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

New Zealand might not be part of the recently revealed security agreement between the US, Britain and Australia (AUKUS), but it certainly can’t avoid the diplomatic and strategic fallout.

Under the pact, Australia stands to gain nuclear-powered submarine capability, with the US seeking greater military basing rights in the region. ASEAN allies have had to be reassured over fears the region is being nuclearised.

Unsurprisingly, China and Russia both reacted negatively to the AUKUS arrangement. France, which lost out on a lucrative submarine contract with Australia, felt betrayed and offended.

But behind the shifting strategic priorities the new agreement represents – specifically, the rise of an “Indo-Pacific” security focus aimed at containing China – lies a nuclear threat that is growing.

Already there have been warnings from China that AUKUS could put Australia in the atomic cross-hairs. Of course, it probably already was, with the Pine Gap intelligence facility a likely target.

While New Zealand’s nuclear-free status makes it a less obvious target, it is an integral part of the Five Eyes intelligence network. Whether that would make the Waihopai spy base an attractive target in a nuclear conflict is known only to the country’s potential enemies.

100 seconds to midnight

What we do know, however, is that nuclear catastrophe remains a very real possibility. According to the so-called Doomsday Clock, it is currently 100 seconds to midnight — humanity’s extinction point should some or all of the planet’s 13,100 nuclear warheads be launched.

The US and Russia account for most of these, with 1,550 many of these deployed on high alert (meaning they can be fired within 15 minutes of an order) and thousands more stockpiled.

Read more:
The AUKUS pact, born in secrecy, will have huge implications for Australia and the region

The other members of the “nuclear club” – France, Britain, Israel, India, North Korea, Pakistan and China – are estimated to possess over 1,000 more.

Most of these warheads are much larger than the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima in 1945. US, Russian and Chinese investment in the development of a new generation of hypersonic missiles has raised fears of a new arms race.

The Trump legacy

From New Zealand’s point of view, this is more than disappointing. Having gone nuclear free in the 1980s, it worked hard to export the policy and promote disarmament. The high-tide was in 2017 when 122 countries signed the UN’s Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

But the nine nuclear-capable countries simply shrugged. The Trump administration even wrote to the signatories to say they had made “a strategic error” that “turns back the clock on verification and disarmament” and urged them to rescind their ratification.

President Donald Trump then began popping rivets out of the international frameworks keeping the threat of nuclear war in check. He quit the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which prohibited short- to medium-range nukes in Europe, and the Open Skies agreement, which allowed flights through national air space to monitor compliance.

Read more:
Why is southeast Asia so concerned about AUKUS and Australia’s plans for nuclear submarines?

He also quit the multi-national agreement restricting Iran’s nuclear programme (despite Iran’s compliance) and failed to denuclearise North Korea, despite much fanfare. The bilateral START agreement limiting US and Russian nukes survived, but China rebuffed Trump’s idea of a trilateral nuclear pact.

Nor is the clock ticking backwards with Joe Biden in the White House. Although he extended START, the Iran deal hasn’t been resurrected and there’s been no breakthrough with a still provocative North Korea.

Both the INF and the Open Skies agreements lie dormant, and the AUKUS pact has probably seen US-Chinese relations hit a new low.

Time for renewed action

While it makes sense for New Zealand to maintain and promote its nuclear-free policy, it must also be pragmatic about reducing tension and risk, particularly in its own region. Being outside the AUKUS agreement and being on good terms with China is a good start.

Not being a nuclear state might mean New Zealand lacks clout or credibility in such a process. But the other jilted ally outside the AUKUS relationship, France, is both a nuclear power and has strong interests in the region.

Like China, France sits outside the main framework of US-Russia nuclear regulation. Now may well be the time for France to turn its anger over the AUKUS deal into genuine leadership and encourage China into a rules-based system. This is where New Zealand could help.

Read more:
After AUKUS, Russia sees a potential threat — and an opportunity to market its own submarines

The Christchurch Call initiative, led by Jacinda Ardern and French president Emmanuel Macron after the 2019 terrorist attack, shows New Zealand and France can cooperate well. Now may be the chance to go one step further, where the country that went nuclear free works with the country that bombed the Rainbow Warrior, and together start to talk to China.

This would involve discussions about weapons verification and safety measures in the Indo-Pacific region, including what kinds of thresholds might apply and on what terms nuclear parity might be established and reduced.

Such an initiative might be difficult and slow — and for many hard to swallow. But New Zealand has the potential to be an honest broker, and has a voice that just might be heard above the ticking of that clock.

As UN Secretary General António Guterres warned only last week: “We are on the edge of an abyss and moving in the wrong direction. Our world has never been more threatened or more divided.”

I was working on the Rainbow Warrior when it was blown up by the French. I helped paint it, before the explosions.

– ref. With the AUKUS alliance confronting China, New Zealand should ramp up its anti-nuclear diplomacy – https://theconversation.com/with-the-aukus-alliance-confronting-china-new-zealand-should-ramp-up-its-anti-nuclear-diplomacy-168652

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Archer, Senior Lecturer in Strategic Communication; social media researcher, Murdoch University

Would you share your most intimate thoughts with strangers?

For many women, during the pandemic and associated lockdowns, closed Facebook groups have been a place to do just that. These groups offer a chance to escape the house virtually and spend time with like-minded souls, sometimes chatting, often venting, and seeking solidarity in virtual sisterhood.

Mental health issues, chronic illness, domestic violence, children’s illnesses and issues, divorce, death, infidelity: these are just some of the issues discussed in these groups, along with the more mundane minutiae of life.

While women get friendship and advice from the groups, it’s at a cost. Group administrators spend countless unpaid hours screening new members, managing group conflict, and ensuring accuracy of information.

What’s more, the recent Australian High Court ruling that media companies are responsible for defamatory comments on their Facebook pages puts the spotlight on some of the risks faced by “accidental community managers” in these groups, unpaid and unprotected by large media organisations (or indeed any organisation at all).

Read more:
High Court rules media are liable for Facebook comments on their stories. Here’s what that means for your favourite Facebook pages

The labour of creating and maintaining peer communities online is often invisible, undervalued, and fraught with risk. The recent Australian census asked questions about household labour, but few people stop to consider the significant labour involved in creating and maintaining online communities.

Closed, women-centred Facebook groups have become a sought-after place for millions of women who want to connect with others outside of the public eye. Their inner workings remain an under-researched area and there are risks and rewards, including the possibility of legal risks, media outing and shaming. The practice of “screen-shotting” content from supposedly private spaces is an ever-present risk.

Members of a closed group of more than 3,000 lawyers who are also mothers were reportedly threatened with defamation action after details of their criticisms of anti-mask activism became known outside the group.

Why women open up to closed groups

Our recent research on closed, female-focused Facebook groups explored some of the risks and rewards for women, particularly mothers, and their motivations for joining these groups.

We interviewed women who are members of closed Facebook groups. We studied four specific categories of Facebook users: partners of those in the military, migrant women, “mum bloggers” and “everyday” mothers.

Participants told us they joined private or secret Facebook groups because they wanted a safe, trusted, gender-specific space for discussion.

But these groups require significant labour to create and maintain. Women undertake this “hidden” labour not only for themselves, but on behalf of their families, institutions and organisations. Groups are used to get information, advocate for their needs and often create a peer assistance community to cover gaps in other support services.

Some mum bloggers told us they joined the groups to seek “refuge” from their public blogging, while still often maintaining a more curated public presence, so as to escape surveillance, including from brands (as current or potential sponsors or partners), the mainstream media, and trolls.

Meanwhile, women whose partners were in the military sought spaces away from the intense expectation of the “ideal military spouse”.

Migrant mothers noted that a shared cultural background, and common experiences such as loneliness or racism, increased their level of trust in the fellow group members and the information they provided.

And for everyday mums, the groups offer a chance to let the “mask of motherhood” slip and to take time out to seek advice and focus on their own issues.

The cost of caring

These responses suggest many women are seeking solace from their intensive caring roles as mothers and partners. But ironically, it takes a lot of work to create, maintain and participate in these groups.

Members and administrators of these groups work hard to make them safe, trustworthy and inclusive. But with COVID lockdowns affecting much of Australia’s population, tensions have pushed some groups to breaking point.

Fiery exchanges around specific issues such as vaccines, panic-buying or compliance with public health orders, or generally heightened emotions amid the pandemic, have prompted some moderators to close or temporarily suspend pages.

Earlier this year, Facebook admitted it needs to do more to reduce the risks involved in moderation and membership of closed groups, pledging to “continue to build and invest to make sure people can rely on these places for connection and support”.

Read more:
Why are Australians still using Facebook?

While closed Facebook groups meet people’s need for connection away from the glare of the societal gaze, the paradox of creating “private” spaces within a commercial platform that monetises personal information also sits uncomfortably for many users.

The invisible work women undertake in these groups bring many benefits to their families, their employers, and to themselves. Recognising this unpaid labour is vital and more needs to be done to train, resource and support the volunteers who make and maintain these vital community resources.

Catherine Archer received funding from St John of God Health Care and partnered with Playgroup WA for part of the research into mothers’ use of social media that informed this article.

Amy Johnson is currently an administrator of a women-centered Facebook group.

Leah has been a volunteer admin for various Facebook groups, and currently runs a local parents’ Facebook group.

– ref. Closed Facebook groups offer respite for stressed-out women. But running them involves yet more unseen labour – https://theconversation.com/closed-facebook-groups-offer-respite-for-stressed-out-women-but-running-them-involves-yet-more-unseen-labour-168075

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zahid Mumtaz, PHD candidate and casual sessional academic, Australian National University

The swift reemergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan after a failed 20-year war means we need to look beyond military solutions to extremism. One area policymakers should focus on are madrassas — the religious schools that have existed in many Muslim countries for centuries.

Read more:
Afghans’ lives and livelihoods upended even more as US occupation ends

Our research in Pakistan shows the importance of these institutions not just in terms of education and religious fundamentalism, but welfare support, too.

This provides critical lessons for Afghanistan.

Madrassas and the Taliban connection

The exact number of madrassas in Afghanistan is not documented, but many Taliban have studied in them. There are an estimated 30,000-plus madrassas in Pakistan, where there is also a strong connection to the Taliban. For example, the Darul Uloom Haqqania madrassa in north west Pakistan has been described as the “university of jihad”.

The 9/11 Commission’s report found madrassas provided a narrow education, supporting religious fundamentalism, that may lead to terrorism. It specifically recommended supporting improved education in Pakistan.

But reforms have only met with limited success. In part, this is because madrassas help meet the welfare needs of large, marginalised segments of the population.

Poverty in Afghanistan and Pakistan

Both Afghanistan and Pakistan have very high poverty levels, although the problems are more intense in Afghanistan. In 2016, more than half (51.7%) of the Afghan population and 39% of Pakistan’s population were considered poor due to the serious health, education and living standard deprivations they faced, using the poverty line of US$1.90 (A$2.60) per day.

Read more:
Taliban’s religious ideology – Deobandi Islam – has roots in colonial India

More than 70% of Pakistan’s workforce are in informal jobs, such as street vending and more than 80% in Afghanistan are in similarly vulnerable employment.

Despite the high level of need in these countries, spending on social protection is only 2% of GDP, a figure less than 1/10th the average in high-income countries. In Australia social spending (including health) makes up close to 17% of GDP.

Research in Pakistan

Between November 2019 and February 2020, the lead author travelled to Pakistan to conduct field research. Almost 600 families who sent children to madrassas were surveyed, with 90 of this group further interviewed in depth. An additional 40 madrassa heads were also interviewed.

There are 132 districts in Pakistan, but these can include several towns and villages, and the fringes can include significant rural populations. Out of these 132 districts, 14 were randomly selected for survey. About 35-45 families from each district were then randomly selected. The selected cities had high, middle and low poverty index scores and included Lahore, Faisalabad, Bajor (a conflict-affected tribal area bordering Afghanistan), Upper Dir (a conflict-affected area in the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) and Multan.

The families were asked about their jobs, assets, the risks they faced, and the support they received from the government and family, friends, and religious institutions.

Living on 20 cents a day

The study found most families sending their children to madrassas were deeply impoverished. Remembering that the international poverty line is only US$1.90 per day, it is notable that of the 570 households studied, more than 400 were earning between 14 and 28 US cents per person per day (20 to 40 Australian cents per day).

Of the group, almost 12% were unemployed, while 60% had precarious jobs such as street vending, and 1.75% had no male adult — so child labour was their primary income source.

Of those surveyed, 15% suffered from infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, hepatitis and polio. Forced migration because of conflict (13%) and natural disasters (13%) were also common.

One of the participants described the lack of services:

My wife and I suffer from hepatitis […] A sizeable portion of my income is spent on treating this disease […] The water in my area is salty and undrinkable. Therefore, we must travel long distances to collect water. The hospital is hours drive from our village, and in emergency cases, we usually resort to traditional treatments.

Another talked about the ongoing risk of violence:

We are faced with a tribal conflict ongoing for forty years. Several members of our family have been killed in this conflict. We cannot move out of our homes during the day […].

Madrassas fill the vacuum

In the absence of hospitals and essential services, madrassas step in to help fill these needs. They are a significant source of welfare for these families, in addition to the education they provide.

This can include cash assistance to families in times of need, assistance with health costs and helping with marriage and burial services.

I am a brick kiln worker, and we are a family of eight […] I have sent two of my kids to a madrassa in another city, where they are fed, provided shelter, and given a monthly stipend. So, it is a big relief for me.

A madrassa education, including education in Arabic, also makes children employable, potentially leading to jobs in other countries, or as Islamic teachers in schools, re-employment in the same madrassas or running their own madrassas.

I got a degree in Islamic education and got re-employed in the same madrassa. Although my income is less, I am happy that I have a job to feed my family.

Lessons for aid agencies and governments

International development agencies and financial organisations now highlight the role of social safety nets in poverty reduction in developing countries.

Despite this growing interest, Pakistan and Afghanistan face severe economic and financial problems, assistance through formal government programs is only marginally helpful in meeting household needs.

As one participant explained:

I am a widow, and I get approximately 4500 PKR (approximately A$42) on a quarterly basis from [the government social welfare program]. I have to feed four kids, and the amount I receive is so little that I can use it only for buying basic consumption items [wheat flour, lentils, oil, rice, milk, and vegetables] of a week.

Our research suggests vulnerable and marginalised populations will continue to depend on madrassas for welfare support so long as governments do not have the adequate financial resources to fund effective social protection programmes.

In turn, a breeding ground for fundamentalism and extremism may continue to welcome new recruits. International donor agencies and countries such as Australia should direct their efforts to strengthen formal welfare strategies, so impoverished families are not forced to turn to madrassas for help.

Zahid Mumtaz receives funding from Australian National University for his PhD.

Peter Whiteford has received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Department of Social Services. He is a Policy Advisor to the Australian Council of Social Service and a Fellow of the Centre for Policy Development.

– ref. ‘It is a big relief for me’: how the welfare provided by madrassas holds a key to fighting the Taliban – https://theconversation.com/it-is-a-big-relief-for-me-how-the-welfare-provided-by-madrassas-holds-a-key-to-fighting-the-taliban-167899

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Patrick Taylor, Chief Environmental Scientist, EPA Victoria; Honorary Professor Macquarie University, Macquarie University

Everything in our homes gathers dust. But what exactly is it? Where does it come from, and why does it keep coming back? Is it from outside? Is it fibres from our clothes and cells from our skin?

Yes, but it’s a lot more than that.

People from all around Australia have been sending their dust to Macquarie University’s DustSafe program. Instead of emptying the vacuum cleaner into the bin, they package it up and we analyse it. As a result, we are getting to know the secrets of your dust! In total, 35 countries are part of this program.

Here’s a taste of what we know so far.

Read more:
We’re all ingesting microplastics at home, and these might be toxic for our health. Here are some tips to reduce your risk

Dust is everywhere

Dust is everywhere. It settles on all surfaces in the natural environment as well as inside homes and buildings — where we spend about 90% of our time, even before COVID.

