Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Doctor of Botany, University of Melbourne

Every spring, streets across Australia turn purple with the delicate, falling flowers of jacarandas. This year, they’ll likely be flowering over Christmas.

The colour of the flowers is often debated – is it indigo, blue or purple? Well, it’s all of them and more as the colour ranges from deeper to lighter shades depending on the specimen, soils and season.

Read more: Spring is here and wattles are out in bloom: a love letter to our iconic flowers

Jacaranda is so well known to Australians and so well loved, that many of us think of them as a native. But the genus Jacaranda is actually native to South America, and the most common variety in Australia, Jacaranda mimosifolia, may be from an Argentine source.

For this reason, and others, there are many who don’t share the jacaranda love.

Festivals and local lore

Jacaranda festivals are a highlight of the year in many towns across Australia, including in Grafton, Applecross, Goodna, Camden, Woodville and Ipswich, to name a few.

The trees are even part of local lore at the University of Queensland, with students knowing of “purple panic” as they associate end of year exams with flowering.

California, Texas, Florida, southern Italy, Malta, Portugal, Spain and India boast stunning populations of jacaranda, too. I have seen them in Pretoria, South Africa’s capital, which is renowned for them, and in Gaborone, the capital of marvellous Botswana.

This is testament to how widely Jacaranda mimosifolia has been planted around the world. This is because, despite being a little frost sensitive, the tree is quite hardy when it’s young and copes with a wide range of soil and climatic conditions. And in hot climates, the trees provide an appealing, dappled shade — the flowers are a bonus.

And yet, jacaranda is classified as threatened or vulnerable in its natural habitat. This is because the land it once and still occupies in South America is being rapidly converted for agricultural use.

It’s not all about the flowers

Jacaranda mimosifolia is known to attract some birds and insects such as the African honey bee and local and native honey-eaters. The species belongs to the family Bignoniaceae, and its members are largely distributed in tropical regions.

The Bignoniaceae family contains woody species alongside jacaranda, but many other members are “lianes”, the climbers you might associate with Tarzan swinging through the jungle.

Read more: Tree ferns are older than dinosaurs. And that’s not even the most interesting thing about them

Jacarandas also have both soft and brittle wood and large, pod-like fruits which turn brown as they dry out.

These pods become almost woody and can rattle in the wind. This can be a bit disconcerting at first, but in mild wind it makes a soothing sound – a bit like a natural wind chime. And as Christmas approaches, some people gather the pods, decorate them and use them as ornaments.

While the twigs and branches of the jacaranda break easily with an almost explosive crack, large pieces of wood can be used for wood turning, especially for bowls and handles. The brittleness of the wood also leaves jacaranda vulnerable to damage during strong winds, but usually only smaller branches and twigs are affected.

So what’s not to love? A lot, actually

Jacaranda has been declared an invasive weed in South Africa and parts of Australia, with the fine seeds within the woody fruits very easy to germinate. In Africa, it has proved very difficult to eradicate and can only be planted with official permission.

Its roots can be quite extensive and, depending on soil type, may damage paths and fences. This strong root system is one of the reasons jacaranda outcompetes local species, such as native grasses and wattles, and why very few other species can grow under it. In such situations, it can form dense seedling thickets.

When it sheds its fine, feathery leaves, they have an amazing capacity to get into every nook and cranny, under roofs and into ceilings. While the living tree is fire retardant, I have seen how the leaves can form thick, tinder-dry mats which can be a fire hazard, and can completely fill or block gutters and drains, causing major damage to homes after heavy rain.

What’s more, their beautiful flowers are almost filmy when they shed, and if you add a little rain they can become very slippery.

What does the future hold?

Whether you love them or hate them, the future for Jacaranda mimosifolia in urban Australia is bright, as it’s one of the species likely to do well under climate change as it grows well in warmer and drier places.

But in rural and regional Australia, greater care must be taken in places where it has the potential to become weedy.

Perhaps the nursery industry will come up with fruitless or seedless varieties to resolve the problem, as it has with white cedar (Melia azedarach), whose fruits are so hard they represented a tripping hazard in cities.

