have described it as “psychological rape”, with the stalker invading every part of their life.

The cumulative impact of seemingly never-ending intrusions, and their social and financial toll, is probably why stalking victims report high rates of depression, anxiety and traumatic stress disorders.

Researchers have estimated being stalked for 14 months costs victims approximately $A140,000, including direct costs from lost work and legal expenses and indirect costs of physical and mental harm.

Who stalks?

Most stalking is perpetrated by people who are known to the victim, either as an acquaintance or an ex-partner, with strangers responsible for about 20-25% of stalking.

Stalking usually starts either because the person feels mistreated and stalks to take revenge or right the wrong, or they stalk to start or enact a relationship with the victim that does not exist. In a small number of cases, stalking has a sexual motivation and can sometimes be part of planning or preparation for a sexual assault.

Regardless of motivation, most stalking is communicative – the stalker wants the victim to know they exist and to feel like they must respond.

However, responding to a stalker is not advisable as it usually just adds fuel to the emotional fire that drives them.

Ex-partners account for just under half of all stalking cases and many more women than men are stalked by an ex.

Stalking in this context is a type of intimate partner violence and it receives by far the most attention and response.

Research suggests that intimate partner stalking is more often identified as being perpetrated by former rather than current partners.

Psychological abuse or coercive control during a relationship might be linked to increased potential for stalking after a break-up.

Physical violence is much more common in cases of ex-partner stalking, with the ABS survey and earlier research finding half of intimate partner stalkers used physical violence.

Thankfully, most stalking-related violence does not cause severe physical harm and homicide is extremely rare.

Although prior stalking is common in ex-partner homicides, recent Victorian research showed that of 5,026 intimate partner violence reports to police involving stalking, only nine involved fatal or near fatal violence in the following 12 months.

This means the presence of stalking is not a useful risk factor for trying to predict intimate partner homicide.

Strategies against stalking

Numerous strategies have been identified to prevent and reduce stalking-related harms. Among those tried largely outside Australia:

• stalking awareness campaigns
• training and specialist responses by police and courts
• education for young people in schools
• providing psychological treatment for people who stalk.

The Victorian Law Reform Commission’s 2022 review of stalking laws recommended adoption of several of these strategies, though to date the state government has committed only to revising the stalking law.

A simple but powerful strategy

Stalking is a complicated problem and a comprehensive response needs multi-faceted systemic change that will be costly and take much effort and time.

Currently, there doesn’t seem to be an appetite in Australia for the work required.

However, there is one relatively straightforward thing the federal, state and territory governments could do right now to help: establish a national stalking helpline that can provide specialist information, advice and advocacy for all victims.

Such a helpline was established in the UK in 2010 and has supported more than 65,000 people.

The helpline provides online and telephone advice to potential stalking victims, including basic risk assessment, advocacy and links to local support services. It also provides advice to mental health professionals and others who are supporting stalking victims.

The helpline serves all people, regardless of their gender or relationship with the stalker. Nearly half (45%) of its clients are stalked by a stranger or acquaintance, not an ex-partner. This highlights the importance of a specialised stalking response separate to existing services for family and intimate partner violence.

An Australian equivalent would provide immediate support for victims and a focal point for necessary research and evaluation into what works to stop stalking.

An Australian national stalking helpline would be a practical, relatively inexpensive and immediately helpful strategy that governments could implement to support the hundreds of thousands of Australians who are stalked every year.

Troy McEwan has received funding from the Australian Research Council and Victoria Police for stalking-related research.

– ref. Stalking rates in Australia are still shockingly high – one simple strategy might help – https://theconversation.com/stalking-rates-in-australia-are-still-shockingly-high-one-simple-strategy-might-help-241891

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liam Moore, Lecturer in International Politics and Policy, James Cook University

Tuvalu’s Prime Minister Feleti Teo took to a stage in Apia, Samoa, on Thursday morning to say something pointed. Planned fossil fuel expansions in nations such as Australia represented, for his nation, a “death sentence”. The phrase “death sentence”, Teo said, had not been chosen lightly. He followed up with this: “We will not sit quietly and allow others to determine our fate.”

Teo chose the moment for this broadside well – on the sidelines of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), attended by both King Charles and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. The speech came at the launch of a new report on moves by the “big three” Commonwealth states – the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia – to expand fossil fuel exports.

These three states make up just 6% of the population of the Commonwealth’s 56 nations, but account for over 60% of the carbon emissions generated through extraction since 1990, the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative report shows.

Canada and the UK are no climate angels, given their respective exports of highly polluting oil from oil sands and North Sea oil and gas. But Teo and others in the movement to stop proliferation of fossil fuels have reserved special criticism for Australia. That’s because Australia is now second only to Russia based on emissions from its fossil fuel exports and has the largest pipeline of coal export projects in the world – 61% of the world’s total.

The elephant in the room

Tuvalu, like many other small Pacific nations, is laser-focused on the threat of climate change. Across the Pacific, rising sea levels and saltwater intrusion are already pushing people to consider migration or retreat.

Australia has long been influential in the Pacific, even more so as Western states try to outcompete Chinese funds and influence in the region. But fossil fuel exports are a very large elephant in the room.

As Tuvalu’s leader points out, Australia is:

morally obliged to ensure that whatever action it does [take] will not compromise the commitment it has provided in terms of climate impact.

Teo pointed out the “obvious” inconsistency between Australia’s commitment to net zero by 2050 and ramping up fossil fuel exports.

This year, Australia and Tuvalu’s groundbreaking Falepili Union treaty came into force. The treaty includes some migration rights for Tuvaluans as well as a controversial security agreement. But Teo has now flagged using this as leverage to “put pressure on Australia to align its activities in terms of fossil fuels”.

Tuvalu’s diplomatic pressure is a small part of broader efforts by island states facing escalating climate damage to be seen not as passive victims but to emphasise, as Teo said, they are also “at the forefront of climate action”.

Echoing these sentiments was Vanuatu’s climate envoy, Ralph Regenvanu. He called on Commonwealth nations to “not sacrifice the future of vulnerable nations for short-term gains”, and “to stop the expansion of fossil fuels in order to protect what we love and hold dear here in the Pacific”.

Vanuatu and Tuvalu have led the campaign for a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, committing signatories to ending expansion of fossil fuels. So far, 12 other nations have joined, including Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Republic of Marshall Islands, Colombia and the CHOGM host, Samoa.

Australia all alone?

It’s not surprising to see Australia facing these calls for action. The meeting is being held in Samoa, the first time a Pacific Island state has hosted Commonwealth leaders.

Leaders of other large Commonwealth states have skipped the meeting. Notable by their absence were Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Climate action is one of several background issues in Apia. One of the more significant is the call for reparations for slavery from former British colonies – calls UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is keen to put to the side. But reports on the ground suggest the issues of reparations, monarchy and the future relevance of the Commonwealth are all in the shadow of the main concern – climate change.

The meeting also serves as a precursor to November’s United Nations climate talks, the COP29 conference in Baku, Azerbaijan. Pacific nations are focused on building consensus on climate finance.

Australia has its own concerns. The host of the 2026 COP31 conference will be announced in Baku, with a joint Australia-Pacific bid in competition with Türkiye. Observers suggest Australia is in the box seat, but it has faced consistent pressure from Pacific states to reconcile its actions with its climate rhetoric.

There are domestic implications too. As the next federal election looms, the lure of a potential A$200 million windfall for the COP host city would be more than welcome.

Securing an Australia-Pacific COP could also boost the government’s environmental credentials as it comes under sustained attack from the Greens over fossil fuels and the Coalition over energy security and nuclear power.

In Apia, Pacific efforts to convince leaders of the need for greater climate action are reported to include a walk through a mangrove reserve for King Charles, guided by Samoan chief and parliamentarian Lenatai Vicor Tamapua. Tamapua told the ABC he showed leaders how king tides today were “about twice what it was 20, 30 years ago”, which he says is forcing people to “move inwards, inland now”.

For Australia, difficult questions remain. How will it balance regional demands to phase out coal and gas exports with domestic pressures to maintain jobs, public funds and economic growth? Can it walk the tightrope and be the partner of choice in the Pacific while continuing to explore for, extract and export coal and gas?

These questions will not be resolved in Apia. They might not even be resolved by the next federal government, or by the time COP31 arrives. But they will not go away.

The way Australia and other exporters resolve these tensions will, as Teo says, decide whether Tuvalu stays liveable – or goes under.

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

– ref. ‘We will not allow others to determine our fate’: Pacific nations dial up pressure on Australia’s fossil fuel exports – https://theconversation.com/we-will-not-allow-others-to-determine-our-fate-pacific-nations-dial-up-pressure-on-australias-fossil-fuel-exports-242103

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Shortis, Adjunct Senior Fellow, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina.

In a repetitive, anxiety-inducing mantra, media coverage of the US presidential election between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris recites these seven states over and over again.

The winner will almost certainly be decided by these states – perhaps a few of them, or maybe just one.