Some dust is natural, coming from rocks, soils and even space. But the DustSafe program is revealing Australian house dust can include nasties such as:

• trace metals

• radioactive elements

• antibiotic resistant genes (genes that make bacteria resistant to antibiotics)

• microplastics and

• perfluorinated chemicals (PFAS) found in fire-fighting foams, stain and water protection for fabrics and carpets, some packaging and other sources.

Dust from inside your home

Some estimates suggest one third of trace element contaminants in household dust originate from sources inside your home, with the rest migrating from outside via air, clothes, pets, shoes and the like.

You and your pets are constantly contributing skin cells and hair to dust. Dust is also made up of decomposing insects, bits of food, plastic and soil.

Intuitively, one might think having pets transporting a variety of organic contaminants including faeces into homes is somewhat gross. However, there is emerging evidence that some “filth” is beneficial as it may help your immune system and reduce allergy risk.

Cooking, open fireplaces and smoking indoors adds very fine dust to your home along with contaminants of concern, which are associated with poor health outcomes.

Dust contains a wide collection of chemicals, including those listed on the UN’s Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, which are linked to certain cancers, birth defects, dysfunctional immune and reproductive systems, greater susceptibility to disease and damage to the nervous system.

Chemicals used in pesticides and in our clothing and furniture also combine with dust in our homes. Toxic flame retardants are used in countless domestic products including children’s pyjamas and can make their way into dust.

Dust also contains microplastics from clothes, packaging, carpeting and furnishings. They’re easily inhaled and ingested, especially by children who often put their hands in their mouth.

Pefluorinated chemicals or PFAS — known as the “forever chemicals” — are used in many domestic products including cosmetics and some non-stick surfaces. These chemicals are in our house dust, too.

Dust from outside your home

About two-thirds of household dust comes from outdoors.

Garden soil and road dust gets tracked in on your shoes or blown in on windy days. Outdoor dust particles get in on the hairs of your pets. Vehicle exhaust dust also gets inside.

Recent dust storms have transported topsoil from farming lands and desert regions to our homes in the city.

Bushfires create fine particulate atmospheric dust, which can contain toxic components from past pollution.

Dust from nearby mines and industry can result in toxic exposures to children.

Poor air quality and damp homes are a source of disease and death.

By deduction, dust would also contribute to adverse health outcomes. Certain types of dust are particularly bad; there are renewed exposures concerns about silicosis dust for tradespeople, and asbestos dust from home renovation.

Excessive use of disinfectants and antibacterial products has been linked to the increased prevalence of antibiotic resistant genes, which we can detect in our dust.

Nearly one in five Australians have allergic rhinitis (hay fever), caused by dust related allergens such as dust mites, pollen, pet dander and skin particles.

Take action against dust!

House dust is part of life. Even in closed-up homes, it will still settle from the indoor atmosphere, leak from the ceiling cornices and attic spaces, and seep into your living areas through cracks around windows and doors.

Any particles of dirt, smoke, fibres or crushed materials that go into the air eventually come down as dust.

But there’s much you can do.

We can try to stop dust getting inside. Use door mats and take your shoes off indoors. Mud-covered children or pets can be towelled down at the door and dusty work clothes should be removed upon entering.

We can choose wisely what chemicals we allow into our homes and how they are used.

Reducing our use of plastics, pesticides and waterproofers will help to reduce the chemical load. Quit unnecessary antibacterial products. A damp cloth with soap or a detergent is just as useful to clean a surface.

Regular vacuuming helps enormously. Vacuum cleaners fitted with a fine particle filter (such as HEPA filter) are more effective at removing allergen-causing dust.

Dusting with a dry cloth or feather duster is likely to recirculate the dust back into the air, so use a damp cloth instead.

Wet mopping of hard floor surfaces also removes fine dust left behind by sweeping or vacuuming.

To find out more about your dust, send a sample to DustSafe.

Read more:
What does the dust in your home mean for your health?

MPT is currently employed as the Chief Environmental Scientist for Victoria at EPA Victoria. He remains an honorary Professor at Macquarie University.
MPT has been affiliated with Broken Hill Lead Reference Group (NSW, Australia), LEAD Group (NSW, Australia), and NSW Environment
Protection Authority’s Broken Hill Environmental Lead Program, and reports undertaking paid and non-paid work for the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Broken Hill Environmental Lead Program in relation to the assessment and management of environmental lead contamination in Broken Hill, NSW, Australia. MPT has also provided advice in relation to lead exposure matters to various law firms, relating to mining and smelting lead contamination and human exposures in Australia and Africa, including accepting personal fees from Leigh Day for an investigation of lead contamination in Zambia. MPT also reports managing two community-orientated programmes in Australia that provide advice about lead contamination from garden soils and household dusts with support from Macquarie University. MPT also reports compensated and uncompensated work for the Australian Building Codes Board, the Australian Federal
Government, and the US non-governmental organisation Pure Earth.

The “DustSafe” program was funded by an Australian Government Citizen Science Grant, CSG55984 to M.P. Taylor.

Cynthia Faye Isley works at Macquarie University as a postdoctoral researcher for DustSafe.

Kara Fry works at Macquarie University as a research assistant for DustSafe.

Max Mclennan-Gillings works as a research assistant for VegeSafe, DustSafe’s sister citizen science program.

– ref. What is dust? And where does it all come from? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-dust-and-where-does-it-all-come-from-168265

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deborah Lupton, SHARP Professor, leader of the Vitalities Lab, Centre for Social Research in Health and Social Policy Centre, UNSW Sydney, and leader of the UNSW Node of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society, UNSW

Today, we use the term “long COVID” to describe the lingering symptoms some people have many weeks or months after infection.

But how long COVID came to be recognised by doctors and the wider community shows us the power of patient activism, networking, research skills and persistence.

Using social media, patients collected evidence of their symptoms, and advocated for themselves and for further research. Even the term long COVID stems from this activism.

Read more:
The mystery of ‘long COVID’: up to 1 in 3 people who catch the virus suffer for months. Here’s what we know so far

Support on Twitter, Facebook, TikTok

When growing numbers of COVID survivors began realising their symptoms were persisting or worsening, patient-led groups quickly sprang up online. Social media was crucial in helping survivors collect evidence, network and advocate.

As early as March 2020, people with continuing COVID symptoms began drawing attention to their experience on Twitter.

Some people began to call themselves “COVID long-haulers”. The term comes from truck-drivers who regularly work long shifts.

US teacher Amy Watson started the trend with a selfie posted to Facebook from the day she was first tested for COVID in March 2020. Watson wore a trucker’s cap in the photo.

Once Watson realised her COVID symptoms were continuing longer than expected, she began describing herself as a “long hauler” and started a private Facebook group using the same name.

Several other Facebook support groups for COVID survivors have sprung up since then. They include COVID-19 Long Haulers Support, with over 51,000 members and Long COVID Support Group, with over 44,000 members.

Archaeologist Elisa Perego invented the #LongCovid Twitter hashtag in May 2020.

Now we have a wide range of Twitter hashtags and account names including: #LongCovidKids, @LongCovidPhysio, @LongCovidItalia, @LongCovidNYC and @LongCovid in Academia.

Several British patients who were part of the Long Covid SOS advocacy group made a YouTube video, Message in a Bottle, which they uploaded in July 2020. It has since received more than 57,000 views.

The video captured the attention of the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 response team, which invited group members to a meeting to discuss their experiences.

Video-sharing platform TikTok also features #covidlonghauler content, with millions of views. Young people who made these short videos describe their experiences of long COVID and warn viewers to be careful about protecting themselves from infection.

As momentum grew, the medical profession and peak health bodies such as the World Health Organization began to accept the name long COVID as a diagnosis.

Read more:
How your friends affect your health

Patients’ evidence matters

We now recognise that patient-led evidence is crucial in learning more about COVID’s effects on the body.

People with long COVID have worked together to collect evidence about the condition. University researchers, from medical and non-medical backgrounds, living with prolonged COVID symptoms have often led the charge.

Many health-care workers contracted COVID. They could reflect on the experience recovering from the disease from both a professional and personal viewpoint.

Researchers wanted to learn more

Websites such as covidCAREgroup offer members the opportunity to take part in medical and public health research.

People with COVID founded the online Body Politic support group. In an example of patient-led research, researchers with long COVID at King’s College London initiated and led a web-based survey to research the condition. They advertised the survey on the Body Politic website. The findings were published in a medical journal this year.

Although estimates vary, we now know about 10% report symptoms 12 weeks after their COVID diagnosis.

Survivors report 200 symptoms across ten organ systems. And longer-term symptoms can even occur in people whose initial ones were moderate or mild.

It’s not just long COVID

The outstandingly successful example of long COVID is the latest of a history of patient-led support, information sharing, activism, fund raising and involvement in research.

People with new or rare diseases or those whose conditions are contested have often had to fight hard to have their illness acknowledged and appropriately treated.

When HIV/AIDS first emerged in the early 1980s, patient activist groups had major successes in combatting stigma and fighting for support, health care, medical research and drug development.

The most well-known activist organisation was ACT UP, based in the US and led by the LGBTQI community. ACT UP members relied on street marches, protests and rallies to spearhead political action.

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is another example. People with this syndrome have had to challenge doctors’ assumptions their symptoms are “all in their mind” because the causes and markers of their illness are still open to speculation.

The medical profession has sometimes criticised advocates for being overly “militant” in their efforts to be heard and receive effective treatment.

Yet patient-led research and activism have made great strides in achieving their goals in achieving recognition for HIV, CFS and many other conditions.

Read more:
Explainer: what is chronic fatigue syndrome?

The development of the internet in the 1990s assisted these efforts, as has social media since the early 2000s.

Dedicated platforms such as PatientsLikeMe have sprung up, offering a variety of condition-specific support groups and access to clinical trials. PatientsLikeMe has a COVID-19 forum with over 100,000 members.

Read more:
How support groups can boost your health and make chronic conditions easier to live with

A positive step

The success of patient-led groups in putting long COVID firmly on the medical and health policy map is one positive step in countering the effects of the continuing pandemic.

However, many members of successful patient-led groups are highly educated and socioeconomically advantaged, with excellent access to digital devices and the internet.

Long COVID has sometimes been described as a “silent” disease, because damage to the body can be overlooked. Some patients have been able to break the silence.

However, it remains important to find ways for marginalised and disadvantaged groups and people living in low-income countries to benefit from these kinds of initiatives. More than ever, the voices of these groups should be heard.

Deborah Lupton is affiliated with OzSAGE, an independent COVID-19 policy advisory body.

– ref. Social media, activism, trucker caps: the fascinating story behind long COVID – https://theconversation.com/social-media-activism-trucker-caps-the-fascinating-story-behind-long-covid-168465

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katy Thomas, PhD Candidate, University of Tasmania

In the media, parents can be portrayed as fearful and conservative when it comes to relationships and sexuality education. Parental concern about the appropriateness of such programs at school is often cited as a reason they may be watered down.

My recent study examined the views of 612 fathers of children aged 3-12 across Australia on relationships and sexuality education. Most (94%) of the fathers surveyed said they valued it for their own children and 92% said they wanted to play an active role in delivering it.

Why does it matter?

There are many reasons why it’s important men are more involved in conversations around relationships and sexuality education.

For instance, men are more likely to hold homophobic views than women. And in Australia, 83% of criminal offences related to intimate partner violence in 2019 and 2020 were perpetrated by men.

However, research shows fathers in Australia are substantially less involved in relationships and sexuality education than mothers, and are also less likely to participate in related research. The reasons for this largely reflect expectations mothers are nurturers and fathers providers. Although these notions are outdated and evolving, they do persist in Australia today.

Read more:
Parents, your kids are watching you. Sex education begins at home

Additionally, fathers consider themselves poorer communicators and feel less comfortable talking about sensitive topics than mothers. This leads to a gap between their intentions and their actions as sexuality educators.

What I did in my study

My study included fathers of varying types and levels of employment and education, different cultures, ages, and ethnic backgrounds. Participants also included fathers of varying sexual orientations. The proportions of fathers in each category broadly resembled that in the Australian population more generally.

First, 612 fathers completed a survey on their opinions about what should be included in relationships and sexuality education, as well as the extent to which they were involved.

The survey comprised 106 questions about various aspects of relationships and sexuality education. These included the appropriate age to teach it and value placed on various topics and outcomes, the strategies fathers recall using, and fathers’ fears, concerns and barriers to engaging with it.

I then interviewed ten fathers to help explain the findings.

What fathers said

The survey included a list of 17 outcomes of relationships and sexuality education. These ranged from understanding puberty and reproduction, to knowing how to find help with a sexuality related issue. Fathers rated these on a scale from “not important” to “very important”.

When asked to rate how important individual outcomes were for their children as they approached the teen years, fathers’ top priorities were their teenagers’ capacity to avoid violent relationships, understand consent, and recognise and report sexual abuse.

When asked about what motivated him to be involved in relationships and sexuality education for his children, one father of six in his 60s said:

I want to make sure that if something happens to one of my kids, they can come to me to discuss it.

Understanding gender diversity, emotions, puberty, contraception, body image, sexual orientation, values, reproduction and birth, and sex were all outcomes fathers considered important.

Read more:
Instagram can make teens feel bad about their body, but parents can help. Here’s how

Most interview participants felt the recent changes in social norms around gender and sexuality reflected in the media were opportunities for them to start conversations:

One father in his late twenties, with two sons, said:

There’s a big change around gender and all of that, so I’m reading up on that and I translate it into how I’m dealing with my kids.

In both the survey and interviews, most fathers dismissed concerns the mere act of talking about sex would shatter childhood innocence.

One father said he received no education or involvement from his own father on sexual or relationship matters. He also said:

I don’t think that you are going to make a six-year-old suddenly super interested in sex if you just have an honest conversation about what it is.

Fathers rated most outcomes as more important for daughters than for sons, reflecting a slightly elevated level of concern and a perceived vulnerability of daughters when it comes to sex and relationships:

I think the consequences for girls are, in our society especially, harder.

I see that the repercussions are worse for girls and women because sexual violence is gendered.

The responsibility to prepare sons to treat women and girls with respect was also front of mind for many participants. One father said:

It would be mortifying if I sent a boy out, you know, who was a predator.

Religious fathers, who constituted 30% of participants, valued the majority of outcomes slightly less than non-religious fathers. However, they still rated a range of progressive outcomes that might be considered discordant with religious values, such as comfort with sexual orientation and use of contraception, as important.

While fathers accepted exposure to sexualised imagery and pornography was, to some extent, out of their control, they wished to protect their children from perceived harms.

One father of four from a religious background said:

When it comes to pornography, or sexualisation and social media, I’ve got an important job to actually provide protection for the children.

Fathers need more support

Unpublished findings from my study indicate fathers would like to have access to a range of resources specifically designed for fathers to support further engagement with relationships and sexuality education.

One father said:

I don’t know how I’d have those conversations, but I would cross that bridge when I got there, you just have to.

Several tips to start conversations about sexuality with your kids include:

• try to answer questions simply and add layers as your children mature or ask for more detail

• aim for frequent, small, casual conversations that show you are a non-judgemental, unshockable parent

• ask your children to share with you their opinions and values, and listen to them

• use media and events as prompts to start a conversation, and keep in mind you don’t need to have all the answers

You may need to start the conversations yourself, as your children may never ask.

For more tips, look at Talk Soon, Talk Often.

Read more:
Not as simple as ‘no means no’: what young people need to know about consent

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

– ref. ‘I want to make sure if something happens to one of my kids, they can come to me’: fathers want to talk to kids about sex, but need support – https://theconversation.com/i-want-to-make-sure-if-something-happens-to-one-of-my-kids-they-can-come-to-me-fathers-want-to-talk-to-kids-about-sex-but-need-support-167878

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joyleen Christensen, Senior lecturer, University of Newcastle

With action sequences that are being hailed as some of the best in the history of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is shaping up to overtake Black Widow as the biggest film of the pandemic.