Fruitless or seedless varieties of jacaranda would eliminate its potential weediness, ensuring it grows only where desired.

Regardless, we are likely to see the purple haze of jacarandas in flower over the Australian summer heat for many decades to come.

Read more: White cedar is a rare bird: a winter deciduous Australian tree

– ref. Why there’s a lot more to love about jacarandas than just their purple flowers – https://theconversation.com/why-theres-a-lot-more-to-love-about-jacarandas-than-just-their-purple-flowers-150851

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ilana Finefter-Rosenbluh, Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Monash University

This has been a year of schools closing and a rapid switch to online learning. It’s also been a year with no NAPLAN. The cancellation of the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy due to COVID marked the first interruption of the annual testing cycle since 2008.

NAPLAN is a standardised test, conducted yearly for students across the country in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9. It has been used by teachers, schools, education authorities, governments and the broader community to see how children are progressing against national standards in literacy and numeracy — and over time.

After the changes COVID brought to education, policymakers have an opportunity to rethink our national “high-stakes” testing system that focuses on literacy and numeracy skills. It often leads teachers to “teach to the test”, rather than ensuring students leave school with a well-rounded set of skills.

NAPLAN scores are used to gauge the quality of schools. But the overemphasis on only literacy and numeracy scores stands in the way of providing a more holistic education. We need a system that delivers confident citizens and creative problem solvers. And that means re-evaluating what we mean by a good quality school.

A history of NAPLAN and My School

Over a decade ago, Australian leaders envisioned a national system that assesses school quality. In 2010, led by Education Minister Julia Gillard, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) launched the My School website.

The move was influenced by countries such as the US and UK, which employ formal and non-formal school rankings to show the quality of schools. My School did this by reporting NAPLAN data, accompanied by up-to-date information such as schools’ missions and finances.

Julia Gillard still stands behind her controversial decision, while acknowledging the system’s serious problems. These include its overemphasis on the test, rather than a focus on the processes of learning and inquiry.

Research shows the “teach to the test” approach can narrow the curriculum focus and make it harder to cater for students’ various needs. It can limit opportunities for students to engage with the materials in ways that develop their learning and critical thinking skills.

Read more: Too many adjectives, not enough ideas: how NAPLAN forces us to teach bad writing

A change to the My School website

While educators lamented the negative impacts of NAPLAN, parents have constantly complained the My School system left them confused, feeling as if they were sitting in a test themselves. The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) commissioned a review of NAPLAN.

The very long review process consisted of public submissions, focus groups and interviews with stakeholders, parents and unions. The resulting report showed a relatively unified confusion around the purpose of NAPLAN and My School.

It also showed concerns about displaying test scores alongside the school’s socioeconomic index. This amplified the fact students in the most disadvantaged areas were substantially more likely to score below the national minimum standard for each of the test’s three domains than those in more advantaged areas.

Read more: Not all parents use NAPLAN testing in the same way – and it may be related to their background

ACARA simplified the website, noting the changes agreed to by education ministers after the review’s report came out.

Before, it compared a school’s NAPLAN result against the average result of 60 similar schools. Now, a school’s results are benchmarked against the average NAPLAN score of all students across the country with a similar background.

The website seeks to provide a greater focus on student progress (using NAPLAN results), rather than on statistical comparisons. So, before entering My School, the user must accept a list of terms, which acknowledge:

the content on this site about the performance of a school on any indicator including the National Assessment Program ─ Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests is only one aspect of the information that should be taken into consideration when looking at a school’s profile.

This statement is followed by another about the importance of speaking to “teachers and principals to get an understanding of what each school offers”. Both of these suggest there has to be more to a national system to provide meaningful information that supports transparency and accountability of Australian schools.

This notion is clearly reflected in other Australian education policies, including in the report from the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools (also known as Gonski 2.0). The report urges the education system to be more creative in the curriculum, assessment and reporting.

How can the system be improved?

It would be foolish to say there is an easy silver bullet assessment solution. But it may be worthwhile to consider some international initiatives.

All 50 US states have established educational measurement systems based on standardised testing. These have been heavily criticised for hurting schools and students. Criticisms include concerns over widespread cheating issues and schools’ inflating test scores to create the illusion of improved equity and school quality.