Depending on your particular interpretation of the electoral map, the mantra might just be Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania. Or could it be Wisconsin, Wisconsin, Wisconsin? Or perhaps it’s Georgia, Georgia, Georgia.

Some analysts argue that to win, Harris needs to hold on to the “blue wall” of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, three predominantly white states with large numbers of working-class voters. In 2016, Democrats were devastated by Trump’s sundering of this wall – he narrowly won all three.

The Democratic victor in 2020, Joe Biden, rebuilt the wall with three wins in these states. (In fact, Biden won six of the seven battleground states in 2020, losing only North Carolina.)

In this year’s campaign, Harris needs to keep it standing, while the Trump campaign is hoping to break it down again.

But it’s also possible for some cracks to appear in the “blue wall” – if Harris can hold on in Pennsylvania, there is a path to victory for the Democrats through the remaining battleground states.

The Trump campaign is, meanwhile, hoping it can repeat 2016 and break down the blue wall, particularly by winning the iconic rust-belt state of Michigan.

An outsize focus on ‘swing voters’

The critical role these seven states will play of course means they are the overwhelming focus of both campaigns and the media that covers them. Trump and Harris and their running mates have visited Pennsylvania and Michigan dozens of times, while residents of these states are being subjected to wall-to-wall television advertising.

The other states are, effectively, stitched up for one side or the other.

There’s no real possibility of Trump winning solidly Democratic New York or California. And no chance Harris will could win deep-red Wyoming or Tennessee.

In the American democratic system, presidential elections are decided not via a national popular vote but the enslavement-era Electoral College (alongside widespread voter suppression). As a result, vast swathes of the American electorate are effectively disenfranchised.

In the states that are in play, the polling margins are razor-thin, just as they have been in most elections this century.

In 2020, for example, Biden won the popular vote by a four-point margin – seven million votes. But in the Electoral College, which is what actually decides the winner, Biden won by around 45,000 votes: 10,457 in Arizona, 11,779 in Georgia, and 20,682 in Wisconsin.

While polls are only one indicator – and they aren’t always that reliable – they do suggest the result in the seven battleground states in 2024 may be that close again.

That’s why both Harris and Trump have been spending so much time in those states. And it’s why their campaigns – as well as the media’s attention – are focused on finding as many voters in those places as they can.

And because of the way the American electoral system works, this focus is disproportionately placed on certain types of voters – or “swing voters”.

Both campaigns are chasing voters who may have gone for Trump in 2016 and then Biden four years later. They’re chasing “shy” Republicans or Democrats – voters who may be generally inclined to vote for one party or the other, but for whatever reason (usually, the particular candidate) are quiet about their choices.

Since the role of the “blue wall” in both electoral politics and the American imagination is so pronounced, this means there’s an inordinate focus (often unconsciously) on white swing voters, in particular.

Chasing the swing voters

These voters may indeed turn out to be the critical deciding factor.

But in American politics, it’s rarely one single thing that decides the outcome.

In a system that does not have compulsory voting, in which small numbers of voters in a small number of states can change the result, voter turnout is the main game. This election cycle, it could matter a great deal.

And that is why there is a hidden tension in both campaigns.

In Trump land, there has been consistent pressure (and unsolicited advice) on Trump to “moderate” his stances on particular issues in order to appeal to those “shy” or swing voters.

This is particularly the case with reproductive rights. It’s led to contradictory messaging from Trump – he’s taken full, individual credit for the overturning of Roe v. Wade while simultaneously insisting he is not supportive of extreme, right-wing positions on abortion bans.

Trump’s pick of JD Vance as his vice presidential running mate suggests his campaign decided not to focus mostly on swing or shy voters, but on mobilising and expanding their core voter base of white men. That is reflected in much of Trump’s media strategy and his consistent presence on right-wing podcasts.

But that is contradicted occasionally, and quite deliberately, by high-profile surrogates, including his wife.

The Harris campaign, on the other hand, seems to be attempting to divide its focus more evenly. Harris is chasing swing voters by going on Fox News and sharing a stage with former Representative and harsh Trump critic Liz Cheney. She also appeared with 100 Republicans at an event in Pennsylvania this month.

At the same time, the campaign is also attempting to drive turnout in key demographics for Democrats. Harris is targeting young women, particularly in the South, by going on popular podcasts like Call Her Daddy. Similarly, she is reaching out to Black men by appearing on platforms like Charlamagne tha God’s podcast in a live event in Detroit.

Does the strategy work?

The question for both campaigns is: does one of these tactics undermine the other?

Might the alliance between Democrats and the Cheney family’s deeply conservative stances on foreign policy, for example, further undermine or depress turnout in a state like Michigan, where outrage and betrayal over Democratic support for Israel may well be a deciding factor?

Alternatively, will Harris’ more hardline message on immigration depress enthusiasm amongst Black and Latino voters?

Similarly, might the Republican Party’s position on reproductive rights, and the consequences of the overturning of Roe v. Wade, mean Trump continues to lose support with women, which might not be countered by a sizeable boost in men’s turnout?

The answer is: we don’t know. And if the margins are indeed as close as the polling suggests, we may not know for some time after election day.

Until then, the mantra keeps repeating:

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina.

Emma Shortis is senior researcher in international and security affairs at The Australia Institute, an independent think tank.

– ref. With 7 states deciding everything, can Trump and Harris reach the remaining swing voters – without alienating others? – https://theconversation.com/with-7-states-deciding-everything-can-trump-and-harris-reach-the-remaining-swing-voters-without-alienating-others-240670

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Jean Baker, Senior Lecturer in Journalism, Monash University

This story contains spoilers.

Lee, the feature film debut from director Ellen Kuras, explores the rawness of authentic image making and the impact of gender in war reporting.

Kate Winslet stars as the world weary photojournalist Elizabeth “Lee” Miller – better known for featuring in an iconic photograph, rather than taking one.

The same day Adolf Hitler committed suicide at his Berlin bunker in 1945, photojournalist David E. Scherman took a photograph of Miller sitting in the bath in Hitler’s Munich apartment.

But Miller was also a trailblazing, feminist photojournalist who managed to shift Vogue magazine from beauty and aesthetics to capturing the reality of the second world war. She gave us images of the frontline, fearful women and children, concentration camps, and the aftermath of war.

Here’s what you should know about the real woman behind the film – and what we can learn about war correspondents today through her story.

In front of and behind the camera

Miller was born in New York in 1907, and began her bohemian life as a model for Vogue before the war, and as a muse to her surrealist mentor Man Ray.

The film follows Miller from her work as a fashion photographer pre-war, through to her photographing the second world war and then the liberation of Paris in 1945.

Lee explores tensions with other renowned photographers at the time, such as Cecil Beaton (Samuel Barnett); her relationship with the second husband, English artist, historian and poet, Roland Penrose (Alexander Skarsgård); and her connections to the French resistance.

Female photojournalists of the time were usually assigned to taking portraits or working in fashion.

When Miller was in her 30s, her photographs for Vogue leaned towards the surreal. This was also seen in her Blitz images, where two staff from the magazine wearing creatively designed gas masks about to enter a bomb shelter was published in the London edition.

When the war broke out, Miller was accredited as one of four American female photojournalists. Like fellow American Margaret Bourke-White, Miller was known for the horrific images of Buchenwald and Dachau concentration camps in Germany, reinforcing the fact that photojournalism tells a story that is more powerful than any other form of journalism.

Ethics and photojournalism

A 2019 study examined how professional photojournalists apply ethics to their work.

Photojournalists believe photographs should be published alongside news, that photographers are key in supporting the public’s “right to know”, and they must balance “their obligation to the truth, while minimising harm”.

You can see these ethical frameworks all at play in Miller’s work, especially in her images of Dachau just after the war.

The editor of British Vogue, Audrey Withers (played in the film by Andrea Riseborough), refused to publish the photos. But American Vogue published them in June 1945, with the headline “Believe it”, as a modern memorial to the war.

But photojournalists also take actions that prioritise themselves. Sherman’s image of Miller sitting in Hitler’s bath, though a visual metaphor for the end of the war, has been criticised as a “look at me” moment.

In 2006, the New York Times described the photograph as “a woman caught between horror and beauty, between being seen and being the seer”.

The place of the woman photographer

Contemporary research suggests female photojournalists are more empathetic and have better access to vulnerable subjects than their male counterparts.

In the film, Miller’s gentle photo of a French woman publicly accused of being an informant to the Germans illustrates empathy, while masking the hidden contradictions of war.

Befriending a frightened girl in a bomb shelter, Miller has flashbacks of her youth as a victim-survivor of sexual violence. “There are different kinds of wounds, not just the ones you see,” she says in the film.

A survey in 2019 of 545 female photojournalists from 71 countries found women faced more obstacles than their male counterparts, are still considered subordinate in the profession and subject to sexism.

During the war, Miller used the gender-neutral Lee as her first name, instead of Elizabeth, fearing press accreditation on the frontline would not be approved if she was a woman.

The National Press Photographers Association say gender bias and assumptions still continue to hinder female photojournalists. These commonly held assumptions include women are weaker, less skilled and will eventually leave the profession to raise a child.