A hit with critics and audience alike, many commentators are praising Shang-Chi’s cast and, in particular, the performance by Hong Kong screen legend Tony Leung Chiu-wai, for helping breathe new life into a familiar Marvel formula.

Given the huge challenge of presenting a film of this scale with a kung fu master as its central character, it was imperative the filmmakers delivered authentic fight scenes that could stand alongside the classics and showcase the best action the genre has to offer.

Tracing through China, Hong Kong and Hollywood, martial arts films have a history almost as long cinema itself. This history is on exciting display in Shang-Chi, and will cement the film’s position in kung fu cinematic history.

Read more:
‘I didn’t have a superhero that looked like me’: Marvel’s new female, culturally diverse and queer protagonists mirror our times

Birth of the kung fu genre and the first boom

Beginning with Shanghai productions in the 1920s, early martial arts films drew influence from Chinese opera and wuxia novels: narratives set in Ancient China focusing on heroes with supernatural martial arts abilities. Fight scenes in these early films emphasised flowing dramatised movements, but rarely showcased actual martial arts skills.

This changed with the transformation of Hong Kong cinema in the 1970s. Resisting the fantastical elements of the wuxia style, local studios Shaw Brothers and Golden Harvest put actual martial artists into their films.

With this move, the kung fu genre was born.

Popular titles of the time like Five Deadly Venoms (1978) and The 36th Chamber of Shaolin (1978) are classics, and the films of Bruce Lee brought kung fu to the world’s attention.

Lee’s intense and realistic fighting style, as shown in films like The Big Boss (1971) and Enter the Dragon (1973), sparked an international obsession with the art of kung fu — even as international fans often had to deal with poor-quality dubbing and bootleg videos.

After Lee’s untimely death in 1973, the genre morphed from showcasing ferocious physicality into a more acrobatic, comedy-infused approach, such as in Drunken Master (1978) and The Magnificent Butcher (1979) starring, respectively, Jackie Chan and his China Drama Academy “brother”, Sammo Hung.

Hong Kong cinema entered its Golden Age in the 1980 and ‘90s. At this time, contemporary kung fu classics like Chan’s Police Story (1985) complimented popular historical films such as Jet Li’s Tai Chi Master (1993) and Donnie Yen’s Iron Monkey (1993).

The second boom

In the late 1990s, around the time of Hong Kong’s handover to China, many of the industry’s leading figures made the move to Hollywood.

With films like Chan’s Rush Hour (1998) and Shanghai Noon (2000), and Li’s Romeo Must Die (2000) and The One (2001), English-speaking fans could finally see kung fu films on a big screen without the need for subtitles.

Celebrated martial arts choreographer Yuen Woo-ping also lent his talents to international productions, allowing kung fu to find its way into hits like The Matrix (1999) and Kill Bill (2003).

In 2000, the Chinese blockbuster Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon showed modern international audiences now had an appetite for the elaborate swordplay and gravity-defying wirework of wuxia films, and many stars returned to China to capitalised on the trend.

Jet Li’s Hero (2002) and Fearless (2006), as well as House of Flying Daggers (2004) and the first film to feature both Jackie Chan and Jet Li, Forbidden Kingdom (2008), all helped to redefine the martial arts film: bringing star power and global audiences to an industry that had, until then, largely received only local attention.

These Chinese-made films focused on producing elegant wuxia action dramas. In Hong Kong, kung fu was still going strong, largely thanks to Stephen Chow’s hugely popular comedies Shaolin Soccer (2001) and Kung Fu Hustle (2004), and Donnie Yen’s Ip Man (2008).

Shang-Chi: the first Asian superhero

In many ways, the character of Shang-Chi may be seen as the cultural successor to Bruce Lee. Created during the height of the global obsession with Lee’s films, the character of Shang-Chi first appeared in Marvel comics in December 1973 – just months after the death of the legendary actor.

Marvel’s “other kung fu hero”, Iron Fist from the 2017 Netflix series of the same name, was controversial. The star, Finn Jones, lacked martial arts experience, and the show was criticised for its “white saviour” narrative.

In light of this, the producers of Shang-Chi were keen to bring together a predominantly Asian and Asian-American cast and crew who could do justice to the first Asian superhero to headline a Marvel feature film.

This has paid off: Shang-Chi is being praised as both a classic Marvel superhero film, and an exceptional kung fu film in its own right.

Under fight director Andy Cheng and stunt coordinator Brad Allan, the film draws upon a range of different styles, including wing chun, Shaolin kung fu, bajiquan and hung ga stances, and the iron rings from which the film gets its title.

Hollywood has come a long way from declaring Lee “too authentic” to take the lead role in the original 1970s Kung Fu television series. Shang-Chi is likely to inspire a whole new generation of kung fu cinema fans.

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

– ref. From Bruce Lee to Shang-Chi: a short history of the kung fu film in cinema – https://theconversation.com/from-bruce-lee-to-shang-chi-a-short-history-of-the-kung-fu-film-in-cinema-168273

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Ha, Associate, Grattan Institute

Political momentum is growing in Australia to cut greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050. On Friday, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg was the latest member of the federal government to throw his weight behind the goal.

But for Australia to achieve net-zero across the economy, emissions from agriculture must fall dramatically. Agriculture contributed about 15% to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2019 – most of it from cattle and sheep. If herd numbers recover from the recent drought, the sector’s emissions are projected to rise.

Cutting agriculture emissions will not be easy. The difficulties have reportedly triggered concern in the Nationals’ about the cost of the transition for farmers, including calls for agriculture to be carved out of any net-zero target.

But as our new Grattan Institute report today makes clear, agriculture must not be granted this exemption. Instead, the federal government should do more to encourage farmers to adopt low-emissions technologies and practices – some of which can be deployed now.

Read more:
Nationals’ push to carve farming from a net-zero target is misguided and dangerous

Three good reasons farmers must go net-zero

Many farmers want to be part of the climate solution – and must be – for three main reasons.

First, the agriculture sector is uniquely vulnerable to a changing climate. Already, changes in rainfall have cut profits across the sector by 23% compared to what could have been achieved in pre-2000 conditions. The effect is even worse for cropping farmers.

Livestock farmers face risks, too. If global warming reaches 3℃, livestock in northern Australia are expected to suffer heat stress almost daily.

Second, parts of the sector are highly exposed to international markets – for example, about three-quarters of Australia’s red meat is exported.

There are fears Australian producers may face a border tax in some markets if they don’t cut emissions.
The European Union, for instance, plans to introduce tariffs as early as 2023 on some products from countries without effective carbon pricing, though agriculture will not be included initially.

Third, the industry recognises action on climate change can often boost farm productivity, or help farmers secure resilient revenue streams. For example, trees provide shade for animals, while good soil management can preserve the land’s fertility. Both activities can store carbon and may generate carbon credits.

Carbon credits can be used to offset farm emissions, or sold to other emitters. In a net-zero future, farmers can maximise their carbon credit revenue by minimising their own emissions, leaving them more carbon credits to sell.

The agriculture sector itself is increasingly embracing the net-zero goal. The National Farmers Federation supports an economy-wide aspiration to be net-zero by 2050, with some conditions. The red meat and pork industries have gone further, committing to be carbon neutral by 2030 and 2025 respectively.

Read more:
Land of opportunity: more sustainable Australian farming would protect our lucrative exports (and the planet)

What can be done?

Australian agricultural activities emitted about 76 million tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions in 2019. Of this, about 48 million tonnes were methane belched by cattle and sheep, and a further 11 million came from their excrement.

The sector’s non-animal emissions largely came from burning diesel, the use of fertiliser, and the breakdown of leftover plant material from cropping.

Unlike in, say, the electricity sector, it’s not possible to completely eliminate agricultural emissions, and deep emissions cuts look difficult in the near term. That’s because methane produced in the stomachs of cattle and sheep represents more than 60% of agricultural emissions; these cannot be captured, or eliminated through renewable energy technology.

Supplements added to stock feed – which reduce the amount of methane the animal produces – are the most promising options to reduce agricultural emissions. These supplements include red algae and the chemical 3-nitrooxypropanol, both of which may cut methane by up to 90% if used consistently at the right dose.

But it’s difficult to distribute these feed supplements to Australian grazing cattle and sheep every day. At any given time, only about 4% of Australia’s cattle are in feedlots where their diet can be easily controlled.

Diesel use can be reduced by electrifying farm machinery, but electric models are not yet widely available or affordable for all purposes.

These challenges slow the realistic rate at which the sector can cut emissions. Yet there are things that can be done today.

Many manure emissions can be avoided through smarter management. For example, on intensive livestock farms, manure is often stored in ponds where it releases methane. This methane can be captured and burnt, emitting the weaker greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, instead.

And better targeted fertiliser use is a clear win-win – it would save farmers money and reduce emissions of nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas.

Governments must walk and chew gum

An economy-wide carbon price would be the best way for Australia to reduce emissions in an economically efficient manner. But the political reality is that carbon pricing is out of reach, at least for now. So Australia should pursue sector-specific policies – including in agriculture.

Governments must walk and chew gum. That means introducing policies to support emissions-reducing actions that farmers can take today, while investing alongside the industry in potential high-impact solutions for the longer term.

Accelerating near-term action will require improving the federal government’s Emissions Reduction Fund, to help more farmers generate Australian carbon credit units. It will also require more investment in outreach programs to give farmers the knowledge they need to reduce emissions.

Improving the long-term emissions outlook for the agriculture sector requires investment in high-impact research, development and deployment. Bringing down the cost of new technologies is possible with deployment at scale: all governments should consider what combination of subsidies, penalties and regulations will best drive this.

Agriculture must not become the missing piece in Australia’s net-zero puzzle. Without action today, the sector may become Australia’s largest source of emissions in coming decades. This would require hugely expensive carbon offsetting – paid for by taxpayers, consumers and farmers themselves.
 

Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute’s activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities as disclosed on its website.

– ref. The clock is ticking on net-zero, and Australia’s farmers must not get a free pass – https://theconversation.com/the-clock-is-ticking-on-net-zero-and-australias-farmers-must-not-get-a-free-pass-168474

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

A tough debate is expected when a highly volatile Nationals parliamentary party meets on Monday, ahead of climate change negotiations between Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce to endorse a target of net zero emissions by 2050.

Joyce is under dual pressure, with his party room sharply divided over the 2050 target, and former minister Darren Chester announcing, in a weekend statement which criticised Joyce without naming him, that he is taking “some time away” from the party room.

No details of the climate plan are yet on the table, but strong positioning is underway, with negotiations between Morrison and Joyce resuming once the PM, returning on Sunday night from his American trip, is back in the country.

The Nationals meet every Monday, remotely when parliament is not sitting.

Joyce indicated on Friday he would accept the government adopting a firm target of net zero emissions by 2050 provided the regions were not worse off. He also wants some largesse for the Nationals.

At the same time he is expressing concerns and gives the impression of being dragged reluctantly towards an agreement.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Barnaby Joyce falls (sort of) into step for the ‘net zero’ march

Morrison was pressed again while in the US about increasing Australia’s ambition on climate policy and has signalled he proposes to do so. But he has to get the minor Coalition partner on side.

Both President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson have pushed Australia hard as the November Glasgow climate conference draws near.

The government’s current position is net zero “preferably” by 2050.

Interviewed by the ABC on Sunday, Joyce provided little fresh clarity. But asked whether there should be no coal jobs lost, he said, “well, not by reason of domestic policy”.

Deputy Nationals leader and agriculture minister David Littleproud, who supports the 2050 firm target with safeguards and incentives for the regions, told Sky that members of the Nationals party room were “pragmatic”. They were “looking through the lens of protecting regional Australia but making sure there’s opportunity for regional Australia to also participate in this”.

But former resources minister Matt Canavan tweeted, “I am deadset against net zero emissions. Just look at the disaster the UK is living through. They’re switching off their industry to keep their lights on, and they are struggling to feed themselves. Net zero emissions would just make us weaker.”

Resources minister Keith Pitt said: “We are yet to see the strategy, the plan, the cost, and who’s paying.

“My priority will be the 1.2 million direct and indirect jobs associated with the resources sector”.

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: After the deal on security, Scott Morrison turns to the shift on climate

Chester, who is a supporter of net zero, won’t be in the meeting to help advance the case. He said he had “decided to take a break from organised meetings, events and activities in The Nationals Federal Parliamentary party room.

“I will reassess my position when Federal Parliament resumes in October.

“To be clear, I continue to support the Coalition Government but want some time away from the The Nationals Federal Parliamentary party room to reflect on a number of significant issues.

“My decision follows months of frustration with the repeated failure of the leadership to even attempt to moderate some of the more disrespectful and offensive views expressed by a minority of colleagues.”

Chester, who was dropped from the frontbench when Joyce became leader, has been highly critical of Queensland National George Christensen, whose string of provocative comments have included, most recently, accusing Victorian police of using excessive force against demonstrators, and suggesting they should be arrested.

Read more:
Josh Frydenberg prepares ground for Scott Morrison to commit to 2050 climate target

Joyce on Sunday again indicated he could not silence Christensen, who is retiring at the election, and said that anyway, there was a right of free speech.

Asked on SBS whether he thought he had the support of the majority of the Nationals to go forward on climate policy, Morrison said: “It’s not about my view. It’s about what I think Australians are clearly looking for”.

“My job is to bring my government together to focus on the plan that can achieve it.

“A plan [that] says to Australians, whether they’re up in the Hunter, or down in Bell Bay, or up in Gladstone or up in the Pilbara […] this is how we achieve net zero emissions in the future.

“Our view is that we can achieve that by keeping the costs low, keeping people in industries, ensuring we’re using transition fuels that take us from one place to the next, and we take people on the journey,” Morrison said.

The communique from the QUAD summit which Morrison attended at the end of his trip said: “We have joined forces to tackle the climate crisis, which must be addressed with the urgency it demands.

“Quad countries will work together to keep the Paris-aligned temperature limits within reach and will pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

“To this end, Quad countries intend to update or communicate ambitious NDCs [nationally determined contributions] by COP26 and welcome those who have already done so.”

The QUAD includes the US, Australia, Japan and India.

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. Agitated Nationals grapple with climate debate, as former minister Chester takes ‘a break’ from party room – https://theconversation.com/agitated-nationals-grapple-with-climate-debate-as-former-minister-chester-takes-a-break-from-party-room-168736

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lavina Lee, Senior lecturer, Macquarie University

The Quad has come a long way since it was resurrected in 2017 as a loose coalition comprising the US, Australia, India and Japan. The face-to-face, leaders summit at the end of last week marked a new high point for the grouping.

Three of the members continue to suffer Chinese coercion in various forms: economic coercion in Australia’s case, and the use of military and grey-zone tactics to advance territorial claims when it comes to India and Japan.

It is an open secret the Quad’s primary and overwhelming raison d’etre is countering China. As a response, Beijing vacillates between outright scepticism and scornful indignation about the return of a “Cold War mentality” to the region.

Read more:
Explainer: what exactly is the Quad and what’s on the agenda for their Washington summit?

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian for example, described the latest meeting in Washington as a “closed, exclusive clique targeting other countries”. He added the Quad

runs counter to the trend of the times and the aspirations of regional countries. It will find no support and is doomed to fail.

Beijing is wary of the Quad with good reason. While the Quad countries avoid mentioning China directly, Beijing knows the group is seeking to counter its ability to set the regional agenda, promote its own authoritarian norms and values, and dominate the most important technologies of the future.

China’s aims present a comprehensive challenge to the US-led liberal order in everything from diplomacy and trade to technology and military power. It is this Chinese ambition which has given momentum to the Quad.

A commitment to combat global problems

Friday’s summit made substantive progress on the initiatives flagged during the first Quad leaders’ virtual meeting in March. It also expanded the Quad agenda to include broader aspects to meet the China challenge.

These initiatives can be grouped into three broad categories:

First, the Quad wants to show that liberal democracies can deliver solutions to the greatest challenges of our time, and that their vision of a “free and open Indo-Pacific” is more attractive than the China-centric model Beijing promotes.