Read more: What makes a school good? It’s about more than just test results

US scholars lamented the nation’s “testing charade” and its measuring too little about schools and too much about families and neighbourhoods. They sought to look beyond a single test, suggesting a novel assessment framework that paints a more nuanced picture of schooling.

The framework explores what many would agree are crucial aspects of education. Aside from literacy and numeracy scores, they include:

• student-teacher relationships

• physical and emotional safety

• a sense of belonging

• student engagement and achievement

• problem solving

• relationships between the family and school

• cultural responsiveness

• social and emotional health

• community involvement.

These are measured through the use of tools such as administrative data and student and teacher surveys. One such alternative system can be found, among others, in Massachusetts, US.

Research on pilots of such a framework show a less deterministic relationship between school quality and students’ socio-economic status.

Standardised tests can be useful for educators and policymakers who seek to track some student progress and allocate resources. But these tools are limited in what they tell us and can be misleading.

Creating a new schooling framework that has a less deterministic relationship between school quality and students’ socio-economic status will be challenging. But it is possible and worthwhile in the long run.

– ref. A year without NAPLAN has given us a chance to re-evaluate how we gauge school quality – https://theconversation.com/a-year-without-naplan-has-given-us-a-chance-to-re-evaluate-how-we-gauge-school-quality-138603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julie Rowlands, Associate Professor in Education Leadership, Deakin University

Australia and the UK experience regular annual outrage over vice-chancellors’ pay. This is unsurprising – in Australia their average pay at the 37 public universities topped A$1 million in 2019. Those at prestigious Group of Eight universities were paid more than A$1.2 million on average.

Vice-chancellors’ pay has soared over recent decades (although most accepted pay cuts this year as part of COVID-related savings). In 1975, our research suggests, vice-chancellors at elite Australian research-intensive universities received about 2.9 times the pay of regular lecturers on Level B – the second-lowest and most numerous academic grade. By 2018 they were earning 16 times as much.

Similar, but less extreme, trends are evident in the UK. In 2018-19 vice-chancellors received nearly £350,000 (A$635,000) on average.

Figures are just starting to be published showing the ratio of VC-to-staff average pay at each UK institution. Of the 20 highest-paid vice-chancellors in 2017-18, London Business School had the highest ratio at 12.8 times average staff pay, with the 20th-placed University of Reading having a ratio of 9.2.

These trends prompt questions about what is going on. Universities are public institutions funded primarily by fee-paying students and taxpayers. As such, it is important to consider whether students and the public are getting value for money from these salaries. If not, we need to understand how salaries have been inflated and find ways to keep them in check.

When universities are challenged about these salary packages, they say vice-chancellors run complex “businesses” in competitive global markets, and their salaries reflect the work done and results achieved. Of course, these are demanding roles, but econometric research demonstrates little, if any, relationship between vice-chancellors’ pay and their actual performance.

What is driving these increases?

Econometricians also looked at what might be driving these pay hikes. They concluded that benchmarking and salary tournaments play a role.

Benchmarking is a technical exercise whereby universities pick comparator organisations and pitch senior staff salaries at similar levels. This tends to generate a race to the top – pay rises in one university ripple through the others.

In salary tournaments, pay levels reflect the hierarchy of organisational roles. So, if universities hire highly paid marketing or communications staff, it drives up pay levels for those above (but not below) them.

An issue of governance

Benchmarking and pay tournaments explain the mechanics of how this is happening, but not why salary resources are allocated in this way. To unpick that, we explored the governance structures of universities.

Over the past 30 years, Australian and British universities have been marketised, emulating private-sector for-profit organisations. Core to that process has been the transition of vice-chancellors from being “first among equals” in academic communities to entrepreneurial chief executive officers of quasi-corporations.

In real market businesses, CEOs hold a lot of power, including the power to enrich themselves at the cost of the dividends paid to shareholders. In the dominant agency form of governance used in business, shareholders are cast as principals and executives as their agents.