Living through her archive

Lee begins and ends with the 70-year-old Miller reflecting on her career to a young male journalist, while continuously gulping down alcohol, perhaps illustrating undiagnosed post traumatic stress syndrome, all too common among news photographers.

Returning to London after the war, Miller gave up photojournalism.

After her death in 1977, more than 60,000 negatives of her work were discovered in her attic at home. These images of surrealist photography, Vogue editorials, second world war photojournalism and portraits of important 20th century figures formed the basis of her 1985 biography, The lives of Lee Miller, written by her son Antony Penrose.

Lee is a visually, brave story about a female photojournalist whose images alter and enlarge our notions of what is worth looking at – and what we have a right to observe.

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

– ref. Lee Miller helped shape our understanding of war. Her life as a photojournalist echo in those working today – https://theconversation.com/lee-miller-helped-shape-our-understanding-of-war-her-life-as-a-photojournalist-echo-in-those-working-today-236878

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Allen, Senior Lecturer, Griffith University

There’s been an increased political and media focus recently on so-called youth crime waves, particularly in Queensland and the Northern Territory.

This has unfortunately led to crackdowns from governments and police. Young people in Alice Springs have been subject to curfews.

Queensland Opposition Leader David Crisafulli (who’s ahead in the polls ahead of this weekend’s election) has suggested young people found guilty of some crimes should be sentenced as adults.

But punitive youth crime policies violate children’s human rights and are an expensive way of making the community less safe. It’s much better to stop youth crime before it starts by supporting children’s positive development in early childhood.

In a new evaluation published today, we found a preschool program reduced the amount of young people before the courts by more than 50%. When the right family support was provided too, the chances of the children committing crimes were even lower.

Our original study

Early community-based crime prevention strategies have been greatly neglected in Australia. This is despite international evidence and the recommendations of a widely circulated 1999 Commonwealth government report.

Scientific evidence has been accumulating for more than 50 years that shows the root causes of serious youth crime can be addressed in early childhood through prevention initiatives. The most famous example is the Perry Preschool Project, implemented in a disadvantaged area of Michigan in the early 1960s.

In Australia, the Pathways to Prevention Project operated in a disadvantaged, multicultural region of Brisbane from 2002 to 2011.

It was a collaboration between Griffith University, the Queensland Department of Education, and national community agency Mission Australia.

The project aimed to improve child and youth outcomes by partnering with local preschools, schools, families and community organisations.

In 2002 and 2003, 214 four-year-old children attending two local preschools received an enhanced program focused on communication skills. This is called an “enriched preschool program”.

It was integrated into the standard curriculum and delivered by specialist teachers working with the children’s classroom teachers and their parents.

Evidence at the time showed communication skills were directly linked to success at school. They were also linked to to success in life through improved behaviour and enhanced social skills.

The communication program brought children together in small groups with similar levels of language competence. The groups were balanced in terms of gender and cultural background. They completed carefully curated activities including games, bookmaking and reading.

These provided children with the opportunity to extend and practice oral language skills in ways that were personally meaningful. These activities were led by the specialist teachers who had postgraduate qualifications in communication and oral language development.

The specialist teachers engaged parents and children in joint activities, and actively supported reading and language activities at home. By year one, children who received the communication curriculum had better language proficiency, social skills, classroom behaviour and academic achievement than children in the other preschools.

The children’s families could also access practical support from community workers from their own cultural background. This included parenting education, advocacy with government agencies and counselling. This continued until 2011.

What’s new?

Earlier evaluations showed the enhanced curriculum helped improve children’s readiness for school, among a range of other benefits. Now we’ve evaluated the success of the program over the long term.

Using anonymised data-linkage procedures, we followed up the students who received the enhanced curriculum back in 2002 to see what’s happened since.

Children who received the enhanced curriculum had improved classroom behaviour throughout primary school. They were also 56% less likely to be involved in serious youth crime by age 17.

Read more:
Is Australia in the grips of a youth crime crisis? This is what the data says

Remarkably, our evaluation found none of the children whose families also received support in the preschool years went on to offend.

The full Pathways Program was implemented widely in the community over a ten-year period, so we thought it might have had an impact more broadly.

We looked at the rate of youth offending in the region in the years 2008–16, when members of the 2002–03 preschool cohort were between 10 and 17 years old. It was 20% lower in this region than in other Queensland regions at the same low socioeconomic level.

How does this lead to less youth crime?

Programs like this work by levelling the playing field and improving the lives of children early in their developmental pathways. Developmental pathways are events and experiences that follow on from each other, or cascade, across the course of life.

For instance, a difficult transition to school increases the likelihood of poor engagement and academic problems. These are well-known risk factors for antisocial behaviour.

The long-term impact of Pathways to Prevention on youth offending means it could be a model for similar programs across Australia.

This is especially the case given our nation’s chronic under-investment in community-based developmental crime prevention. We need more programs in disadvantaged communities that are open to everyone and don’t stigmatise people.

Overwhelmingly, efforts across the country are devoted to early intervention with children identified as “at risk” in some way (such as showing disruptive behaviour), or to the treatment of young people who become enmeshed in the youth justice system.

In Queensland, there is an over-reliance on youth detention, which is often very harmful for children and of no preventative value.

Using Pathways as a model for other communities doesn’t necessarily mean exactly replicating what we did (though this is also important). Any early prevention initiative will have the best chance of success if it includes evidence-based strategies that improve children’s life chances.

These can be implemented cost-effectively through existing systems including preschools, schools and primary care. Ideally, they should operate through local partnerships involved at all stages of planning, data collection, implementation and evaluation.

Jacqueline Allen received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Institute of Criminology Research Grants.

Kate Freiberg holds an unpaid position at RealWell and received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Institute of Criminology Research Grants.

Emeritus Professor Ross Homel received funding from the Australian Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology Research Grants, the Queensland Government and the John Barnes Foundation. He is affiliated with the Justice Reform Initiative as a Queensland Patron and provides honorary research support to RealWell Pty Ltd.

– ref. We tried a different preschool curriculum to prevent youth crime. Checking in 20 years later, it worked – https://theconversation.com/we-tried-a-different-preschool-curriculum-to-prevent-youth-crime-checking-in-20-years-later-it-worked-235888

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Luis M. García Marín, Postdoctoral Researcher, Brain & Mental Health Program, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute

The human brain is a marvel of complexity. It contains specialised and interconnected structures controlling our thoughts, personality and behaviour.

The size and shape of our brains also play a crucial role in cognitive functions and mental health. For example, a slightly smaller hippocampus, the structure responsible for regulation of memory and emotion, is commonly seen in depression. In dementia, atrophy of the hippocampus is correlated with memory loss and cognitive decline.

Despite these insights, we have only scratched the surface of understanding the brain and its connection to mental health.

In collaboration with scientists around the world, we have conducted the world’s largest genetic study of the volume of regional structures of the brain. This study is now published in Nature Genetics.

We discovered hundreds of genetic variants that influence the size of structures such as the amygdala (the “processing centre” for emotions), the hippocampus and the thalamus (involved in movement and sensory signals).

We uncovered their potential overlap with genes known to influence the risk of certain developmental, psychiatric and neurological disorders.

More than 70,000 brains

To understand how the brain connects to mental health, scientists like ourselves engage in large-scale scientific studies that span the globe.

These studies, which involve thousands of volunteers, are the bedrock of modern biomedical research. They help us discover genes associated with brain size and mental health conditions. In turn, this can improve diagnostic precision and even pave the way for personalised medicine, which uses a person’s genetic test results to tailor treatments.

We screened the DNA and closely examined magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans from more than 70,000 people across 19 countries. We wanted to find out if there are specific genetic variants influencing differences in brain size between individuals.

What we found was stunning. Some of these genes seem to act early in life, and many genes also increase the risk for conditions like attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and Parkinson’s disease.

What did we find out?

Brain-related disorders are common, with an estimated 40% of Australians experiencing a mental health disorder in their lifetime.

Our genetic findings reveal that larger regional brain volumes (the size of specific parts of the brain) are associated with a higher risk of Parkinson’s disease. In comparison, smaller regional brain volumes are statistically linked with a higher risk of ADHD.

These insights suggest that genetic influences on brain size are fundamental to understanding the origins of mental health disorders. And understanding these genetic links is crucial. It shows how our genes can influence brain development and the risk of mental health conditions.

By investigating shared genetic causes, we could one day develop treatments that address multiple conditions simultaneously, providing more effective support for individuals with various conditions. This is especially important in mental health, where it is common for someone to experience more than one disorder at the same time.

Our study also revealed that genetic effects on brain structure are consistent across people from both European and non-European ancestry. This suggests that certain genetic factors have stuck around throughout human evolution.

Bridging the gaps

Our research also lays the groundwork for using genetic data to develop statistical models that predict disease risk based on a person’s genetic profile.

These advancements could lead to population screening, identifying those at higher risk for specific mental health disorders. Early intervention could then help prevent or delay the onset of these conditions.

In the future, our goal is to bridge the gaps between genetics, neuroscience, and medicine. This integration will help scientists answer critical questions about how genetic influences on brain structure affect behaviour and disease outcomes.