As part of this, the Quad countries have upped their COVID-19 vaccine pledge, now promising to donate 1.2 billion vaccine doses globally by the end of 2022.

While India has pledged to resume vaccine production for export in October, Japan set aside US$3.3 billion (A$4.5 billion) in loans and Australia US$212 million (A$291 million) in grant aid for Indo-Pacific countries to purchase vaccines.

Given the existential threat COVID-19 still presents to much of the region, this represents an attractive counter to Beijing’s vaccine diplomacy, which has been used to exert political influence.

Read more:
Why pushing for an economic ‘alliance’ with the US to counter Chinese coercion would be a mistake

And on climate change, the Quad announced three notable initiatives:

• a taskforce dedicated to establishing “two to three low-emission or zero-emission shipping corridors by 2030” through the development of green-port infrastructure and clean bunkering fuels at scale

• a clean-hydrogen partnership to “strengthen and reduce costs across all elements of the clean-hydrogen value chain”

• a new cooperative space initiative to exchange satellite data to monitor climate change risks and manage the sustainable use of oceans and marine resources.

Secure technologies and supply chains

The second category of initiatives involves measures to foster an open, accessible, and secure technology ecosystem — a response to growing security concerns about the use of equipment from Chinese telecommunications companies to build 5G networks around the world.

The group pledged to work towards advancing more “secure, open, and transparent 5G and beyond-5G networks” — an indirect reference to developing an alternative to Chinese vendors.

And to prevent China from dominating the critical and essential technologies of the future, the Quad also launched an initiative to map vulnerabilities and bolster security in these supply chains, particularly semiconductors.

A counterpoint to Belt and Road

Finally, the third category of initiatives is targeted toward the creation and promotion of liberal rules, norms and economic standards throughout the region.

This includes the development of standards on quality infrastructure development, technology standards for the collection of big data, the use of artificial intelligence, and shared cyber standards for the development of “trustworthy digital infrastructure”.

All these programs are designed to counter Chinese economic practices (via its Belt and Road Initiative) and high-technology exports that undermine liberal democratic practices and enable government corruption and authoritarian-style control and surveillance of populations.

Read more:
Why is there so much furore over China’s Belt and Road Initiative?

However, an economic component capable of competing directly with China’s Belt and Road Initiative is still missing. The absence of a more comprehensive, Quad-based economic strategy remains the greatest weakness in its pitch to advance a “free and open Indo-Pacific”.

Without it, the Quad cannot counter Beijing’s narrative in the region that the path to economic prosperity is primarily dependent on China.

Still not a ‘security apparatus’

Also notably absent from the summit was discussion of greater military-strategic cooperation.

Prior to the meeting, a US administration official emphasised “the group is not a security meeting or security apparatus”.

The Quad is certainly not an alliance and it is unlikely to become an “Asian NATO”, despite Chinese claims this is what it is aiming to do.

Nevertheless, the four countries have advanced their abilities to conduct joint military operations, such as the Malabar naval exercise. They have also strengthened their cooperation in other areas — such as the sharing of military logistics and maritime surveillance and intelligence information — although this is in bilateral and trilateral formats so far.

And the momentous announcement of the AUKUS alliance between the US, UK and Australia will certainly complement the deterrent capabilities of the Quad.

In all of these initiatives, the Quad leaders have succeeded in dispelling Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s prediction the group would “dissipate like sea foam”.

Instead, it has become a genuine democratic bulwark against Chinese expansionism and is increasingly forcing Beijing to recalculate the costs of its actions.

Lavina Lee has received funding from the Australian Department of Defence. She is a member of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute Council.

– ref. With vision of a ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’, Quad leaders send a clear signal to China – https://theconversation.com/with-vision-of-a-free-and-open-indo-pacific-quad-leaders-send-a-clear-signal-to-china-167896

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

The Coalition brigade is assembling, readying for the final march to a place it once regarded as enemy territory and poisoned ground, too dangerous to approach.

Josh Frydenberg waved the flag on Friday. Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce, a conscripted officer, is reluctantly falling (sort of) into step. Angus Taylor will be purchasing the requisite boots.

Scott Morrison, the general, will announce the arrival. But not until the details of a deal, heavy with technology and trade offs and pay offs, are landed with Joyce.

The Prime Minister wants – “needs” would be a better word – Australia to support a 2050 net zero emissions target at the November Glasgow climate conference.

No if or buts or qualifications. No having to say net zero “preferably” by 2050, as the government has been doing.

Morrison and Joyce have been talking at length about this imperative, because without the Nationals the journey – which seems so short to outsiders but so very arduous for the Coalition – cannot be completed.

Frydenberg on Friday delivered the blunt message that if Australia doesn’t step up to world expectations on climate policy, it will have trouble getting the capital it needs from overseas, in sufficient quantity and at the cheapest cost.

Read more:
Net-zero, carbon-neutral, carbon-negative … confused by all the carbon jargon? Then read this

The Treasurer’s speech was focused on finance, rather than the environment as such. He pitched his push for the firm target so as to appeal in hard-headed economic terms. It’s the markets (not the greenies) that are requiring us to do this, was the message.

Frydenberg is battle-hardened for the task. As energy minister, he was then prime minister Malcolm Turnbull’s lieutenant when they carried the standard for a National Energy Guarantee, the NEG.

That succumbed to an ambush from a group of rebel troops, leaving Turnbull mortally wounded. Morrison has better armour; anyway, the Liberal sceptics aren’t heard from nowadays. The noise comes from Nationals.

Read more:
Scott Morrison has embraced net-zero emissions – now it’s time to walk the talk

On Friday morning Joyce did his bit on ABC radio. His doubts were evident, as he pointed to power price rises and collapsing energy companies in Britain.

But he came through with the vital central line. Asked, “do you support net zero by 2050?” he replied, “I’ve got no problems with any plan that does not leave regional areas hurt”.

Later in the day he said: “Now, when people say do you support it and they don’t tell you how they’re going to do it, they’re opening themselves […] to a crisis like they’re experiencing in Europe, like they’re experiencing in the UK”.

Joyce will have problems with some of his followers, especially his one-time staffer, now senator, Matt Canavan, who can remind his leader how he not so long ago trashed the target.

But he’ll get plenty of loot for the Nationals in the final package. Even Frydenberg seems to have stopped worrying about the appallingly high cost of political living these days.

In Washington, Morrison was asked whether the government had made a decision on net zero.

“No, if Australia had made such a decision, I would have announced it,” he said. “Australia has not made any final decision on that matter … we’ll be considering further when I return to Australia the plan that we believe can help us achieve our ambition in this area”.

Read more:
Yes, it is entirely possible for Australia to phase out thermal coal within a decade

While the army’s destination seems clear, there’s still work to be done, and the Nationals say the actual map is yet to be laid out on the table.

But if anything were to derail the expedition now, it would be a shock to everyone – including Morrison, and no doubt to Joe Biden and Boris Johnson.

Morrison would be left in an intolerable position for Glasgow. Frydenberg made a point of noting 129 countries have committed to the 2050 target.

The PM would also be hobbled at the election, with climate an issue especially in the leafy city areas and independent candidates gearing up to run in various seats.

Embracing the 2050 target is a minimal requirement for a nation’s Glasgow policy, but the United States, Britain and other climate frontrunners are focused on countries being more ambitious in the medium term.

What Morrison and Joyce do about that will soon become the big question.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Barnaby Joyce falls (sort of) into step for the ‘net zero’ march – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-barnaby-joyce-falls-sort-of-into-step-for-the-net-zero-march-168671

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

University of Canberra Professional Fellow Michelle Grattan alongside University of Canberra Associate Professor Caroline Fisher discuss the week in politics.

This week the pair discuss the announcement of the AUKUS, in particular the reaction of the French to what has been seen as a failure of democracy on behalf of Australia, who has reneged on their previous defence deal – resulting in ongoing tension between nations involved.

They also discuss Australia’s climate change policy, in particular Treasurer Josh Frydenburg’s recent announcement of the pathway forward for the nation towards emissions reductions. With this announcement has paved the way for Australia to take a firm emissions target to the coming Glasgow conference.

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

– ref. VIDEO: Michelle Grattan on AUKUS fallout and the government moving to net zero – https://theconversation.com/video-michelle-grattan-on-aukus-fallout-and-the-government-moving-to-net-zero-168654

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, University of South Australia

As world leaders have gathered for the UN General Assembly in New York this week, there has been uncertainty over who should be representing Myanmar.

Since a coup on February 1, Myanmar’s military has argued it is the legitimate government of the country and should have the power to appoint ambassadors to the UN and elsewhere.

However, a government in exile has also been formed — called the national unity government (or NUG for short) — which is comprised mainly of elected representatives of former leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s deposed government and ethnic minority groups.

It, too, says it’s the legitimate government of Myanmar and should be able to appoint the country’s ambassadors. Civil society groups in Myanmar have sent a letter to the General Assembly urging it to retain current UN ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun, who opposed the coup and is a vocal critic of the junta.

So, why does it matter who represents Myanmar on the global stage and who currently has the upper hand?

What is the national unity government?

The NUG was formed in April in response to the coup and the junta’s brutal suppression of peaceful protesters, which has now led to over 1,100 deaths, some 6,600 arrests and hundreds more being forced into hiding or exile.

The NUG’s two main leaders are Suu Kyi and ousted President Win Myint, but they have both been under arrest since the coup so their roles are largely symbolic.

The rest of the leadership comprises acting Prime Minister Mahn Winn Khaing Thann, an ethnic Karen and Christian politician, and President Duwa Lashi La, an ethnic Kachin politician.

Many NUG ministers were part of the former government led by Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) party, but there has clearly been an effort to offer a more inclusive vision of the country’s leadership.

In addition to the NLD, the ministry draws on elected members of parliament from a wide range of political parties and a broad mix of ethnic minorities. Significantly, a Rohingya activist was appointed an advisor in the Ministry of Human Rights.

Most countries have been reticent to recognise the military as the legitimate government of Myanmar, but it has been difficult for the NUG to receive formal recognition, too.

Read more:
Sanctions against Myanmar’s junta have been tried before. Can they work this time?

The quest for international recognition

In addition to forming a cosmopolitan, multi-ethnic ministry, the NUG also reversed a controversial policy on citizenship that excluded the long-oppressed Rohingya.

And in a canny strategic manoeuvre, the NUG announced it would for the first time accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court with respect to all international crimes committed in Myanmar since 2002.

Both the ICC and the International Court of Justice have cases underway related to alleged abuses against the Rohingya.

These moves may well be genuine reassessments of the former government’s much-criticised failure to support the Rohingya. Suu Kyi previously defended the military for driving hundreds of thousands of Rohingya from their homes into Bangladesh, denying it was a genocide.

But the NUG’s moves may also be engineered to gain international support. In particular, there was pressure from the US Congress to address the Rohingya issue prior to the US providing diplomatic and material support to the government in exile.

Diplomatic fight shifts to the UN

The key prize in this battle for recognition is Myanmar’s seat at the UN. The seat is important, as it reflects the will of the international community regarding the legitimate Myanmar government.

The NUG has been assisted by the general assembly’s rules, which dictate the incumbent ambassador keeps the seat if there is a credentialing dispute.

The UN was expected to make a formal decision on recognition in the lead-up to the current general assembly session. However, in a back-room compromise between the US and China (and informally endorsed by the European Union, the ASEAN bloc and Russia), it was agreed the military’s representatives would not be allowed to attend the meeting.

That means the current ambassador, Kyaw Moe Tun, was able to participate in the opening of the general assembly session, although the agreement required him to refrain from using any tough rhetoric against the military. Nevertheless, this was a big win for the NUG.

The nine-member credentialing panel, which includes the US, China and Russia, will now decide in November who formally takes Myanmar’s UN seat.

Is civil war inevitable?

While the NUG is angling for international recognition, it has simultaneously announced a “people’s defensive war” against the junta, abandoning the nonviolent tactics adopted by Suu Kyi during her years of house arrest.

This overt call for violence has caused unease in some quarters, although criticism from the US and UK embassies in Myanmar is relatively muted.

While it is understandable the people of Myanmar are desperate for a solution, it is far from certain that encouraging relatively untrained and poorly equipped civilians to attack the military will produce the desired result.

There is some evidence of collaboration between the highly trained ethnic armed groups and more recent recruits from the cities, but given the Myanmar military’s long history of absorbing significant casualties without caving in, it does not bode well for a settlement.

Nevertheless, people may feel war is their only option. Indeed, in the short term, the chances of a peaceful resolution to the long-running conflict between Myanmar’s military and its people may have disappeared the moment Suu Kyi and Win Myint were arrested in the early hours of February 1.

Read more:
We know how to cut off the financial valve to Myanmar’s military. The world just needs the resolve to act

Adam Simpson 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. Two governments claim to run Myanmar. So, who gets the country’s seat at the UN? – https://theconversation.com/two-governments-claim-to-run-myanmar-so-who-gets-the-countrys-seat-at-the-un-167885

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Devaki Monani, Lecturer, Social Work, Charles Darwin University

During COVID-19 we’ve seen racism and discrimination against migrant and refugee communities erode trust between them and authorities.

So as the Delta variant spreads, we must find ways to build that trust.

With greater trust, we can improve contact tracing and the chance of people following public health advice. This is essential if we are to help prevent more infection, illness and death.

Read more:
‘I will never come to Australia again’: new research reveals the suffering of temporary migrants during the COVID-19 crisis

More racism and discrimination

COVID-19 has exacerbated existing tensions between some migrant and refugee communities and parts of the wider population, including government and health authorities.

Migrants have been blamed for spreading COVID-19; international students have faced racism, and have reported poor mental and physical health; and people of Chinese background or those of “east Asian appearance” have suffered racist slurs and physical attacks.

Then there are the refugee communities of non-English speaking backgrounds. Many have arrived after experiencing war and human rights abuses by other governments only to face tough social distancing restrictions and the use of police and military to enforce lockdowns in Australia.

Read more:
Using military language and presence might not be the best approach to COVID and public health

This has led to some concerns about being reported to government, having their visa cancelled, being detained or deported.

As a result of this past trauma and the risk of losing their temporary visa status, some people have been reluctant to participate in contact tracing and follow public health advice.

Making matters worse has been some media outlets and social media sharing racist and harmful stereotypes.

Understand diversity

Building trust requires recognising the diversity of communities. For example, the phrase “culturally and linguistically diverse” is often used to describe migrant and refugee communities of non-English speaking backgrounds. While the phrase has merit in some situations, it disguises differences between and among communities.

For instance, the term “migrant” refers to people who have chosen to move from one country or area to another. Migrants can include international students, business owners, professionals and those wanting to work and join family already living in Australia.

In contrast, refugees arrive after suffering from psychological distress and trauma due to war, torture and/or conflict. Some refugees may have lower levels of education, literacy and financial support.

Read more:
How can governments communicate with multicultural Australians about COVID vaccines? It’s not as simple as having a poster in their language

Any projects aimed at communicating health information with such communities need to learn about the variations and differences within and between them. Differences include varying levels of education, language and literacy skills, preferences in old and new media, and differing cultural understandings of health.

Some communities have a more communal approach to health, which influences how to best share information. Rights and access to government supports also differ, including employment support and Medicare.

Engage with communities

We can improve contact tracing, the sharing of public health advice and, most importantly, build trust, by better engaging with communities.

This means involving communities in decision-making and how services are developed and delivered. Governments and health agencies should engage with communities and ask them what skills and support they need to manage the pandemic and daily life.

Bilingual community facilitators, also known as bicultural community workers, may be needed. These help bring together community members and health agencies to moderate discussions, hold workshops, develop solutions and build relationships and trust for the long term.

Read more:
We asked multicultural communities how best to communicate COVID-19 advice. Here’s what they told us

Know there’s more going on

We can also build trust by improving access to training, education, employment, affordable housing and other social factors. These can help improve health outcomes.

Without appropriate support and tailored health communications it’s more likely people will be forced to break COVID restrictions, like going to work when sick, or gather in family groups for support. Without understanding or trusting public health advice, contract tracing for COVID is much harder.

Read more:
Why some people don’t want to take a COVID-19 test

Help grow stronger communities

Communities of people with migrant and refugee backgrounds can be supported to find their own solutions to the challenges and opportunities of everyday life.

This “capacity building” might include holding workshops with families, or supporting young people to develop their abilities as leaders. For this to happen, governments need to work closely with non-government organisations.

Such programs would help build stronger relationships within Australian society that help more people feel like they belong. With stronger relationships and greater capacity in communities to deal with health issues, more people are likely to trust the procedures of contact tracing and public health advice.

Read more:
Understanding how African-Australians think about COVID can help tailor public health messaging

Where to now?

Health agencies, governments and others working with people from refugee and migrant communities can make real and positive differences by helping to build trust with migrant and refugee communities of non-English speaking backgrounds.

Our challenge now is doing this gradually and with care.

More respectful and sensitive engagement could be one of the most important ways we reduce the terrible illness and death from COVID, and combat the stigma and racism that has come with it.

Devaki Monani has previously received funding from NSW Multicultural Health Communication Service

Ben O’Mara has previously received funding from VicHealth, the Department of Heath and Ageing and the Australian and New Zealand School of Government. O’Mara also works as the Information Resources Manager at Motor Neurone Disease Australia.

Gemma Carey 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. Building trust with migrant and refugee communities is crucial for public health measures to work – https://theconversation.com/building-trust-with-migrant-and-refugee-communities-is-crucial-for-public-health-measures-to-work-167180

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Johnston, Professor and Dean of Science, UNSW

For 16 years, German chancellor Angela Merkel has guided her country through wave after wave of uncertainty, from the 2008 global financial crisis to Brexit, the imperative to drop fossil fuels, and of course the COVID pandemic. Her leadership of the European Union’s largest economy has been described as one of assurance and sure-handedness and an anchor amid stormy times, and she has been called “the de facto leader of Europe”.

Merkel has outlasted seven Australian prime ministers, and there can be no single explanation for her long stretch of success. However, her career and training as a scientist presents useful insights.

As Merkel declines a fifth term and leaves her office this month, world politics loses another scientist. In Australia we find ourselves wondering, yet again: “Across all our politics – where are the scientists?”

The scientist and the leader

Globally, there have been shining examples of scientists who have entered the world of politics to great success. What are the qualities of scientists that might make them powerful and effective leaders?

Merkel retained many traits that are common among scientists throughout her long political career. She is patient and discerning. She has vision and strategy, and understands the value of planning for the long term. She is rational and empirical. And she builds collaboration and cooperation.

Finally, Merkel is known for drawing a clear boundary around what is known. She does not overstate the facts but, rather, promotes the temporary embrace of uncertainty until the data can be gathered to inform a decision.

Read more:
From ‘Mädchen’ to ‘Mutti’: as Angela Merkel departs, she leaves a great legacy of leadership

Merkel earned her doctorate in the field of quantum chemistry a specialisation within the broad field of quantum mechanics. Widely known for the macabre “Schrödingers cat” thought experiment, quantum mechanics is guiding scientists to discover and manipulate the characteristics of atoms and sub-atomic particles.

For many, Schrödinger’s cat mystifies more than it enlightens, but the counterintuitive nature of quantum mechanics in fact reveals the strength of science. By collecting data and developing theory, by following the trail of irreconcilable observations, scientists develop and test models of the world.

And like the greatest scientific models, quantum mechanics predicts more than we can immediately explain. It is a tool that moves past our human shortcomings, of emotion-driven bias and impulse, and allows us to pry at greater truths.

Amid pandemics of viruses and misinformation, a distrust of authority and erosion of meaning, Australia has never had greater need of the tools of science and the qualities of its scientists.

Where are Australia’s science-trained political leaders?

Just 17 of the 227 members of Australia’s federal parliament have training in scientific, technical, medical or engineering (STEM) fields. That’s only 7%.

Australia faces grave threats from many of the world’s most pressing challenges: climate change, the biodiversity crisis, pandemic variants, cybersecurity and AI challenges, and antibiotic resistance.

To meet these challenges, our national decision-makers need to objectively assess complex information, discern fact from fiction, and build collaboration and approaches that will take years, or decades, to fully come into their own.

We also need just and bold leadership with the confidence to adopt and rapidly deploy new technologies to reduce carbon emissions, build new economic sectors, and keep Australia’s digital assets safe.

What would a science-led Australia look like?

Can you imagine how things might be different if there were more scientists in Australia’s federal parliament? We can.

Australia would have responded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “Code Red” report by introducing more ambitious carbon emissions targets, and an infrastructure investment plan to achieve them.

Read more:
How an approach to science helps define the political centre

It would have secured Australia’s place as a world-class digital economy, growing jobs and wealth and improving equity of access to work, schools and health care for all citizens.

The government would be taking a strong, bold and evidence-informed approach to building our economy, by strengthening investment in research and development. It would provide incentives for others to do the same, generating strong GDP returns and lifting Australia from the bottom of the OECD rankings for government investment in research and development.

Australia would be rapidly building the manufacturing, energy and data infrastructure to fast-track a transition to an economy that generates no waste.

Scientists of Australia, we need you

That science and politics go “hand-in-lab-glove” is no coincidence. Both seek order in a world of frightening complexity. The challenges of the 21st century – from COVID-19 to global warming – appear to be consuming us from the inside out, our national unity deteriorated by misinformation. How can a scientist make change in politics?

Angela Merkel has said her strategy was to take “many small steps” and avoid extreme reforms.

Progress can be made by invoking the rhythms of science (where decades-long projects are commonplace), by making decisions on the best available evidence, by establishing cause and consequence, and by developing and testing our models time and time again. In this way we can benefit from the steady accumulation of increasingly detailed and reliable knowledge.

In just 16 years Angela Merkel transitioned Germany from a 10% renewable energy mix to the world’s first major renewable energy economy. She established a net zero emission target by 2045 while making the German economy the fourth-largest in the world by GDP. This is one of many evidence-based changes implemented by her chancellorship and one of the many features of her legacy.

Science arose through necessity, as “a candle in the dark” from the dark ages. We have enjoyed the enlightenment in which science played a major role.

And as new shadows encroach on the world, science can help keep the flame alight. Australia’s scientists: we need you.

Read more:
Doctor, doctor: why so few scientists in top government jobs?

Professor Emma Johnston is the Dean of Science at the University of New South Wales.

Kylie Walker is CEO at the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering.

– ref. Angela Merkel’s career shows why we need more scientists in politics – https://theconversation.com/angela-merkels-career-shows-why-we-need-more-scientists-in-politics-168365

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Klugman, Research Fellow, Institute for Health & Sport, member of the Community, Identity and Displacement Research Network, and Co-convenor of the Olympic Research Network, Victoria University

On the last Saturday of September every year many of the inhabitants of Melbourne, and indeed of the whole of Australia and even in foreign lands, are stricken with a strange infirmity.

So wrote the Australian historian Manning Clark in 1981. He was speaking of the Grand Final of the Victorian Football League (men’s) competition. Of the way around 100,000 people would journey to a place

mistakenly known as the Melbourne Cricket Ground [MCG]. There for two and a half hours they lose the appearance of human beings and become like beasts of the field. They growl, they roar, they bellow, they yell and they howl.

Forty years later, the grand final of the (now) Australian Football League Men’s competition (AFLM) continues to provoke fervent anticipation in the millions who hold a passionate interest in the sport.

Once again, it is being held on the last Saturday of September. Once again “a strange infirmity” grips supporters of the two teams left to battle for the premiership – the Melbourne Demons and the Western Bulldogs. If Melbourne wins, some of their barrackers will inevitably note that they can now die happy – which testifies to the absurdly profound meaning the game still holds for many.

Yet for the second year running, the location of the AFLM Grand Final will not be in Melbourne at the cricket ground that remains a spiritual home of footy.

Part of the grief over the displacement of the AFLM Grand Final from the MCG is that COVID has made it impossible for so many lifelong barrackers of the Demons and Dogs to cheer, bellow, and roar from the stands as the game unfolds amid a babel of sound. However another part seems to be the dismay over the loss of what was once “normal”.

But should we be craving a return to normality, or striving for something better?

Football and place

Place is central to the stories that AFL tells. It is the only major spectator sport to be so intertwined with the emergence – and growth – of a city. The game was first codified in 1859 at a time when Melbourne was in its early years as a rapidly developing city fuelled by Victoria’s gold rush. The riches of gold lead to bountiful parks and gardens where football could be played.

The activism of Melbourne’s Stonemasons in 1856 – and the ensuing eight-hour work day – meant that many men, and soon women, had the leisure time to watch games of football.

The game quickly became not only popular, but a site of communal passion. It was supposed to produce good, strong white men. Yet by the 1880s, Melbourne was already more famous for its raucous, seemingly mad football spectators, or “barrackers” as they became known. In 1890 “JEB” wrote in a suburban Melbourne newspaper:

For an Englishman to visit Australia, and go home without having seen an Australian football match, with its attendant multitude of ardent barrackers, would be as unintelligible as for a Colonial to see London and omit the tower […]

For what an experience it is to be at one of the big
matches! What a babel of sound! What a magnificent uproar! What a glorious cloud-shattering eruption of profanity!

By 1900, Melbourne was already home to two major men’s Australian Rules football competitions: The Victorian Football League and the Victorian Football Association. The expectation was that everyone who lived in the city barracked for a team.

Migrants like the novelist Peter Temple quickly realised that “footy talk” was the city’s “lingua franca – it transcended class, transcended gender, you could talk about football to anyone”. By 1967 some Melbourne residents so abhorred the incessant “footy talk” that a rival Anti-Football League was created.

Read more:
The AFL sells an inclusive image of itself. But when it comes to race and gender, it still has a way to go

However, place in Australia is complex, layered, and inescapably leads back to questions of sovereignty and justice. Melbourne was built on a place called Naarm that has never been ceded by its original inhabitants. The form of football that grew with the city has been shaped by acts of invasion, migration, and the displacement, survival, and resistance of First Nations Peoples.

Tom Wills, one of the four white men who wrote the first laws of Australian Rules football, spent much of his childhood among the Djab-wurrung people in the western districts of Victoria, speaking their language and playing their games. How much Wills was influenced by one of these games – the football game of Marn Grook – is a contentious question. While some have dismissed any possible links, they rely on sources drawn solely from the archive that reflect an exclusively colonial memory.

As Barry Judd has noted,

It is a colonial past that history is able to reconstruct, a past that says little or nothing about Indigenous experience or Indigenous remembrance of that same past carried into the present from the other side of the colonial frontier.

Wills has been a celebrated figure in the folklore of Australian Rules football. He is memorialised in a statue outside the MCG. This past week, the football world has been rocked by the revelation of an account detailing Wills’ involvement in the horrific reprisals that followed the killing of his father and other pastoralists in Queensland in 1861 (which itself was a response to the murder of Gayiri men by a neighbour of Wills).

Yet even before this news, it was known Wills supported the massacres of Gayiri and other First Nations Peoples. Indeed Wills asked his cousin and co-author of the first laws of Australian Rules – H.C.A. Harrison – to send “good resolute men that will shoot every black they see.”

Wills was made an inaugural member of the Australian Football Hall of Fame in 1996. The brilliant Yorta Yorta player, administrator and activist (amongst many other things), Sir Doug Nicholls, is still yet to be inducted into that Hall of Fame, despite having an AFLM round named after him. There is a statue of Sir Doug (and Lady Gladys Nicholls) outside the Victorian Parliament, but none outside the MCG or other football grounds.

Read more:
The land we play on: equality doesn’t mean justice

Those attending this Saturday’s AFLM Grand Final, however, will walk past a statue of St Kilda legend Nicky Winmar. When the statue was announced, many people in the football world argued it should be in Melbourne, where in 1993 Winmar responded to racial abuse from opposing fans and players by raising his jumper, pointing to his skin and stating over and over that he was “Black and proud”.

But Winmar is a Noongar man, and he wanted the statue commemorating his call for justice to be on Noongar land.

And then came COVID …

If anything, the pandemic has intensified Australia’s fascination with the football game that was first known as Melbourne Rules. Like the Olympics, it has provided a spar of meaning, joy, angst, relief, and at least momentary escape. The game has provided great comfort in a time of communal distress.

But the non-COVID happenings of the past football year – the continued racial abuse of Eddie Betts, the systemic racism found at Collingwood in its treatment of Héritier Lumumba, Taylor Walker’s racist vilification of Robbie Young, and the retirement of AFLW players because they are not being paid a living wage by Australia’s richest sporting body – reveals the need for the AFL to grapple more critically with its colonial past and present.

Reflecting more deeply on the game’s relationship to land and justice would be a good place to start.

Matthew Klugman has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. On the eve of an AFLM grand final like no other, can the shadow of the pandemic make us strive for something better? – https://theconversation.com/on-the-eve-of-an-aflm-grand-final-like-no-other-can-the-shadow-of-the-pandemic-make-us-strive-for-something-better-167792

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jess Coyle, Lecturer, Sports Management, Western Sydney University

This article discusses colonial violence against First Nations peoples. There is reference to people who are now deceased.

There has been a new revelation by researcher Gary Fearon that cricketer and founding father of Australian (Rules) Football Tom Wills was an active participant in the mass murder of Aboriginal people. The research confirms that Wills was involved in an attack on Gayiri people in Queensland, in response to the murder of his father.

The new evidence uncovered by Fearon reflects the complex politics of settler-Aboriginal relations at the time. Through his relationship with Aboriginal people, Tom Wills was essentially existing on the boundary between settler and Indigenous peoples.

The discovery challenges popular understandings of Tom Wills as a peaceful friend of all Aboriginal people. It will be interesting to see how the Australian Football League (AFL) and Cricket Australia respond now this information has finally been made public.

Tom Wills as a cultured man

There is a common misconception that Aboriginal people exist as a single collective. However, there is an immense diversity that exists within Aboriginal communities in Australia; a fact that is visualised in the AIATSIS map of the continent.
This is why Wills treated Gayiri people as hostile outsiders despite having relationships with Djab Wurrung people.

It is also important to remember the cultural values and attitudes of the 1860s are not the same as those of the 2020s. Men and masculinity was something vastly different then and violent retribution was central to it. 19th century Australia was a violent place. However, this in no way justifies the atrocities against First Nations people.

Tom Wills spent his early childhood with Djab Wurrung people in western Victoria, and spoke in language. Following the murder of his father by the Gayiri people, Wills returned to Victoria and worked with Aboriginal cricketers who were Jardwadjali, Gunditjmara and Wotjobaluk peoples of Western Victoria.

The contemporary celebration of Tom Wills as the father of Australian football and as a pillar of settler-Aboriginal relations is one-dimensional, which demonstrates our inability to grapple with the messiness of Australia’s colonial history. That Wills took part in colonial violence demonstrates the extent to which violence featured on the frontier, a fact highlighted in this massacre map.

Most of the killings that followed the Gayiri attack where Wills’ father died were carried out by government-funded Indigenous and non-Indigenous Queensland Native Police. A part of history that has caused much pain to Aboriginal people in Australia.

This is an example of a colonial truth that is often difficult to discuss. Like Wills’ involvement in the retributions for his fathers murder, it is far easier to understand the frontier as representing a line between good and bad or right and wrong. That Wills, like the native police, straddled this line is often difficult to consider.

An 1895 Chicago Tribute article suggests Wills was more than just involved in the killing of 40 Gayari people in response to the Cullin-la-ringo massacres (of which his father was a victim), but that he might have orchestrated the attack, with Wills stating:

I turned to the drovers, who were crying like children, and ordered them to gallop to the neighbouring “runs” to spread the news.

The Cullin-la-ringo massacre where 19 people were killed, is known as the largest massacre of Europeans by Aboriginal people in Australia’s history. The total death toll of Aboriginal people as a result of retribution for the Cullin-la-ringo massacre is estimated to be between 370-1,000.