Understanding the genetics of brain structure and mental health susceptibility can help us better prevent, diagnose and treat these conditions.

The concept of the “human brain” first appeared in ancient Greece around 335 BCE. The philosopher Aristotle described it as a radiator that prevented the heart from overheating. While we now know Aristotle was wrong, the complexities of the brain and its links to mental health remain largely mysterious even today.

As we continue to unlock the genetic secrets of the brain, we move closer to unravelling these mysteries. This type of research has the potential to transform our understanding and treatment of mental health.

Luis M. García Marín receives funding from The University of Queensland (UQ).

Miguel E. Rentería receives funding from the Rebecca L Cooper Medical Research Foundation, the Shake It Up Australia Foundation, The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research & the Medical Research Future Fund.

– ref. How do genes shape the structures in our brains? We studied 70,000 people and found new links to ADHD and Parkinson’s – https://theconversation.com/how-do-genes-shape-the-structures-in-our-brains-we-studied-70-000-people-and-found-new-links-to-adhd-and-parkinsons-231824

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Buxton, Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Carleton University

More than five million Canadians — approximately one in eight of us — are living with a mood, anxiety or substance use disorder. The prevalence of mental disorders is on the rise, with a third of those with a disorder reporting unmet or partially met needs for mental health-care services.

The stresses of the city, where more than 70 per cent of Canadians now live, can increase the risk of poor mental health even further.

When most people think about caring for their mental health, they may think about getting more exercise, getting more sleep and making sure they’re eating healthy. Increasingly, research is showing that spending time in nature surrounded by plants and wildlife can also contribute to preventing and treating mental illness.

Our research focuses on the importance of birds and trees in urban neighbourhoods in promoting mental well-being. In our study, we combined more than a decade of health and ecological data across 36 Canadian cities and found a positive association between greater bird and tree diversity and self-rated mental health.

The well-being benefits of healthy ecosystems will probably not come as a great surprise to urban dwellers who relish days out in the park or hiking in a nearby nature reserve. Still, the findings of our study speak to the potential of a nature-based urbanism that promotes the health of its citizens.

Read more:
How the health of honeybee hives can inform environmental policies in Canadian cities

Birds, trees and human connection

Across cultures and societies, people have strong connections with birds. The beauty of their bright song and colour have inspired art, music and poetry. Their contemporary cultural relevance has even earned them an affectionate, absurdist internet nickname: “birbs”.

There’s something magical about catching a glimpse of a bird and hearing birdsong. For many urbanites, birds are our daily connection to wildlife and a gateway to nature. In fact, even if we don’t realize it, humans and birds are intertwined. Birds provide us with many essential services — controlling insects, dispersing seeds and pollinating our crops.

People have similarly intimate connections with trees. The terms tree of life, family trees, even tree-hugger all demonstrate the central cultural importance trees have in many communities around the world. In cities, trees are a staple of efforts to bring beauty and tranquility.

When the Australian city of Melbourne gave urban trees email addresses for people to report problems, residents responded by writing thousands of love letters to their favourite trees. Forest bathing, a practice of being calm and quiet among trees, is a growing wellness trend.

Birds and trees as promoters of urban wellness

Contact with nature and greenspace have a suite of mental health benefits.

Natural spaces reduce stress and offer places for recreation and relaxation for urban dwellers, but natural diversity is key. A growing amount of research shows that the extent of these benefits may be related to the diversity of different natural features.

For example, in the United States, higher bird diversity is associated with lower hospitalizations for mood and anxiety disorders and longer life expectancy. In a European study, researchers found that bird diversity was as important for life satisfaction as income.

People’s connection to a greater diversity of birds and trees could be because we evolved to recognize that the presence of more species indicates a safer environment — one with more things to eat and more shelter. Biodiverse environments are also less work for the brain to interpret, allowing restoration of cognitive resources.

To explore the relationship between biodiversity and mental health in urban Canada, we brought together unique datasets. First, we collected bird data sourced from community scientists, where people logged their bird sightings on an app. We then compared this data with tree diversity data from national forest inventories.

Finally, we compared both of these data sets to a long-standing health survey that has interviewed approximately 65,000 Canadians each year for over two decades.

We found that living in a neighbourhood with higher than average bird diversity increased reporting of good mental health by about seven per cent. While living in a neighbourhood with higher than average tree diversity increased good mental health by about five per cent.

Importance of urban birds and trees

The results of our study, and those of others, show a connection between urban bird and tree diversity, healthy ecosystems and people’s mental well-being. This underscores the importance of urban biodiversity conservation as part of healthy living promotion.

Protecting wild areas in parks, planting pollinator gardens and reducing pesticide use could all be key strategies to protect urban wildlife and promote people’s well-being. Urban planners should take note.

Read more:
Eco-anxiety: climate change affects our mental health – here’s how to cope

We’re at a critical juncture: just as we are beginning to understand the well-being benefits of birds and trees, we’re losing species at a faster rate than ever before. It’s estimated that there are three billion fewer birds in North America compared to the 1970s and invasive pests will kill 1.4 million street trees over the next 30 years.

By promoting urban biodiversity, we can ensure a sustainable and healthy future for all species, including ourselves.

Rachel Buxton receives funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, National Institutes of Health, and Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Emma J. Hudgins received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Fonds de Recherche du Québec – Nature et Technologies for this work. She currently receives funding from Plant Health Australia.

Stephanie Prince Ware has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

– ref. Want to built healthier cities? Make room for bird and tree diversity – https://theconversation.com/want-to-built-healthier-cities-make-room-for-bird-and-tree-diversity-235379

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Prudence Flowers, Senior Lecturer in US History, College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Flinders University

The 2022 news that the US Supreme Court had overturned Roe v Wade and ended the constitutional right to abortion sent shockwaves around the world.

For Australian opponents of abortion who had long looked to the US for leadership and inspiration, it prompted rejoicing.

As a leader of Cherish Life Queensland put it, “if the USA can do it, with God’s help, so can we”.

In late 2024, the abortion issue has suddenly erupted in Queensland and South Australia. A subset of local conservatives, energised by the fall of Roe v Wade and the example of Donald Trump, are embracing the divisive “culture war” tactics that dominate US politics.

Abortion and Australian politics in 2024

In the 2020 Queensland election, the Liberal National Party (LNP) has promised a “review” of the legislation that had decriminalised abortion two years prior. However, the party has spent most of the 2024 campaign studiously avoiding the issue.

That is, until Robbie Katter MP, of Katter’s Australia Party, threw a spanner in the works.

On October 8, Katter announced that if the LNP won, as was widely predicted, he would immediately introduce a private member’s bill to repeal the state abortion law.

LNP leader David Crisafulli, who voted against decriminalisation, insists that changing the law is “not part of our plan”.

However, last week Crisafulli was asked 132 times about abortion and the issue of conscience votes and refused to provide a clear answer.

In the final leaders’ debate on Tuesday night, Crisafulli finally said there would be no change to abortion law and he was “pro-choice”.

However, that is unlikely to be the end of the issue – opposition to abortion runs deep in the LNP.

Party policy in 2018 was that abortion should remain a criminal offence. Despite being a conscience vote, the three LNP members who voted for decriminalisation were threatened with “punishment” afterwards.

In 2024, several new anti–abortion candidates are running for the LNP. Former Liberal senator Amanda Stoker is a particularly high-profile one, having repeatedly addressed the Brisbane March for Life rally.

The furore over the future of reproductive rights in Queensland occurred in parallel with controversy over anti-abortion legislation introduced by state Liberal MP Ben Hood in South Australia.

His bill required anyone needing to end a pregnancy after 28 weeks to have labour induced and for the baby to be delivered alive, regardless of the health outcomes for the pregnant person or infant.

Peak medical and legal bodies condemned the bill, which critics described as a “forced birth” measure. It was narrowly defeated in the upper house on October 16.

Federally, Senator Jacinta Price has also called for abortion to be back on the “national agenda” and condemned abortion after the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Her stance is out of step with abortion law in all Australian jurisdictions.

Read more:
Abortion is now legal across Australia – but it’s still hard to access. Doctors are both the problem and the solution

Public and party opinion

This sudden uptick in anti-abortion politics does not reflect Australian attitudes.

A 2024 poll found 75% of Queenslanders agreed that decriminalising abortion had been the right action.

This view was shared across partisan and geographical lines, held by 73% of LNP voters and 78% of regional Queenslanders.

Historian Cassandra Byrnes demonstrates that these pro-choice attitudes have deep roots. A majority of the public opposed the police raids on abortion clinics that occurred under Nationals premier Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen.

A 2020 poll of South Australians found 80% supported decriminalisation. And 63% considered that later abortion should be available “when the woman and her healthcare team decide it is necessary”.

The LNP’s hostility towards decriminalisation was also markedly different from the approach in other states.

Notably, in both New South Wales and South Australia, prominent Liberals, including premiers, voted to decriminalise abortion.

In South Australia, two senior Liberals, Minister for Human Services Michelle Lensink and Attorney-General Vickie Chapman, led the cross-party group that achieved law reform.