In my research, I have found that Australia’s denial and systemic forgetting of colonial violence and Aboriginal peoples’ forced assimilation is an indicator of white belonging. White belonging is the need to forget and deny the past to be able to claim Australia as home in the present.

Fearon’s discovery therefore marks an important moment for the AFL. Will the AFL use this as an opportunity to engage in an honest discussion of its history and culture or turn a blind eye, deny and distance itself?

Opportunity for truth telling and reconciliation

Australian (Rules) Football has played a role in shaping contemporary Australia and is celebrated as a pillar of contemporary race relations in Australia. For example, Joe Johnson is celebrated as the first Indigenous VFL player. However, he was never actually able to reveal his Aboriginality at the time, as it would have ended his football career, a fact ignored today.

The AFL must move beyond enlightened racism and symbolic reconciliation to finally acknowledge Marngrook as the Aboriginal precursor of Australian (Rules) football, and the significance Aboriginal cultural knowledge and practice holds in Australian (Rules) Football.

The AFL needs to understand racism like the instances reported in 2019 documentaries “The Australian Dream” and “The Final Quarter” as symptomatic of a colonial culture of exclusion, denial and hyper masculinity. Both documentaries contextualised Adam Goodes’ experiences as an Aboriginal man within an organisational structure that does not understand the nuances of race and racism.

If the AFL truly wants to be a leader in the fight against racism, it must first acknowledge the messiness, the uncomfortable realities of exclusion and the legacy of frontier violence. More must be done beyond overdue apologies.

Rather than whitewash this discussion, listen to Aboriginal people, sit with the history as well as the contemporary truths. Despite the introduction of the AFL’s racial vilification rules and yearly education seminars, these issues are not going away.

Indigenous players continue to experience racism and are unable to embrace their culture within a sport that traces its origins to Wills’ interactions with the Djab Wurrung people.

Although the AFL has development programs for Indigenous players, the AFL remains an unsafe place for Indigenous people. The AFL needs to address the white privilege allowing them to lean on Aboriginal people to do all the educating, reconciliation and truth telling.

To paraphrase AFL footballer Eddie Betts, it’s not on Aboriginal people to make change. That change starts with honest conversation and recognition of the ugly truth of our shared history. Truth telling is fundamental to any process of reconciliation and highlights strategies the AFL can use to move forward in a culturally respectful and appropriate way.

If Wills is to be a figure of truth and reconciliation through his meaningful Aboriginal-settler relations, the reality of that relationship needs to be acknowledged. It is truth that makes reconciliation possible. If a history must be rewritten let it be one that draws on Aboriginal perspectives, centres Aboriginal voices and makes racism the responsibility of non-Indigenous people. For far too long First Nations peoples have had to carry the burden of our complacency.

Rather than removing tributes or altering the record on Tom Wills as the celebrated father of Australian (Rules) Football, let this be an opportunity for change, to grapple with our shared difficult history. We need to learn to live with the shame and discomfort of our history and try to understand what Aboriginal people experience in this country.
We cannot do this if Tom Wills is wiped from public memory.

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. Tom Wills’ story is the AFL’s opportunity for truth telling about its ugly history – https://theconversation.com/tom-wills-story-is-the-afls-opportunity-for-truth-telling-about-its-ugly-history-168381

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mathew Doidge, Senior Research Fellow, University of Canterbury

From a distance, the big news about Germany’s coming election on September 26 is the end of Angela Merkel’s reign after 16 years of leadership in Germany and Europe. Closer up, with no clear front-runner to take Merkel’s place, the picture is far more complex.

Seemingly on track for a clear victory until February, the prospects of Merkel’s centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party the Christian Social Union (CSU) have waned, as first the Greens and then the Social Democrats (SPD) narrowly topped the surprisingly volatile polls.

Merkel’s successor will be determined by the politics of coalition formation in an arrangement familiar to New Zealanders — Germany having provided the model for our own MMP system.

With another CDU/CSU-SPD grand coalition ruled out, the most likely outcome will see one of those parties leading a government comprising the Greens and the liberal Free Democrats (FDP) in a so-called “Jamaica” or “traffic light” coalition (named for the party colours).

A large undecided vote

But nothing is clear cut. In an unpredictable campaign dominated by missteps rather than policies, the fortunes of those battling for the chancellery – the CDU/CSU’s Armin Laschet, the SPD’s Olaf Scholz and the Greens’ Annalena Baerbock – have ebbed and flowed.

Caught guffawing during the German president’s remarks to victims of the July floods, alongside accusations of plagiarism (a problem to which the German political establishment seems particularly prone), Laschet has seen his party’s support plummet to the lowest-ever polled.

Read more:
Angela Merkel: gentle persuasion in an age of populism

Meanwhile, Baerbock’s aggressive response to her own charges of plagiarism, combined with a failure to declare income, have raised concerns about her personal credibility and seen her party slump from their surprise lead in April.

In contrast stands Scholz. The only candidate with federal executive experience, including currently as minister of finance and vice-chancellor in the CDU/CSU-SPD grand coalition, Scholz was initially welcomed with little fanfare.

However, his leadership during the pandemic (dispensing billions of euros in support), coupled with the absence of gaffes, has seen his personal popularity rise. In preferred chancellor polls, Scholz now leads on 40%, with Laschet on 19% and Baerbock on 13%. Somewhat soberingly this close to the election, 28% of respondents still “don’t know”.

Business as usual?

In an election devoid of real policy debate, it is difficult to say how the result will change Germany.

The answer may be “probably not much” if Laschet or Scholz gain the chancellery, with both in various ways casting themselves as continuity candidates (Scholz even going so far as to adopt Merkel’s patented rhombus hand gesture). But a strengthened Greens voice in any coalition – likely on current polling – will have an impact.

From a New Zealand perspective, there are three areas of interest: European integration, foreign policy and climate change. One way or another, each will affect the world beyond Germany’s borders.

Read more:
From ‘Mädchen’ to ‘Mutti’: as Angela Merkel departs, she leaves a great legacy of leadership

European integration

Germany is at the heart of the European project, and Merkel’s time as chancellor has been important to the union.

Taking office during the disarray following the collapse of the EU’s constitutional project, Merkel’s approach to integration was shorn of grand ambition. Instead, she has focused on stability and incremental reform in the face of subsequent crises (the Eurozone debt crisis, the European refugee crisis).

But the EU requires more than ad hoc incrementalism. It is increasingly difficult to reconcile the union’s significant economic footprint with its lack of foreign policy clout. In times of great power competition, the two are irrevocably interconnected. The role of the new chancellor in shaping European integration cannot be underestimated.

Read more:
Auf Wiedersehen, ‘Mutti’: How Angela Merkel’s centrist politics shaped Germany and Europe

Aside from the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), all parties standing are pro-European and all envision reforms to strengthen integration. For New Zealand, with US-China tensions threatening to spill over in unpredictable ways, a strong EU is essential to maintaining a stable and rules-based international order.

This is particularly significant for a small trading power, dependent on the predictability and enforceability of global rules. Any moves to make the EU more consistent, understandable and responsive will benefit New Zealand.

Climate change

The climate crisis will be at the core of policy, regardless of which coalition comes to power. All parties have been forced to address the issue, a priority driven home by the July floods.

Carbon neutrality is central to the platforms of the main parties, though differences exist on how to achieve this.

Germany’s approach will cause ripples beyond its borders, playing as it does a key role in defining EU policy, including the union’s expectations of trading partners such as New Zealand.

Read more:
How Germany’s Green party took on the far right to become a major political force

Foreign policy

There is also significant pressure for Germany to play a stronger global role to match its economic weight. This includes a more robust approach to powers such as China, something Merkel avoided.

Trade relations under Merkel were a priority. Separated from more contentious issues, it was an approach that pleased her Chinese counterparts. But complications darken the horizon: the EU has defined China as a “systemic rival”, and there have been calls for Germany to more actively confront Chinese assertiveness.

Developments in the Indo-Pacific are critical to New Zealand, which this week was surprised by the announcement of the formation of the AUKUS alliance between Australia, the US and UK. A more engaged Germany would be welcomed.

Read more:
State of the EU: tech and defence challenges cloud COVID success

A CDU-CSU victory is unlikely to see significant change, however. The party continues to prioritise trade in its international relationships, and Laschet has made some dubious foreign policy statements, raising questions as to what he would bring to the global stage.

The SPD also holds a conservative view of international engagement, aiming to avoid foreign conflicts. An emphasis on economic and trade policy is important for New Zealand, as negotiations for a free trade agreement with the EU near their end.

With only a few days until Germans cast their votes, the election remains anyone’s to win. Regardless of the outcome, New Zealand should continue to count Germany as an important friend in the EU. With Britain’s withdrawal in 2020, the relationship with Germany is more valuable than ever.

Mathew Doidge receives funding from the Erasmus+ programme of the European Union.

Serena Kelly receives funding from the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union. She is affiliated with the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs and the European Studies Association of Australia and New Zealand.

– ref. German election: the race to replace Angela Merkel and why it matters to New Zealand – https://theconversation.com/german-election-the-race-to-replace-angela-merkel-and-why-it-matters-to-new-zealand-168379

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hamish McCallum, Director, Centre for Planetary Health and Food Security, Griffith University

The origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which has caused the COVID-19 pandemic, has been hotly debated.

This debate has caused substantial difficulties in the Australia-China relationship, with a call by Foreign Minister Marise Payne for another inquiry into its origin being considered by China as a hostile act.

What’s not in doubt is the closest relatives of the virus are found in bats. How, where and when the virus spilled over into humans is the contentious issue.

One widely supported hypothesis is the spillover occurred in the “wet markets” of Wuhan, where many species of wildlife from across China are held in crowded conditions.

However, there’s no evidence the species of bats in which the closest relatives of SARS-CoV-2 are found were sold through the Wuhan wet markets at any time in the two years before the pandemic. This hypothesis requires the existence of a “bridge host”, another species that becomes infected via spillover from the original bat hosts, and then passes the virus onto humans.

Bridge hosts are well-known in many emerging human diseases. For example, Hendra virus, which my group studies, has flying foxes as its reservoir. Hendra spills over to horses with some frequency. Horses then amplify the virus as a bridge host and can infect humans.

Fortunately, this is extremely rare, with only seven known cases. Tragically, four of those people died. Hendra has never been known to spread directly from flying foxes to humans.

À lire aussi :
I was the Australian doctor on the WHO’s COVID-19 mission to China. Here’s what we found about the origins of the coronavirus

More evidence a lab leak is very unlikely

A second, much more contentious hypothesis is the origin of the pandemic was the result of a “lab leak”.

Wuhan has one of the most sophisticated virological laboratories in China, and the laboratory does work on bat viruses. The suggestion is the virus may have inadvertently been released into the general community via one of the workers. No direct evidence supports this hypothesis.

A new pre-print study, released online this month, provides strong evidence to support the “natural spillover” hypothesis, with results that are hard to reconcile with the “lab leak” hypothesis.

The study is yet to be peer reviewed. But it’s based on a detailed examination of the genetic sequences of two early lineages obtained from people infected in late 2019 and early 2020.

For convenience, these two lineages are called A and B. The two lineages differ by just two nucleotides (letters in the genetic code) at two different key sites in the genetic sequence.

If there was a single lab escape event, the separation into lineages A and B must have happened after the lab escape. We would therefore expect to see a substantial number of intermediate lineages, with the lineage A nucleotide at one site, and the lineage B nucleotide at the other site.

However, if almost all of the genetic sequences obtained from humans are “pure” lineage A or pure lineage B, this suggests there were at least two different spillover events, either directly from bats or via bridge hosts.

And the evolution of the two lineages occurred before humans were infected.

The researchers downloaded all complete genetic sequences for SARS-CoV-2 that had been lodged in a widely used genomic database. Of these sequences, 369 were lineage A, 1,297 were lineage B and just 38 were intermediates.

À lire aussi :
Why it will soon be too late to find out where the COVID-19 virus originated

Genetic sequencing isn’t perfect. Close examination of the 38 intermediates strongly suggested they were more likely to be sequencing errors of pure lineage A or lineage B than to be true intermediates.

The genetic evidence, therefore, suggests very strongly there have been at least two separate spillover events into human populations, one being from lineage A and another being from lineage B.

Did a human bring SARS-CoV-2 to the wet markets?

The data don’t tell us there have been only two spillover events — there may have been more. Nor do they tell us whether these spillovers happened directly from bats, or whether some or all happened via an intermediate bridge host.

A Nature news article suggests this evidence points to the spillover having happened via the wildlife trade, but I think this is taking it a step too far.

While some of the wildlife species sold through the Wuhan wet market can indeed become infected with SARS-CoV-2 (for example raccoon dogs and mink), there’s no evidence any sold through the market were infected.

Many of the earliest human viral sequences (all lineage B) were recovered from the Wuhan seafood market, but wet markets and abattoirs are well-known to be places where the SARS-CoV-2 virus spreads very well from human to human.

So, it may have been a human who brought the virus to the Wuhan seafood market, rather than a species of wildlife.

One thing we do know is this pandemic originated through a human coming in contact with another species infected with the virus.

It’s unknown whether this was a bat or a bridge host, and whether this contact occurred in a wildlife market, or in a bat cave, or somewhere else entirely different.

Nevertheless, as humans encroach more and more on the habitats of wild animals and as wild animals are brought more frequently into close contact with humans, we can expect further spillovers and pandemics to occur.

À lire aussi :
How do viruses mutate and jump species? And why are ‘spillovers’ becoming more common?

Hamish McCallum receives funding from the Australian Reserch Council and from the US agencies NSF, NIH and DARPA

– ref. New preliminary evidence suggests coronavirus jumped from animals to humans multiple times – https://theconversation.com/new-preliminary-evidence-suggests-coronavirus-jumped-from-animals-to-humans-multiple-times-168473

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy N. W. Jackson, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Australian Venom Research Unit, The University of Melbourne

It’s early spring in southern Australia and the sun is, gloriously, out. You decide to head to your local patch of greenery – by the creek, lake, or foreshore – with the sun on your face, the breeze in your hair, and your dog’s tongue blissfully lolling.

Suddenly you see it. Paused on the path just a few meters in front of your feet, soaking up those same springtime rays — a snake.

Love them or loathe them, snakes have been co-existing with, and haunting us, since well before our ancestors called themselves “human”. From the subtle tempter of Genesis to the feathered serpent deities of Mesoamerica, snakes have always been potent symbols of otherness.

Today, to encounter a snake is to brush up against the wild and mysterious heart of the natural world. Snakes are important members of every terrestrial ecosystem across Australia. Even in the most populous parts of the country, snakes inhabit the remnant bushland dispersed throughout our major cities.

But what exactly influences human–snake interactions? Whether you’re hoping to maximise your chances of seeing one of these shy, fascinating critters or wanting to avoid them at all costs, this article is for you.

Snakes in southern springtime

In southern Australia, a flurry of animal activity occurs in spring. As resources start becoming plentiful after the relatively lean months of winter, spring is the reproductive season for many plants and animals.

One such resource is heat — a particularly crucial resource for organisms such as reptiles, which don’t make their own body heat (unlike mammals). It’s a common misconception, however, that snakes want as much heat as they can get. Like Goldilocks, snakes want the temperature to be just right.

Southern springs are the right temperature for snakes to bask during the times of day we humans are also out and about. In summer, snakes, including venomous species such as tiger snakes and brown snakes, are typically more active very early in the morning, late in the evening, or during the night when temperatures are not too high for them.

After a slow winter, snakes are both hungry (they may have been fasting for months!) and on the lookout for eligible members of the opposite sex. Basking, hunting, and searching for a mate brings snakes out into the open in spring a bit more than at other times of year, so we’re most likely to encounter them during this time.

Snake activity in northern Australia

Like all things, snake activity is a little different in the north. Spare a thought for those poor northern Australians who will never know the joys of a snake-filled springtime.

Still, the north has far more snake species than the south, including many species of non-venomous python — the farther south you go, the more our snake fauna is dominated by venomous species (check out Australian Reptile Online Database for distribution maps).

Because of the unforgiving year-round heat across northern Australia, temperature doesn’t drive snake activity as it does in the south. You will rarely see a basking snake in Australia’s Top End, they’re too busy avoiding the heat.

Instead, snake activity is driven by another important resource – rain. In the Top End, this means snakes are most often encountered following the wet season (April–June) when prey and water abound.

In other, more arid “boom and bust” systems, large rainfall events may only happen every five to ten years. When they do, they can trigger huge flurries of snake activity as the serpents emerge to take advantage of fleetingly available prey.

Snakes indicate ecosystem health

From the moment of birth, all species of snake are predatory, although some, like shovel-nosed snakes, prey only upon eggs.

In some terrestrial Australian ecosystems, snakes are near the top of the food chain. After reaching a certain size, they have few predators of their own. A two-metre coastal taipan in the cane fields of northern Queensland, for example, has more to fear from harvesters than it does from any natural predator.

For large snakes to persist in an environment, they need an abundance of their prey (mice, frogs and lizards), as well as all the species their prey feed upon (invertebrates, even smaller animals, or plants).

Snakes often also have specific habitat requirements. In general, they need shelter and protection from bigger predators, which might include birds of prey, predatory mammals such as native marsupials or introduced cats and foxes, or other snakes. They also need opportunities for safely regulating their body temperature.

This means a snake will only call a place home if it has both a functioning food-web and the necessary habitat complexity. So remember, if you see snakes in your backyard or local park, it’s a sign the ecosystem is doing pretty well.

Snakes don’t want to bite you

Snakes are awesome predators, but no Australian snake is interested in eating a human. In fact, they want as little to do with us giant hairless apes as possible.

Why? Because snakes are actually quite vulnerable animals. Compared to many other species, they are small, have no sharp claws or strong limbs, and limited energy to put up a fight — they are basically limbless lizards with different teeth.

For those that possess it, venom is a last resort and only a minority of species —such as taipans, brown snakes, tiger snakes, and death adders — can deliver a life-threatening bite to a person. But snakes would much rather use their venom to subdue prey (that’s what they have it for) than to defend themselves.

When snakes bite humans in Australia, it’s a defensive reaction to a large animal they view as a potential predator. Remember, they can’t understand your intentions, even if those intentions are good.

If you’re lucky enough to see a wild snake, and if you respect its boundaries and give it personal space, it’s sure to do the same for you. Keep dogs on the lead in snakey areas and educate your kids to be snake-smart from as young as possible.

Even though snakes don’t want to bite, snakebite envenoming can be a life-threatening emergency. Learn first aid, and when you go for a walk in one of those sanctuaries of greenery that snakes like as much as we do, carry a compression bandage (or three).

It’s almost certain you will never need it, but it could just save a life.

Read more:
Does Australia really have the deadliest snakes? We debunk 6 common myths

Timothy N. W. Jackson receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Chris J Jolly receives funding from National Environmental Science Program (Threatened Species Hub).

Damian Lettoof receives funding from HWRE.

– ref. The sun’s shining and snakes are emerging, but they’re not out to get you. Here’s what they’re really up to – https://theconversation.com/the-suns-shining-and-snakes-are-emerging-but-theyre-not-out-to-get-you-heres-what-theyre-really-up-to-168089

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

World leaders and about 30,000 others from assorted interest groups will converge on Glasgow in November for the United Nations’ 26th annual climate summit, COP26 (“Conference of the Parties”).

It will be five years (allowing for a one-year Tokyo 2020-style pandemic hiatus) since the Paris Agreement adopted at COP21 in 2015.

There has been plenty of cynicism about that agreement, its structure and non-binding nature. Important emitters like China were effectively exempt from making meaningful carbon-reduction commitments.

Some OECD countries (such as Canada) have paid lip service to the agreement but done little. Still others (such as Australia) have made some progress reducing emissions but have no long-term plan, relying instead on bumper-sticker slogans about “technology not taxes” and, until recently, hiding behind dodgy accounting tricks.

That aside, it’s hard to see how the world solves what amounts to — as economists put it — a “coordination problem” without global agreements.

For roughly half a century economists have been unanimous about what those agreements must involve — a price on carbon. The 2018 economics Nobel prize awarded to William Nordhaus was belated recognition of this fact.

A price on carbon — in the form of a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme — is a way to use the power of the market’s price mechanism to balance the good that comes from emitting carbon (economic development) with the bad (climate change).

Set the price of carbon at the true social cost of carbon (taking into account all the ills that come from climate change) and the invisible hand of the market will balance the pros and cons. Think of it as Friedrich von Hayek meets Greta Thunberg.

But there is another, less dramatic way to harness market forces to reduce carbon emissions: disclosure.

Read more:
Vital Signs: a global carbon price could soon be a reality – Australia should prepare

Public disclosure works

The idea starts with this: plenty of consumers want to reduce their carbon footprint and are willing to pay for it. That’s why people recycle, use green energy even when it’s more expensive, buy low-carbon clothing, and drive electric cars. A bunch of folks are willing to pay to be green.

The success of companies such as eco-friendly sneaker company Allbirds and electic vehicle maker Tesla exist is evidence of the market catering to these consumer preferences. But can we make it easier for consumers to express their environmental preferences? Can we turbocharge the market for greener products?

A working paper published this month by the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests the answer is “yes”.

Authored by Carnegie Mellon University economists Lavender Yang, Nicholas Muller and Pierre Jinghong Liang, the paper looks at the US Environmental Protectino Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. In effect from 2010, this has required big carbon emitters (including all power plants that produce more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year) to publicly disclose how much they emit.

The authors look at the effect of this disclosure program on the electric power industry, which accounts for 27% of all US emissions.

The results are striking. Plants subject to greater scrutiny reduced their carbon emissions by 7%. Plants owned by publicly listed companies reduced their emissions by 10%. Large public companies, such as those in the S&P500 stock index, cut emissions even more (11%).

Accountability increases environmental performance

Responding to investor concerns

The reason appears to be responsiveness to investors wanting companies to be more environmentally responsible. This explains why emissions went down more for public companies, and even more for large public companies, whose shares are more likely to be held by funds with an ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) mandate.

Some of these investors have pro-social preferences and want to invest their money in more sustainable companies. Others might not care about the environment per se, but know that lots of folks do. Businesses that cater to these consumer preferences have an advantage.

Read more:
Vital Signs: a 3-point plan to reach net-zero emissions by 2050

The dark side to this is that the decline in emissions by major plants was partially offset by an increase in emissions by plants under the 25,000-tonne threshold not subject to disclosure.

In other words, companies responded to the incentives provided by disclosure requirements. Those who could “hide” their emissions did not.

The lesson is that disclosure requirements work. They force companies to own up to their customers and investors, and face the reality of their emissions behaviour. But we need to apply it to all companies, not just big ones.

Richard Holden is President-elect of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.

– ref. Vital Signs: a simple way to cut carbon emissions — don’t let polluters hide – https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-a-simple-way-to-cut-carbon-emissions-dont-let-polluters-hide-168560

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Bishop, Postdoctoral Fellow, Macquarie University

Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander readers are advised this story contains images of people who have died.

“We have fared well out of native hands”, wrote missionary Annie Lock from Oodnadatta in South Australia in 1924. Four years later, having moved to Harding Soak north of Alice Springs, she declared the government should “give the natives food in place of their country”.

Lock’s recognition that white Australians had taken Aboriginal land and owed them compensation was ahead of her time, even if her idea of appropriate compensation was inadequate.

Born in 1876 into a Methodist sharefarming family of 14 children in South Australia’s Gilbert Valley, Lock was a practical woman with a very basic education. A dressmaker by trade, in 1903 she joined what would become the United Aborigines Mission.

It operated on faith lines: missionaries were unpaid and could not actively solicit donations, relying on prayer to answer all needs. Lock, like her colleagues, developed a nice line in inviting supporters to “join her in prayer” for very specific needs, such as “a nice staunch horse for £12”, hoping for a “practical” show of sympathy.

Read more:
Hidden women of history: Mary Jane Cain, land rights activist, matriarch and community builder

From 1903 to 1937, she lived in 10 mission camps across four states and territories. Renowned for being the “Big Boss”, she usually worked alone establishing “new work” — partly because her colleagues found her intensely uncollegial.

She wasn’t only out of step with many of her contemporaries in her belief Aboriginal Australians deserved compensation: she also believed Aboriginal people had a future and they could be “useful citizens” of Australia.

Once again, however, her view of their place in broader Australian society was narrow. She did not imagine Indigenous doctors, lawyers or politicians, but labourers, stockmen and domestic servants.

I first encountered Annie Lock through some of her letters in the South Australian archives. She berated government officials, demanding action and funding for (what she saw as) Aboriginal people’s interests. She was bolshie and outspoken.

At the time I was a young graduate student and naively thought I had uncovered a feminist heroine. I was quickly disabused: for all her intrepid and gutsy behaviour, Lock held intensely socially conservative views in line with her religious conviction.

Read more:
Hidden women of history: Isabel Flick, the tenacious campaigner who fought segregation in Australia

A grand adventure

Lock’s life was like a “girls’ own” adventure story – albeit a teetotal and highly moralistic one.

She made epic horse and buggy journeys across the desert, camped in the middle of nowhere with few resources and was shipwrecked in a pearling lugger. She railed against white men’s abuse of Aboriginal women, and she “rode rough-shod over rules and regulations, always managing to come out on top”, in the words of her obituary from her longsuffering mission society.

Many white Australians felt she went too far. She cuddled Aboriginal children, nursed the sick, and shared her campfire – even “drinking tea out of the same cup”.

After the 1928 Coniston Massacre, in which a police party killed over 100 Aboriginal men, women and children in Central Australia, the Board of Enquiry, widely considered as a whitewash at the time, blamed the unrest leading to the events partly on “a woman missionary living among naked blacks, lowering their respect for whites”.

It was no coincidence that Lock was also one of the people who had publicised the massacre, forcing an enquiry in the first place, after Aboriginal people sought refuge in her camp and told her their horrifying tale.

In fact, rather than “lowering their respect” as a white woman living with Aboriginal people, Lock maintained her camp was an area of mutual respect and negotiation:

They told me their laws; […] I made my rules; they kept them; I kept theirs; we had no trouble.

At certain moments when researching her life, I found Lock seemed impressively broadminded. However, given the uneven distribution of power, the reality was not so idyllic.

Read more:
Hidden women of history: Wauba Debar, an Indigenous swimmer from Tasmania who saved her captors

A troublesome woman

Lock was an integral part of the colonial machine, with all its patronising ethnocentricity. As a white woman, Lock was never troubled by any sense that Aboriginal people were her equals.

She could be dictatorial and bloody-minded, with a highly developed sense of what she saw as right and wrong, approving harsh punishment for transgressors. At the Coniston enquiry itself she was critical of those Aboriginal men who killed cattle, suggesting “a good flogging” was called for.

In Western Australia, she actively took children from their families and she was instrumental in establishing Carrolup Native Settlement in 1915 — a forerunner of notorious Moore River Settlement — to which Aboriginal people were removed.

Read more:
Friday essay: ‘I am anxious to have my children home’: recovering letters of love written for Noongar children

In South Australia in 1924, she started what became Colebrook Home, in which Aboriginal children of mixed descent were institutionalised.

At Ooldea, when Lock was 58, the overworked and tired missionary let her guard slip. An Aboriginal man hit her after she punished his daughter. The daughter should be sent to Colebrook, she suggested, “to punish” him — deviating from the usual missionary script of “in the child’s best interests”.

But history is complicated. One elderly Aboriginal woman smiled when she told an interviewer her memories of Lock, “a real fat one”, playing rounders at Ooldea. The image of a stout middle-aged missionary hitching up her skirts and charging around the sandhills with a bunch of Aboriginal kids is hard to beat.

In Central Australia, some remembered her as a caring for children “on country”, saving them from being sent away.

Lock was consistently vocal about Aboriginal girls’ rights to be protected from white men (although she condoned Aboriginal men’s violent “punishment” of their wives). And while she was irrepressibly evangelistic, she eventually learned Christianity could work with some aspects of Aboriginal culture. Sometimes, she wrote, Aboriginal people could “teach white people a lesson”. They were “real socialist”, sharing the clothes that she gave them. She waxed lyrical about their “corroboree songs” and appreciated the authority of elder generations over the younger.

In 1937, aged 60 and after 35 years in the mission field, Lock suddenly retired. Certainly she had been finding her “pioneering” missionary work more of a strain, and her health had suffered, but also, she told her supporters, God was giving her a “quieter work”. Much to everyone’s amazement, this independent woman had found herself a husband.

She married a retired bank manager and spent the last six years of her life evangelising in a caravan around Eyre Peninsula.

Contradictions

In uncovering the life of Annie Lock, I found a woman who was both fascinating and discomfiting. We can try and judge her motivations and actions as an individual of her time, but we cannot ignore her impact.

She saved people’s lives by providing food and healthcare, and a refuge from more hostile forces. She also destroyed families by removing children. She introduced Christianity, which some found a welcome way of navigating the changing world. She was one of an army of “do-gooders” whose haphazard attempts to improve the lives of Aboriginal people did not always have the result that anyone would have desired.

Her personal impact could be positive – some remember her as “lovely” and “motherly”. But her impact as an active participant in “protectionist” government policies, which limited Aboriginal people’s lives and movement and tore families apart, was traumatic and has endured.

Catherine Bishop is the author of Too Much Cabbage and Jesus Christ: Australia’s “Mission Girl” Annie Lock, out now with Wakefield Press

Catherine Bishop receives funding from the Australian Research Council as a DECRA Research Fellow at Macquarie University. This project benefited from an Australian Religious History Fellowship at the State Library of NSW and an Australian Research Theology Inc travel grant.

– ref. Hidden women of history: Annie Lock was a bolshie, outspoken Australian missionary, full of contradictions – https://theconversation.com/hidden-women-of-history-annie-lock-was-a-bolshie-outspoken-australian-missionary-full-of-contradictions-167781

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

One is tempted to think Scott Morrison’s hero must be Harry Houdini, the great escape artist. Put our prime minister in a corner, and he will talk his way out, or try to.

After President Biden rang President Macron this week to soothe hurt French feelings about AUKUS, a joint statement was issued.

It said in part, “The two leaders agreed that the situation would have benefited from open consultations among allies on matters of strategic interest to France and our European partners.”

Morrison refused to take this as any reflection on Australia’s diplomatic blundering in the way it handled the cancellation of its French submarines contract.

“They were dealing with different issues to Australia,” he argued. “The United States and France are NATO countries. And there are certain expectations amongst NATO partners about how they’re engaged with each other on national security issues.”

On any “trust” metric, Morrison has received a battering since the AUKUS announcement. An angry Macron is not yet willing even to accept his call.

But the Prime Minister probably won’t be too worried in domestic political terms. He’ll think the main takeout by his “quiet Australians” will be not that the French are accusatory, but that a big new deal is delivering nuclear-powered subs and other weaponry to protect against the Chinese, about whom polling shows people are increasingly worried.

Morrison might have been more disappointed that with AUKUS he didn’t manage to immediately wedge Labor. In other times, the Labor left would have been screaming about nuclear boats. But Anthony Albanese, determined to stay a small target, acted with lightning speed to have the opposition back in the agreement.

Albanese, however, will have to be watchful. As Labor frontbenchers started to ask about detail and proposed a Senate inquiry, Morrison quickly said, “If the Labor Party wants to have an each way bet on national security, the Australian people need to know that”. It was a campaign line.

It’s perfectly reasonable to pursue information about an agreement for which we have bones but no flesh, but Morrison will be ruthless in exploiting legitimate opposition probing.

Morrison’s behaviour towards the French, and his refusal to admit the government deceived them, invites broader questions about trust. It’s always an issue but domestically there are some checks. Put bluntly, while dudding foreigners might be reprehensible, doing it to voters can be downright dangerous, as various politicians have learned the hard way.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Morrison and Macron need to talk

When Morrison arrives back from the US, his attention will turn to executing a policy shuffle that’s important for him both internationally and electorally.