Importing the culture wars

When Australian states and territories debated decriminalisation, anti-abortion opponents relied heavily on tactics, pseudoscientific evidence and outright misinformation that first emerged in the United States.

Read more:
How the US right-to-life movement is influencing the abortion debate in Australia

For example, in 2008, one Victorian group controversially distributed graphic photographs of aborted fetuses, and American diagrams and descriptions of later abortion procedures.

Now, as Australian conservatives seek to reopen the debate over abortion, American influence underpins the rhetoric and framing.

For decades, opponents of abortion in the United States focused on chipping away abortion rights and eroding access. They never accepted that abortion was health care.

Since 1995, their central focus was also on the statistically rare abortions performed after 20 weeks gestation. This focus has been imported wholesale into Australia.

The anti-abortion activism surrounding Hood’s bill reflects these approaches. Opponents of abortions waged a broad and stigmatising campaign against abortion after 22 weeks and six days, the legal point in South Australia after which two medical practitioners must approve an abortion.

Hood’s bill is best interpreted as an anti-abortion “messaging” exercise rather than a genuine attempt to amend the law.

For decades, this was the default tactic motivating Republicans when they introduced extreme, unenforceable bills. The purpose was not legislative change but to amplify their rhetoric and arguments and energise conservative voters.

Opposition to abortion is also part of a broader rightward shift taking place among some state Liberal branches.

In South Australia, conservatives launched a power grab after abortion was decriminalised in 2021. This included a significant recruitment drive among Pentecostals.

A similar recruiting focus on conservative religious faith groups has also occurred in Victoria, triggered by LGBTQI+ victories.

In South Australia, the party takeover is openly led by Senator Alex Antic. He made a name for himself through his hostility to COVID-19 vaccines and his opposition to trans and abortion rights.

Antic praises Trump and seeks out connections with conservatives who are or have been close to him, including Steven Bannon and Donald Trump junior.

Meanwhile, in Queensland, Crisafulli’s desperate efforts not to be pinned down on abortion offer a local version of themes in the 2024 presidential election.

Because Republicans have experienced significant voter backlash over abortion, Trump has charted an uneasy course.

Trump claims sole responsibility for the end of Roe v Wade while simultaneously denying any connection to the abortion bans now in place in many states.

Like Crisafulli, Trump has been unclear about what his victory would mean for reproductive rights.

Political commentator Mark Kenny concludes that an “ideological battle” is unfolding among Australian Liberals.

As in the United States, unwavering hostility to abortion is proving central to these politicians as a way to signify their priorities to voters and define themselves against others in their party.

Prudence Flowers has received funding from the South Australian Department of Human Services. She is a member of the South Australian Abortion Action Coalition.

– ref. Abortion is back in the headlines in Australia. The debates in the United States tell us why – https://theconversation.com/abortion-is-back-in-the-headlines-in-australia-the-debates-in-the-united-states-tell-us-why-241778

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephanie Gomes-Ng, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Auckland University of Technology

Making decisions about our health is a complex and sometimes difficult process.

On top of our own attitudes, experiences and perspectives, we are inundated with information from other people (friends, family, health professionals) and from external sources (news or social media) about what it means to be healthy.

Sometimes, this information is consistent with what we think about our own health. At other times, it may contradict our own beliefs. And to make things even more complicated, sometimes this information is deliberate misinformation.

How do we make sense of all this when making decisions about our health? What determines whether we hold fast to our attitudes, or change our minds?

Most of us can probably relate to this. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we had to change many of our behaviours to slow the spread of the virus. This meant working from home, wearing a mask, staying in our “bubbles”, and eventually getting the vaccine.

While the decision to get vaccinated was an obvious one for many people, it was not as straightforward for others. Research from the period immediately before the COVID vaccine became available in New Zealand showed a sizeable minority was unsure about or unlikely to be vaccinated.

These people were more likely to be young, female and less educated, and were primarily concerned about unknown future side effects. Our new research suggests cognitive (mental) flexibility may also have something to do with attitudes towards vaccination.

A flexible mind

Past research suggests mental flexibility plays an important role in our decision-making. Imagine changing the way you do something at work, having a discussion with someone with a different opinion, or being told you should make healthier choices (such as exercising more).

Some people navigate these situations with ease. Others find it more difficult to adapt. Mental flexibility describes this ability to adapt our attitudes, thoughts or behaviours when faced with new or changing information.

Studies show mental flexibility influences how extreme our opinions are, how likely we are to believe misinformation or “fake news”, whether we make pro-environmental choices or engage in health-promoting behaviours (sun protection or physical exercise, for example).

To increase vaccination coverage, governments often use education campaigns that emphasise the safety, effectiveness and importance of vaccination. However, these campaigns don’t always succeed in reducing feelings of uncertainty about vaccination.

Read more:
Vaccine hesitancy is one of the greatest threats to global health – and the pandemic has made it worse

We wanted to know why, and we thought mental flexibility might play a role. To test this, we surveyed 601 New Zealanders on their opinions and experiences of vaccination.

Some questions asked about external factors, such as how easy they thought it was to access or afford vaccines. Other questions asked about internal factors, such as personal beliefs about vaccination, perceptions of their own heath, and how important or safe they thought vaccines were.

Overall, our participants reported few external barriers to vaccination, with 97% saying they found vaccines accessible or affordable. These percentages are promising, and may reflect the government’s continued efforts to make it easier to get a vaccine.

In comparison, internal factors played a larger role in vaccine uncertainty or hesitancy. In particular, nearly a quarter (22%) of participants reported concerns about the health risks of vaccines. And 12% said they didn’t trust the processes or people who developed vaccines.

Testing adaptive behaviour

We also asked our participants to play a game designed to measure mental flexibility.

This involved matching cards based on a rule – for example, match the cards with the same number of objects. The rule would randomly change during the game, meaning participants had to adapt their behaviour as the game went on.

Interestingly, people who found it harder to adapt to the rule changes (meaning they had lower levels of mental flexibility) also reported more internal barriers to vaccination.

For example, when we split participants into two groups based on their mental flexibility, the low-flexibility group was 18% more likely to say vaccination was inconsistent with their beliefs. They were also 14% more likely to say they didn’t trust vaccines, and 11% more likely to report concerns about the negative side effects of vaccines.

This wasn’t the case for external factors. Mental flexibility didn’t predict whether people thought vaccines were accessible or affordable.

Information is sometimes not enough

These results suggest making decisions about our health – including whether or not to get vaccinated – depends on more than receiving the “right” information.

Simply being told about the importance of vaccination may not be enough to change attitudes or behaviours. It also depends on each person’s unique cognitive style – the way they perceive and process information.

Declining vaccination rates have been a concern worldwide, including in New Zealand, since well before the pandemic. Our findings suggest health education campaigns may be more effective if they take into account the role of cognitive flexibility.

One technique is to change the way information is framed. For example, instead of just presenting facts about the safety or importance of vaccination, education campaigns could encourage us to question our own perspectives, or to imagine alternative realities by asking “what if?” questions.

Research shows this type of framing can engage our deliberative thought processes (the ones that help us to think deeply and critically), increase mental flexibility, and ultimately make us more receptive to change.

Stephanie Gomes-Ng received funding from the Ember Korowai Takitini Trust for this research. The funders had no influence over the study’s conceptualisation, design, methodology, data collection or interpretation, nor the decision to publish.

– ref. Being mentally flexible might influence our attitudes to vaccination, a new study shows – https://theconversation.com/being-mentally-flexible-might-influence-our-attitudes-to-vaccination-a-new-study-shows-241559

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bhiamie Williamson, Research Fellow, Monash University

Last month, Australia’s newly appointed minister for emergency management, Senator Jenny McAllister, and Senator Tony Sheldon, special envoy for disaster recovery, took part in a cultural burn outside Lismore in New South Wales, as part of the National Gathering on Indigenous Disaster Resilience.

It was significant to see members of the federal government listening to and taking direction from a cultural burn expert, Oliver Costello of Jagun Alliance, before undertaking a burn.

It represented a hopeful sign that cultural burning might be increasingly used as a tool for disaster mitigation. After all, McAllister isn’t the minister for Indigenous affairs or the environment – her role is emergency management. At last month’s meeting, Indigenous peoples spoke of their desire and inherent right to be involved in disaster management.

Cultural burning is, of course, vitally important to culture. But these gentle, regular burns were one of the main ways Indigenous groups managed land. They created mosaics of burned and unburned land, reducing the chance of megafires by burning fuel loads and creating safe havens in dangerous times.

Networks of Indigenous groups have begun using fire to once again care for Country all around Australia. These are positive signs. But there is more to do to dismantle remaining barriers to mainstreaming cultural burning – and making it possible to use these ancient techniques to reduce, or avoid, disasters.

An ancient practice rekindled

The evidence of Indigenous land management using fire is significant and growing.