The Glasgow climate conference is only weeks away and for it Morrison needs, at the least, to firmly embrace the 2050 net zero target and present a pathway that has credible medium term markers.

Biden and British PM Boris Johnson, who’ve delivered AUKUS to Morrison, have been twisting his arm very hard to improve Australia’s climate ambition, and he needs to deliver.

The Nationals will be paid off, and Barnaby Joyce will have to cope with whatever dissent there is within his ranks. When, as acting PM, Joyce appeared on 7.30 on Thursday, he sounded like he knew he had to lock in with Morrison but wished he didn’t.

In a speech to be delivered on Friday Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is preparing the way for the shift from the present government line of reaching net zero emissions “preferably” by 2050 to the firm commitment.

Frydenberg warns if Australia is seen as a laggard on climate policy, the inflow of the capital – its cost and availability – will be hit, with consequences for everything from home interest rates to infrastructure projects.

“Australia has a lot at stake. We cannot run the risk that markets falsely assume we are not transitioning in line with the rest of the world,” Frydenberg says.

He also says the transition must be broad based with “investment in emissions reduction strategies across all sectors, be it agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and others”.

Moreover he directly takes on hardliners within the Nationals by declaring “it is wrong to assume that traditional sectors, like resources and agriculture, will face decline over the course of the transition. To the contrary, many businesses in these sectors are at the cutting-edge of innovation and technological change.”

The government is now walking quite fast rhetorically. Precisely how far it will go in policy remains to be seen.

Read more:
View from The Hill: For Morrison AUKUS is all about the deal, never mind the niceties

f

The position for Glasgow will become the government’s policy for the election, and Albanese won’t credibly be able to hold off much longer in producing Labor’s alternative. It will be a fine judgement for the opposition leader where that policy should be pitched. He will want it some distance from the government’s, but not far enough to dangerously increase Labor’s exposure.

Meanwhile the nation and its leaders, federal and state, are bracing for another sort of transition, which could be hellish. NSW and Victoria are preparing to open (at varying rates), and this is expected to send COVID cases soaring.

There’ll be severe pressures on hospitals in those states, and an increase in deaths. Morrison and NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian hope people will be so glad to be out of lockdown they’ll pay less attention to whatever health disasters might unfold.

The sniping between leaders won’t let up, as Western Australia and Queensland continue to attempt to keep COVID from invading, and their critics rail against border shut outs.

We could be headed into some of the most uncertain and difficult days of the pandemic, with fresh tests of community cohesion and resilience.

This week, in Melbourne’s serial protests, we saw how COVID can bring out the toxic underbelly of our society. Construction workers angry about compulsory vaccinations for the industry and then its shutdown, anti-vaxxers, and thugs from the extreme right came together in a menacing mob.

The recent growth of the extreme right (which ASIO has warned about) is particularly disturbing, because these people can exploit troubled times. Nevertheless, appalling as the protests have been, they should be kept in perspective. We’ve seen thuggery before (remember the 2006 violence in Melbourne against a G20 finance ministers meeting) although it is more dangerous when it comes in a crisis.

With rising vaccination rates and the planned openings, the new year holds promise. On the other hand, with the unpredictability of COVID, no one can be sure. Certainly not Morrison, as he works on his election strategy.

Read more:
Politics with Michelle Grattan: British High Commissioner Vicki Treadell on AUKUS and climate change

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. Grattan on Friday: After the deal on security, Scott Morrison turns to the shift on climate – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-after-the-deal-on-security-scott-morrison-turns-to-the-shift-on-climate-168606

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

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will prepare the way for Scott Morrison to take a target of net zero emissions by 2050 to Glasgow, when he warns on Friday capital inflow will be at risk if Australia is seen as a climate laggard.

“Australia has a lot at stake. We cannot run the risk that markets falsely assume we are not transitioning in line with the rest of the world,” Frydenberg says in a speech to the Australian Industry Group released ahead of delivery.

“Were we to find ourselves in that position, it would increase the cost of capital and reduce its availability, be it debt or equity”.

Frydenberg says there must be investment in emissions reduction in all sectors, including agriculture, mining, and manufacturing.

He firmly rejects the claim – advanced by some critics especially in the Nationals – that the resources and agriculture sectors will face decline in the transition.

“To the contrary, many businesses in these sectors are at the cutting-edge of innovation and technological change,” he says.

The government is set to finalise its revised climate policy after the Prime Minister returns from the United States.

Morrison, who has been pressed hard on climate by President Joe Biden and Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson while in the US this week, wants an unequivocal stand on the 2050 target for the November Glasgow climate conference.

The government’s present formulation is that it is committed to net zero “preferably” by 2050.

Morrison has been negotiating with Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce on a deal which will contain a major pay-off for the minor Coalition partner.

Frydenberg says in his speech that in a long term shift “markets are moving as governments, regulators, central banks and investors are preparing for a lower emissions future”. He points out 129 countries have committed to net zero by 2050.

“Markets are responding as participants make their own judgements as to what this new dynamic means for their existing portfolios and their future investment decisions.

“In particular, they are increasingly focusing on the physical risks to their investments of climate-related events and the transition risk to their investments as consumer preferences, technological and regulatory settings change.

“As a result, trillions of dollars are being mobilised globally in support of the transition.”

One of Australia’s major banks in the last year has coordinated more than 50 transactions worth $100 billion in climate finance related activities.

“Increasingly, institutional investors are themselves committing to the net zero goal, like BlackRock, Fidelity and Vanguard, three of the biggest fund managers in the world. For them, there is an alignment between the commercial opportunities and the environmental outcomes.”

Frydenberg emphasises the importance of Australian markets operating effectively, with investors able to make informed, timely decisions, and capital available at the lowest cost.

He says historically, Australia has relied heavily on imported capital, whether foreign investment or wholesale funding of the banking system. Foreign investors hold close to half the Commonwealth government bonds.

Reduced access to these capital markets would raise borrowing costs, affecting everything from the interest rates on housing and small business loans to the financial viability of big infrastructure projects, he says.

Frydenberg says Australia is addressing the challenges on two fronts.

Regulators have focused on the disclosure of material financial risks relating to climate change and promoted a best practice financial framework. And Australia is making progress in meeting its emissions reduction targets.

“To go the next step and achieve net zero will require more investment across the economy,” Frydenberg says.

“An economy-wide transition is needed, as in the words of the former Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney this ‘isn’t about funding only deep green activities, or blacklisting dark brown ones’”.

Frydenberg says “opportunities will abound and it will be those businesses that recognise these trends and put plans in place to adapt that will have the most promising futures”.

He says the message to Australian banks, super funds and insurers is “if you support the objective of net zero, do not walk away from the very sectors of our economy that will need investment to successfully transition.

“Climate change and its impacts are not going away.

“It represents a structural and systemic shift in our financial system, which will only gain pace over time.

“For Australia, this presents risks we must manage and opportunities we must seize.”

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

– ref. Josh Frydenberg prepares ground for Scott Morrison to commit to 2050 climate target – https://theconversation.com/josh-frydenberg-prepares-ground-for-scott-morrison-to-commit-to-2050-climate-target-168610

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pablo Negret, Postdoctoral research fellow, The University of Queensland

Figures released this week suggest Australia’s koala populations have plummeted by 30% in three years, and fewer than 58,000 now remain in the wild.

The statement from the Australian Koala Foundation has not been verified on the ground, giving it a high degree of uncertainty. But the claim aligns with a number of studies showing some koala populations are rapidly declining, particularly in Queensland and New South Whales.

Fire is an increasing threat to koalas; the 2019-20 megafires are estimated to have affected more than 60,000 koalas and reduced population numbers at multiple sites, including several areas of New South Wales. As bushfire risk increases under climate change, eucalyptus forest where koalas live are expected to suffer further impacts in the next 50-100 years.

So what’s the best way to protect these iconic animals from fires? Our new report for the National Environmental Science Program (NESP) sought to answer this question. We identified actions to reduce the risk of koalas being harmed by fires, and found gaps in scientific knowledge where more research is urgently needed.

A few big unknowns

Our research found scientific understanding of the interaction between fire management and koala conservation is lacking in three areas.

First, more research is needed on koala movements and their activity patterns before, during and after fires. For example, do koalas move during fire or stay in the same trees?

Evidence shows koalas rapidly move to and use recently burnt habitat. But it’s not known whether koalas found in recently burnt areas are new to that part of the forest or inhabited it before the fire.

After bushfires and prescribed burns, koalas can be injured by smouldering bark or burning embers when moving between trees. They can also become dehydrated. But how this affects koala movement and survival is barely understood.

Second, we need better understanding of how prescribed burning affects koala populations, in both the short and long term. Prescribed burning may benefit koalas if it reduces the severity of bushfires, but it can also kill or injure individual koalas. Better understanding the positives and negatives is crucial.

This might be achieved through long-term GPS radio-tracking of individual koalas, or compiling information about injured or dead koalas after prescribed burns and reporting it to conservation authorities.

Third, we need to know more about links between habitat connectivity, bushfire characteristics and koala population dynamics.

For example, fire can cause koala habitat to fragment. This makes habitat drier, which in turn may increase fire frequency and severity. But increased fragmentation can also limit the spread of fire and make it easier to control, which ultimately benefits koalas. More research into these trade-offs is required.

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

Fires and koalas: a roadmap

Koalas can be protected from fires in various ways, including managing fire risk or, when fires do occur, managing koala populations and habitat to increase the chance of recovery.

But to date, there’s been little guidance about how effective various management actions are, and how best to allocate resources.

Our framework, one of the first of its kind, sought to address these questions. It can be used by land managers, scientists, koala rehabilitation groups, the media and the general public.

The work involved reviewing existing literature on fire ecology and management, as well as koala ecology and conservation. We also gathered expert advice through individual discussions and workshops in Queensland and New South Wales.

We identified several goals that, if achieved, will help maintain koala populations in fire prone landscapes. They include:

• improving or maintaining koala habitat and koala populations before and after fires. This might involve replanting, weed management, reforestation and pest control, long-term monitoring of koala populations and their habitat or minimising other threats, such as vehicle collisions, dog attacks, habitat loss and climate change

• maintaining or restoring fire patterns suited to an ecosystem – for example, by conducting prescribed burning to make an area less flammable in the case of altered fire frequency, or so-called “mosaic” burning to create patches of burnt and unburnt areas

• actions during bushfires, such as creating a low-intensity backburn that travels down a slope away from koala areas

• exchanging knowledge between koala conservation organisations and Traditional Owners, Indigenous communities of the area and the various fire management authorities

• effective post-fire management, such as quickly rescuing injured koalas for rehabilitation, and restoring key koala habitat.

Read more:
Scientists find burnt, starving koalas weeks after the bushfires

Looking ahead

Our proposed strategies and actions should also take into account other priorities, such as human safety, property protection and cultural values of Indigenous people and others.

Our framework requires further development. But it’s a first step in bringing together information previously scattered across different sources and branches of knowledge.

The report gives those working to protect koalas, and other tree-dwelling species such as greater glider, a set of guidelines to manage fire and ensure koala conservation strategies are effective. Our research methods can also be used to identify fire management strategies for other species around the world.

Pablo Negret has previously been funded by the National Environmental Science Program’s Threatened Species Recovery Hub.

Daniel Lunney receives support from the Commonwealth and NSW State governments, and the University of Sydney.

– ref. When fire hits, do koalas flee or stick to their tree? Answering these and other questions is vital – https://theconversation.com/when-fire-hits-do-koalas-flee-or-stick-to-their-tree-answering-these-and-other-questions-is-vital-168261

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Maund, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Newcastle

Southeastern Australia was yesterday rocked by a magnitude-5.8 earthquake with its epicentre near Mansfield in Victoria’s northeast.

The quake, which was followed by two smaller tremors, was powerful enough to damage buildings 130 kilometres away in Melbourne, and the shaking was felt as far away as Sydney, Canberra, Adelaide and Launceston.

One Victorian acquaintance said they felt the ground shake so much that “I could see things outside shaking and was wondering if I should dive under the desk”, while Melburnians told of the terrifying swaying of apartment blocks. The damage to buildings confirmed the impact a large quake can have on our built environment.

The earthquake even prompted building evacuations in Newcastle, NSW, the scene of Australia’s most damaging earthquake on record in 1989. That quake, which had a magnitude of 5.6 and an epicentre roughly 15km southwest of the Newcastle CBD, killed 13 people and hospitalised 160, and left 1,000 people homeless.

Yet in the three decades since, many large buildings have been constructed in the Newcastle CBD, including a 22-storey residential tower. The result is that many more people now live near the site of Australia’s deadliest-ever earthquake.

This does not mean we should immediately abandon these popular areas. But we do need a consistent planning approach, to decide where we build and what level of risk we should accept. Natural hazards should be a central focus of planning, and communities should be told explicitly about the risks of living in a particular area.

Earthquakes are far from unknown in Australia. Yet our planning system does not explicitly consider which areas are at unacceptable risk from earthquakes. We continue to build in earthquake-prone areas across Australia, relying solely on building design to manage these risks.

This isn’t good enough. We urgently need a national planning policy that takes account of earthquake risk, to strengthen and support building standards. Building standards alone are not sufficient. We also need to consider the number of people in an area, their ability to relocate during a disaster, and their access to emergency accommodation and recovery support.

Broader planning issues such as secondary roads for evacuation and long-term evacuation centres for those displaced must form part of the design of our cities and towns.

What do the current standards say?

Australia’s national construction code ranks buildings primarily from 1 (minor structures that are unlikely to endanger human life if they fail) to 4 (such as buildings or structures that are essential to post-disaster recovery including medical and emergency services and emergency shelters), based on relevant building standards for earthquake risk. A higher category indicates more stringent construction requirements for all buildings in that category to withstand an earthquake.

The standards also provide a “hazard design factor” that indicates requirements for buildings to withstand an earthquake in different parts of Australia. These design factors consider places such as Meckering and Dowerin in Western Australia to be highly hazardous with regard to earthquakes, whereas places like Newcastle are designated as lower-risk, despite having experienced an earthquake. Shepparton in Victoria, which is near the epicentre of yesterday’s earthquake, has an even lower rating.

While these construction standards provide some useful guidance to architects and planners, they arguably miss a key point. Earthquakes, generally speaking, are very rare but potentially very damaging. So we need to adapt our planning strategies to take account of this, rather than just relying on building standards.

À lire aussi :
We may never be able to predict earthquakes – but we can already know enough to be prepared

We need a national planning policy

Australia doesn’t have a national planning agency, although such an agency would be vital to provide a consistent approach to planning issues such as natural hazards. At the very least, we urgently need a national planning policy that addresses the risk of natural hazards such as earthquakes. This policy needs to consider the legacy of historical planning decisions, and avoid future development in high-risk areas.

Similar to areas affected by floods or bushfires, we must think before we rebuild, and consider whether to rebuild in the same area at all. With specific regard to earthquakes, we need to consider whether a particular location allows us to construct buildings that will be safe, provide safe access and escape via road and public transport, and allow for adequate evacuation centres.

In earthquake-prone locations, we should consider the risk before approving tall buildings, those with large numbers of occupants, or those that cater for lots of people who are likely to need extra assistance in an emergency, such as hospitals, childcare and aged-care centres.

À lire aussi :
Earthquakes don’t kill people; buildings do. And those lovely decorative bits are the first to fall

With Australia’s population set to exceed 49 million by 2066, bringing ever-taller buildings and more urban sprawl, earthquakes may have a growing impact on our lives. We need a strong, consistent and nationwide approach to considering natural hazards in planning as part of meeting our housing, employment and environmental needs.

Without this, we will continue to rely heavily on building standards, continue to develop in hazard-prone areas, and continue to experience damaging disasters. A national policy, in contrast, will help us build communities that are more resilient and safer.

Mark works as an environmental planning consultant.

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

– ref. Australia is no stranger to earthquakes, yet our planning polices have not adapted – https://theconversation.com/australia-is-no-stranger-to-earthquakes-yet-our-planning-polices-have-not-adapted-168470