This evidence has emerged through formal truth-telling processes such as Yoorrook, whose commissioners heard about the deliberate suppression of Indigenous land management in Victoria. It has come from ongoing academic research stitching settler accounts of the land and observations of how Indigenous groups used fire. In 1802, for instance, the settler John Murray recorded his amazement at how Boon Wurrung people set and controlled fire in Victoria’s Western Port Bay. The fire, which “must have covered an acre of ground”, was “dous’d […] at once”.

In Mary Gilmore’s account of 19th-century colonial life in the New South Wales Riverina, she writes:

As to fire, it was [Indigenous people] who taught our first settlers to get bushes and beat out a conflagration […] Indeed, it was a constant wonder, when I was little, how easily [Indigenous people] would check a fire before it grew too big for close handling or start a return fire when and where it was safest.

These historical observations are complementary to the work of passing on knowledge of fire to the next generation. Taken together, they reveal a fundamental truth about Australia – it is a land of fire, and Indigenous people are the masters.

The return of parcels of land to Indigenous groups in recent decades means we can restart these ancient fire regimes, through Indigenous rangers and other organisations.

The return of ancient practices

The management of land over deep time by Indigenous groups has meant people and the land effectively co-evolved.

Since 1788, colonisation and Indigenous dispossession have radically altered many parts of Australia. Land was cleared for farms, cities, roads and infrastructure. Rivers were dammed for irrigation.

Grasslands and yam fields were converted to livestock farms or cropping. Forested areas in some areas were cleared and in other areas thickly regrew, replacing the park-like mix of grassland and stands of trees produced by Indigenous land management. Thirsty crops such as cotton were planted, siphoning off huge volumes of water from lakes and rivers.

Even the creation of national parks transformed landscapes, as Western practices of more passive management replaced active Indigenous management.

The suppression of cultural burning brought yet more difficult change to Australia’s plants and animals. Australia now has one of the highest extinction rates of animals in the world. But cultural burning is being applied as a method to help protect vulnerable species, such as the Corroboree Frog.

Over years, Indigenous groups have worked diligently and strategically to rekindle this ancient practice. But they have also reimagined it. It’s time to ask the question: what would it mean to bring back cultural burning at scale?

No longer do Indigenous groups apply fire as a normal and everyday rhythm of life, stopping to light small fires as they walk. It’s now much more deliberate, requiring careful planning, creation of fire breaks and management of fire using trucks and heavy machinery.

Even ignition is done differently. For a ceremony, firesticks will be used, with further lighting done using drip torches. In remote areas, fires are lit from helicopters, making it possible to cover vast areas.

Combining these ancient and contemporary practices creates something fundamentally new. We require innovative discourses to better describe these developments.

New fire season, new hazards

This fire season is likely to be a dangerous one. The seasonal bushfire outlook released by the Australasian Fire and Emergency Council projects the risk of early fires and a higher-than-usual bushfire risk over vast areas of Australia.

Recent rainy La Nina years triggered rapid vegetation growth in many areas, increasing the fuel load. Fire authorities are worried about what a forecast hot, dry, windy summer will mean.

In recent years, Indigenous ranger groups have been undertaking cool burns as much as possible. In arid areas, there are fears of fast-moving grass fires due to the spread of introduced and highly flammable buffel grass.

As danger from climate change intensifies, making volatile and combustible landscapes safer poses challenges both complex – and urgent.

Indigenous groups around Australia have begun the work of rekindling cultural burns, but barriers still remain. Responsibility for fire management in state forests, national parks and on private land has long been split between government authorities and landholders. It’s time this disaster management work by Indigenous groups was recognised and magnified by governments.

To mainstream cultural burning will mean finding ways of sharing the knowledge of when and how to burn, and resourcing Indigenous groups to undertake training and burns. Doing this will not only benefit the land and Indigenous groups, but all Australians.

Read more:
Before the colonists came, we burned small and burned often to avoid big fires. It’s time to relearn cultural burning

Bhiamie Williamson leads the National Indigenous Disaster Resilience Program at Monash University. He is also a Director of the environmental charity Country Needs People.

– ref. Cultural burning isn’t just important to Indigenous culture – it’s essential to Australia’s disaster management – https://theconversation.com/cultural-burning-isnt-just-important-to-indigenous-culture-its-essential-to-australias-disaster-management-241269

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew J. Martin, Scientia Professor and Professor of Educational Psychology, UNSW Sydney

Early entry schemes for university – where students get an offer before their final exams – are increasingly popular.

For example, more than 27,000 students applied to the Universities Admissions Centre (which mostly deals with New South Wales and Australian Capital Territory unis) for an early offer in 2024. This was a record number and an almost 19% increase on 2023.

On the one hand, early offers are seen as a way to reduce pressure on Year 12 students. But they are also increasingly criticised, with concerns students may stop trying once they receive an offer.

Our new research shows applying for an early offer does not make a significant difference to how hard a student tries leading up to their final exams or their final results.

What are early offers?

The main round of university offers is in December-January, after students have done their final exams in the previous October and November and have their final results or ATAR.

With early entry offer schemes, universities assess students using criteria other than (or on top of) final results.

Amid concerns about students reducing their efforts, in February this year, federal and state education ministers agreed there would be no university offers until September. Federal Education Minister Jason Clare is pushing for a new, national approach to early entry by 2027.

Read more:
‘I don’t believe I would have gotten into university’: how early entry schemes help Year 12 students experiencing disadvantage

Our research

Our new study investigated the role of early entry offers on Year 12 students’ academic and personal wellbeing.

We looked at three types of students: students applying for and receiving an early offer, students applying for but not receiving an early offer, and students who did not apply for an early offer.

We then looked at multiple forms of academic and personal wellbeing, including:

• the ATAR

• motivation at school (their interest, energy, and drive to learn) and enjoyment of school

• how students dealt with academic challenges (also called “academic buoyancy”)

• study burnout

• overall life satisfaction, mental health and self-esteem.

Who did we study?

The study involved Year 12 students in 2022 from schools in New South Wales.

The average age for participants was 17, most (68%) were female, the majority (69%) lived in an urban area, just under a quarter (23%) were from a non-English speaking background, and just over half were from government schools (52%).

We tracked the ATARs of 1,512 students for whom we had early offer data.

We also surveyed a subset of 525 students from this group. We surveyed them in term 2 of Year 12 and then followed up with a second survey in term 4, about 2 weeks before their final exams.

The surveys included questions about their academic and personal wellbeing. Both surveys were done online.

What we found

In terms of early entry status, 16% did not apply for an early offer, 21% applied but were unsuccessful, and 63% received an early offer.

Using statistical modelling to control for prior differences in achievement and motivation between the groups, as well as age, gender, school type and learning difficulties, we found an early offer did not appear to have an impact on a student’s ATAR.

We also found no impact on their motivation, effort, burnout or mental health.

In fact, the best predictors of students’ final results were their previous results and their efforts earlier in Year 12.

As our research showed, the findings for these predictors were statistically significant, meaning we can have confidence the results were not due to chance.

This mirrors other research that suggests you can predict a student’s ATAR from their Year 11 results.

One important difference

We did find one statistically significant effect. Those receiving an early offer scored about 10% higher in academic buoyancy than the other two groups.

This means these students reported they were better able to overcome academic challenges, such as difficult assessment tasks and competing deadlines, as they approached their final exams.

We found this difference even after controlling for any prior group differences in academic buoyancy.

But we note it was only a relatively small effect.

Why was there so little difference?

Some possible explanations about why early offers did not appear to make much difference include:

• Year 12 is a busy year full of activities (from formals and other events, to plans for life after school). It could be early entry status is quickly absorbed in all the demands of the final year and becomes normalised

• the joy or relief of an early offer is short-lived and students return to their emotional equilibrium or their typical “set point” in terms of outlook on life

• the ATAR looms large in students’ lives, so they may still want to do as well as they can – regardless of whether they get an early offer or not.

What does this mean?

Our study suggests receiving an early offer for university does not make much of a difference to final outcomes.

So this suggests students can apply for an early entry offer if they want to.

But once the application is submitted, they need to return their focus to factors that are influential in final outcomes — such as their learning, motivation, and engagement through Year 12.

Helen Tam, Kim Paino, Anthony Manny, Mitch Smith and Nicole Swanson from the Universities Admissions Centre helped with the research on which this article is based.

Andrew J. Martin has received funding from the Australian Research Council, International Boys’ Schools Coalition, NSW Department of Education, and Commonwealth Department of Education.

– ref. If a Year 12 student gets an early offer for uni, does it mean they stop trying? – https://theconversation.com/if-a-year-12-student-gets-an-early-offer-for-uni-does-it-mean-they-stop-trying-241787

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Hayward, Emeritus Professor of Public Policy, RMIT University

The early 1990s in Victoria were tough. The economy was contracting severely, the population was shrinking, employment was collapsing and the unemployment rate skyrocketed to the highest in the land.

A long-term Labor government got the blame for allowing state debt to spiral out of control. Victoria, reckoned a popular joke at the time, was “Australia’s Mexico without the sunshine”.

Is it happening all over again?

Some reporting in national media would suggest it is.

The Australian Financial Review has recently run a series on the state, including a piece last week quoting business leaders saying the Victorian economy was in trouble.

Reference was made to the latest unemployment figures as supporting evidence. Victoria’s unemployment rate has risen over the last year, and at 4.4% is now the highest in the country. Rising numbers of company failures and stagnant house prices were also cited.

Earlier in the month, data showing a falling rate of Victorian business start-ups was highlighted, while another Financial Review article examined the decline in the number of conferences. All this was referred to as evidence of a state struggling under the weight of

$8.6 billion in levies [imposed] in [Labor’s] 2023 budget to curb a mountain of state debt that is forecast to reach $188 billion by 2028.

The Australian also ran a feature on Victoria echoing the same themes.

Readers were asked, “What the hell has gone wrong with Victoria?”. Public debt and taxation figured as prominent causes of an economic catastrophe in the making. The Australian deemed the state to be

at best, trapped in stagnation, forcing it to cover falling private investment and expenditure with ever greater public largesse. And at worst […] as the spending and debt build-up sets off the alarms, a vicious spiral is triggered […] until the whole Ponzi scheme collapses.

But are things that bad? What does the economic data actually show?

Some positive signs

It is true that unemployment in Victoria is rising, and is also high compared to the rest of the country. But it has been stable for the last four months, reflecting the impact of interest rate increases over the previous couple of years.

Also, looking back over the last 40 years, the increase has been from a very low base, and remains at an historically low level – and a long way off the highs of the 1990s.

The number of people in the labour force is continuing to grow at a healthy clip. The participation rate is now the highest on record.

Last month, the labour force increased in seasonally adjusted terms by 20,000, and almost all of these additional people ended up in employment.

The growth in employment since the end of the pandemic is notable.

Since January 2023, employment has increased by 268,000, or 8% in seasonally adjusted terms. That’s 37% of the jobs added in the whole of Australia during that time.

Yes, the share of job growth is falling, but it is still higher than the state’s population share, and it is from an unbelievably high base (55% of all jobs created nationally in July were in Victoria).

The Australian Financial Review acknowledged that the latest jobs data were indeed “unexpectedly strong”.

What about business insolvencies?

Victorian insolvencies are on the rise (up 61% in September compared to the same month last year). But so too are they across Australia, with the national number rising at a higher clip (up 70%).

What about the number of conferences in Victoria? We simply cannot be sure whether they are up or down, because there is no consistent data base to settle the matter.

And while Victoria may have fallen behind other states in the number of new startups per 1,000 businesses, the actual number of businesses has increased by more than 31,000, or 3%, since the beginning of the year.

How are house prices and rents holding up?

Yes, house prices are tumbling. In real terms, they are around 20% below their pandemic peak, at least partly caused by a bundle of new property taxes introduced in the 2023/24 state budget to help pay for pandemic-related debt.

But with housing affordability at an all-time low courtesy of high interest rates, that is no bad thing, especially for those keen to buy their first home.

That fall in house prices stands in contrast to a boom in rents over the same time period.

Over the last 12 months, median rents in Victoria have increased by 13.3%, and by 4.3% over the last quarter. In the March quarter, the rental stock fell for the first time on record, perhaps supporting those who see an economy in trouble.

But that fall amounted to barely 10,000 dwellings, or only 2.7% of the stock. Those properties had to be sold to someone, and it is likely many were sold to first time buyers who, in changing tenure, had no net effect on the rental market. A redistribution of wealth like that may be no bad thing.

Debt is high – but so is infrastructure spending

There is no doubt the Victorian economy has been slowing, as has the rest of the country. That is exactly the outcome sought by the Reserve Bank when it pushed up interest rates last year.

But there is little evidence to show Victoria is following the disastrous path of the early 1990s.

Back then, state debt grew alarmingly because of a savage recession. This time round, state debt has grown strongly, but largely to fund a construction pipeline on a scale the state has not seen before.

Infrastructure spending is now running close to $25 billion a year, almost five times what it was a decade ago. There’s a lot of jobs in those numbers, and shortly a lot of that infrastructure will come on line, boosting the state’s economic potential.

There is one other factor driving Victoria’s surprisingly resilient economy. Net international migration increased by 152,000 in the year to March 2024 – almost 30% of the Australian total – driven partly by the return of international students.

Very fast, migration-driven population growth is not being matched by increased output, and the state’s household income per person is continuing its long-term decline, leading some to argue it has become a “poor state”.

Treasurer Tim Pallas will hope that the increase stock of debt-funded infrastructure provides the productivity boost sorely needed to turn that around.

While on several indicators Victoria’s economy is slowing, this largely reflects a national trend. Drilling down into the data shows there are signs of growth, which suggest alarm at this stage is not justified.

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

– ref. Unemployment’s up, house prices are stagnating. But is the Victorian economy doing as badly as it seems? – https://theconversation.com/unemployments-up-house-prices-are-stagnating-but-is-the-victorian-economy-doing-as-badly-as-it-seems-241762

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexa Scarlata, Research Fellow, Media & Communication, RMIT University

The Australian commissioning team at Netflix has had a pretty good run over the past 12 months. In January, the adaptation of Trent Dalton’s novel Boy Swallows Universe proved to be the most successful Australian-made show to that point, scoring 7.6 million views globally in its first two weeks.

A few months later, the second season of the streamer’s Heartbreak High reboot debuted at number one in Australia, and stayed on the Global Top 10 English TV Series list for three consecutive weeks.

Will Netflix’s latest Australian series – one without any ties to a familiar book or TV show – be as well received? Luckily for the streamer, its new six-part outback western, Territory, has already been described as “epic”, “unforgettable” and “rollicking TV”.

Premium bush family drama

The series takes place in the Northern Territory, on the “world’s largest cattle station”. The fictional Marianne Station is about the size of Belgium.

The once-great dynasty of its owners, the Lawson family, is thrown into doubt when their heir apparent dies in the first episode. The Top End’s most powerful players – billionaire miners, rival cattle barons, desert gangsters and Indigenous elders – immediately start circling.

While this is an original concept by creators Timothy Lee and Ben Davies, you’d be forgiven for feeling a sense of déjà vu, as Territory has been described as equal parts Succession and Yellowstone. I can imagine Netflix executives running the numbers on the returns from those two hits and saying, “let’s throw some money into this”. And boy, did they.

No expenses spared on hats and helicopters

Territory was directed by Wolf Creek heavyweight Greg McLean. According to him, it’s the

biggest South Australian TV production ever. Possibly one of the biggest TV productions in Australia just in terms of the amount of crew (and) the incredible support that we had to put in place to go to the locations we went to.

As Netflix put it, Bondi Beach this is not. While the interiors were filmed in South Australia, half of the series was filmed in stunning remote locations across the NT.

As a result, the show looks like the most ambitious and sophisticated Tourism Australia ad you’ve ever seen. The wildlife! The panoramic drone shots! The hat budget! The rest of the world could go from thinking we ride kangaroos to work, to assuming we’ve all got our own helicopters.

The show looks as expensive as it sounds, but is still kind of soapy. The irony in this story is that everyone’s dirty, but no one ever sweats.

Territory was originally announced as “Desert King”. Changing the name was wise. The landscape is, for the most part, pretty lush – and not in a “look at this oasis we’ve stumbled upon” kind of way. I counted one fly.

Desert queens

What’s more, while the male characters are brilliant sources of humour and violence, it’s the ladies in Territory that bring the heart.

Anna Torv leads the series as Emily Lawson. Emily is the wife to the next-in-line but perpetually drunk Graham (Michael Dorman). She’s also the girl from the property next door, belonging to the rival Hodge family – a slightly shifty bunch who’ve been known to steal the Lawson’s cattle.

Torv was the perfect choice to embody Emily as the long-suffering wife, disdained daughter-in-law, loving sister and exasperated mother. Her poker face kept me guessing. She may not be a Lawson by blood, but her cunning makes her a great fit in this powerful family.

Kylah Day plays Sharnie Kennedy, a young kid kicking (and fooling) around with a couple of Top End bandits. It was fun – if a little frustrating – to watch her figure out her loyalties and her limits.

Finally, Sara Wiseman plays Sandra Kirby, a disgustingly wealthy and ruthless land developer who doubles as the quintessential villain. Sandra plays everyone – even her own son. Her merciless manipulation of aspiring Indigenous cattle baron Nolan Brannock (Clarence Ryan) stings, even as it feels quite heavy-handed.

Whose land and whose legacy?

Territory does a great job of establishing a simmering tension between the traditional owners of the land and the families and businesses that have taken possession of it.

But for a show that’s so centred on the battle for power in the Top End, the plotlines that deal with the issue of dispossession move at a frustratingly slow pace.

Perhaps this is to cater to a global audience, which will likely lack the context that local viewers have. And maybe, for Australian viewers, the enduring subordination and struggle of the original landowners is the intended takeaway.

Ultimately, Territory is an ambitious and attractive series. It was wonderful to see so many resources poured into a new concept, filmed and set in a part of Australia that rarely sees the kind of spotlight it deserves.

Territory is streaming on Netflix from today.

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

– ref. Netflix’s Territory is a Succession-like drama packed with family rivalry and betrayal, set in Australia’s outback – https://theconversation.com/netflixs-territory-is-a-succession-like-drama-packed-with-family-rivalry-and-betrayal-set-in-australias-outback-241896

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ishita Chordia, Ph.D. Candidate in Information Science, University of Washington

Homelessness has surged across the United States in recent years, rising 19% from 2016 though 2023. The main cause is a severe shortage of affordable housing. Rising homelessness has renewed debates about use of public space and how encampments affect public safety.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently weighed in on these debates with its 2024 decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson. The court’s ruling grants cities the authority to prohibit individuals from sleeping and camping in public spaces, effectively condoning the use of fines and bans to address rising rates of homelessness.

East Atlanta Village, a historically Black neighborhood in Atlanta with about 3,000 residents, is trying something different. In the fall of 2023, with support from the Atlanta City Council, the mayor’s office and Intown Cares, a local nonprofit that works to alleviate homelessness and hunger, the neighborhood hired a full-time social worker to support people experiencing homelessness.

Michael Nolan, an Intown Cares social worker, is trained in an approach that emphasizes individual autonomy and dignity, recognizes that being homeless is a traumatic experience, and prioritizes access to housing. His role includes helping individuals get the documentation they need to move off the streets, such as copies of their birth certificates and Social Security cards. He also has a dedicated phone line that community members can use to alert him about dangerous situations that involve homeless people.

I am a researcher at the University of Washington studying programs and technologies that help urban neighborhoods flourish. I’m also a resident of East Atlanta Village and have helped the neighborhood organize and evaluate this experiment.

For the past year, my colleagues and I have collected data about the neighborhood social work program to understand how well it can support both people without housing and the broader community. Our preliminary findings suggest that neighborhood social work is a promising way to address challenges common in many neighborhoods with homelessness.

I believe this approach has the potential to provide long-term solutions to homelessness and improve the health and safety for the entire neighborhood. I also see it as a sharp contrast with the punitive approach condoned by the Supreme Court.

Resolving conflicts over public space

One of the people I interviewed while evaluating this initiative was Rebecca, a resident of East Atlanta Village who walks her dog in the local park every day. In the fall of 2023, she noticed that a man had moved into the park and set up a tent. At first, the area was clean, but within a few weeks there was garbage around the tent and throughout the park.

Rebecca felt that the trash was ruining one of the few green spaces in the neighborhood. She decided to contact Nolan. Nolan told her that he knew the unhoused man, was working with him to secure permanent housing and in the meantime would help him move his tent to a less-frequented space.

Such negotiations around public spaces are common challenges for neighborhoods with large homeless populations, especially in dense urban areas. Other examples in our data included conflicts when a homeless person began sleeping in his car outside another resident’s home, and when a homeless man wandered into a homeowner’s yard.

The standard approach in these situations is to fine, ban or imprison the unhoused individual. But those strategies are expensive, can prolong homelessness and do little to actually resolve the issues.

In contrast, hiring a social worker has enabled East Atlanta Village to resolve conflicts gently, through conversation and negotiation. The solutions address concerns about public health and safety and also offer people without homes an opportunity for long-term change.

Meeting basic needs

Over the past year, this program has helped 13 people move into housing. Nolan has facilitated over 180 medical and mental health care visits for people living on the street.

Eighty-six people have been connected to Medicaid, food assistance or Social Security benefits. Thirty-five people have health care for the first time, and six people have started receiving medication for their addictions.

Research shows that addressing people’s basic needs by helping them obtain food, medicine, housing and other necessities not only supports those individuals but also produces cascading benefits for the entire community. They include reduced inequality, better health outcomes and lower crime rates.

Managing mental and behavioral health

Studies have found that about two-thirds of unhoused individuals struggle with mental health challenges. Unmet mental and behavioral health needs can contribute to unsafe and illegal behavior.

The United States does not have a comprehensive system in place for supporting people who are living on the street and struggling with chronic mental and behavioral health challenges. While much more infrastructure is needed, in East Atlanta Village, Nolan is able to check in on people experiencing homelessness, work with clinics to deliver medication for addiction and mental health needs and alert community members about dangerous situations.

As an example, in December 2023 a homeless man was arrested in East Atlanta Village for trespassing, stealing mail and other erratic behavior. When concerned residents posted to the neighborhood Facebook group, Nolan responded that he knew the man well, that this behavior was not typical and that he would look into the situation.

Nolan later updated his post, commenting that the man had been arrested but that he would “continue to follow up and ensure that his current behaviors do not return upon his release.”

In other examples, Nolan has helped de-escalate situations when people experienced mental health episodes in local coffee shops and churches.

A model for other cities

Cities around the U.S. have decisions to make about addressing homelessness and its associated challenges. Neighborhood social work is not a magic bullet, but my colleagues and I see it as a promising approach to address the most common challenges that neighborhoods with high rates of homelessness face.

East Atlanta Village is currently working with the Atlanta City Council to renew funding for this program, which cost US$100,000 in its initial year. We hope that other neighborhoods also consider this strategy when deciding how to address homelessness in their own areas.

Ishita Chordia is affiliated with the East Atlanta Neighborhood Association. She volunteers for the neighborhood association and has helped organize and evaluate the neighborhood social work program.

– ref. This Atlanta neighborhood hired a case manager to address rising homelessness − and it’s improving health and safety for everyone – https://theconversation.com/this-atlanta-neighborhood-hired-a-case-manager-to-address-rising-homelessness-and-its-improving-health-and-safety-for-everyone-236466

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

Industrial relations will be hotly contested at next year’s election.

Labor has introduced a raft of new worker protections and pushed for wage increases for lower paid workers.
Business groups have argued against further red tape and claimed the government’s new regulations have contributed to rising costs.

The union movement, meanwhile, has been mired in the fallout from the CFMEU controversy, with some union leaders angry over the government and ACTU’s tough treatment of that union after revelations of its infiltration by criminals.

To talk about these issues and more, we’re joined by ACTU secretary Sally McManus and Innes Willox, the head of the Australian Industry Group, one of the peak employer groups.

On how to fix the construction industry, Willox advocates an oversight body but not the reintroduction of the Australian Building and Construction Commission,

We believe that the construction sector does require its own oversight. We had the ABCC previously. We’re not saying go back to that. You don’t have to replicate that model entirely. But the sector has shown that it does require an oversight body that has the ability to launch both civil and criminal claims for poor behaviour. You’re not going to clean it up through sort of task forces and the like, which actually don’t do anything on the ground to change and moderate behaviour.

What other changes to industrial relations would employers want from a Coalition government?

I think what we can expect or hope that the Coalition will look long and hard at things like the right to disconnect. Which came from nowhere. It came out of left field right at the end of a process. It’s created huge uncertainty in workplaces. It’s a bit of a minefield both for employers and employees.

The definition of’casual’ is now a 17-page manual that employers have to work through, rather than a straightforward definition. We’d hope that the Coalition would look at that. And, of course, union right-of-entry powers which have now tilted the balance totally in favour of unions. They’re the sort of things we think that they should look at as a priority and examine what they can do to take off the rough edges that have been put in place there.

On the unions’ wish list from Labor, McManus says they are talking with the government about further action on the issue of equality.

At the moment, the gender pay gap is at the lowest ever recorded. So that’s a good thing. But in terms of equality in the workplace, that issue is still a big one, and there is a big push that we are making for reproductive leave. This isn’t just for women, it’s also for men.

So many women suffer from things like painful periods. Of course, there’s a whole issue of menopause.

For men, there’s a whole lot of issues to do with reproductive issues as well. […] So this is something that we are talking to the government about and campaigning around.

Another issue is that of youth wages:

It’s really totally outrageous that 19, 20-year-olds are paid discount wages in Australia. It’s not acceptable in 2024-2025 and should be fixed. The union movement’s taking it up at the moment and have got rid of it in a lot of industries, and we want to finish the job. So we’re going to try and achieve that through campaigning and through the industrial commission. But if we don’t, if there’s no way of fixing it that way, there’ll be no option then other than to say to the government, listen, ball’s in your court now.

On the split in the union movement over the government and ACTU actions against the construction division of the CFMEU, McManus says the ACTU will continue to keep its door open,

Look, no one likes what’s happened. No one likes the fact that, obviously, that union was infiltrated by organised crime, outlaw motorcycle gangs. And no one supports corruption. The other construction union who works with the CFMEU all the time, which is the ETU, the Electrical Trades Union – they’re the ones who have disaffiliated from the ACTU.

They’re mates, they’re all mates, right? And so, obviously, they’re also not happy with what’s happened. And obviously we will always keep the door open and encourage unity. The ACTU is a place where truck drivers and community workers and teachers and nurses and road workers, everyone of every profession, gets together and talks. It’s always a good thing because you’re listening to other people and you’re stronger together.

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Sally McManus on what unions want from Labor and Innes Willox on business wish list for Dutton – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-sally-mcmanus-on-what-unions-want-from-labor-and-innes-willox-on-business-wish-list-for-dutton-242019