Shareholders try to assert control by rewarding executives through salaries related to performance, creating an alignment of financial interests. Executives get paid more than their work is worth, but less than the cost shareholders would incur in more closely monitoring them – and executives are freed up to act entrepreneurially.

Problematically, universities are quasi-market not-for-profit organisations. As such, they don’t have controlling owners/shareholders. They do have governing councils, which are legally recognised as principals.

The problem is council members don’t have the same financial self-interest as shareholders – the vice-chancellor’s pay does not reduce their own profits. They might even prefer to pay their vice-chancellor over the odds because it makes their university look more prestigious. It also makes it less likely they’ll leave, saving them the bother of appointing a new one.

What can be done about the problem?

Governments could act as de facto principals because universities are public bodies of which they control the purse strings. But, in Australia and the UK, governments have opted for a hands-off approach, urging universities to behave like free-market organisations and not “interfering” in their internal affairs.

It hasn’t always been like this. From 1976 to 1986, the Australian government set recommended maximum salaries for vice-chancellors. Universities were penalised financially if these guidelines were breached.

This approach was abandoned as marketisation set in. Salaries have skyrocketed since.

As a result of this flawed governance framework, universities usually allow vice-chancellors to be members of, or at least attend, the remuneration committees that set their pay. When challenged, they maintain the vice-chancellor “leaves the room” when their pay is decided. The corporate world would not tolerate such practices.

It’s clear there is a governance dynamic that is driving the pay escalation. And when salaries are not justifiable by performance, they can be said to constitute rent – an economic concept that means extracting an unjustified level of resource from an organisation as a result of ownership or control.

Publicity around increased disclosure has so far done little to rein in salary increases.

Government being a proactive principal worked before in Australia. This suggests governments could, for instance, require maximum fixed ratios between vice-chancellors’ remuneration and average academic salaries. This would require considerable political will, but there is little evidence of an appetite for that.

– ref. How Australian vice-chancellors’ pay came to average $1 million and why it’s a problem – https://theconversation.com/how-australian-vice-chancellors-pay-came-to-average-1-million-and-why-its-a-problem-150829

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caitlin Buckle, Research Associate in Housing Studies, University of Sydney

COVID-related travel restrictions and the sudden drop in tourism provided an ideal natural experiment to examine the impact of shifts in the supply of short-term rental accommodation. Our research, released today, found even modest reductions in Airbnb listings, as owners switched to longer-term rentals, increased supply of these properties. The result was lower local rents.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused various upheavals, with obvious impacts on health and employment, as well as a big drop in international migration. The impacts of these changes on rental markets are extremely difficult to track, particularly the impacts on people on the margins of the rental housing system. We investigated these impacts by analysing online listings on common online platforms for share/low-rent housing and short-stay accommodation.

Read more: As coronavirus hits holiday lettings, a shift to longer rentals could help many of us

Listings data show images, prices and descriptions of rental housing. These data provide an insight into this largely hidden sector of the housing market.

Of particular concern are people who:

What happened to these rentals?

Online platforms have transformed the ways in which people search for and advertise housing, so offer unique insights into the market.

We looked at listings of share housing and lower-cost rentals on Flatmates.com.au, Gumtree.com.au and Realestate.com.au between April and May 2020. We also looked at short-stay rentals on Airbnb.

Our primary focus was on Sydney, where Australia’s rental affordability pressures are most extreme.

We found demand for, and supply of, risky rental accommodation in Sydney continued during the pandemic.

In snapshots taken during lockdown restrictions in Sydney in April and May 2020, there were:

• 402 advertisements for rooms or granny flats on Gumtree.com.au in May

• 4,731 share accommodation listings on Flatmates.com.au in April

• 2,923 people seeking accommodation via Flatmates.com.au in April.

Read more: COVID spurred action on rough sleepers but greater homelessness challenges lie ahead

Which renters are most at risk?

Of additional concern are older people in risky rentals who are more at risk of severe COVID-19 symptoms. More than 6,400 renters over the age of 60 lived in share (“group”) households in Sydney at the time of the 2016 census. It was estimated over 4,600 were homeless.

People working in public-facing roles such as healthcare workers, and in food and accommodation services are also at risk of virus transmission. Many of them live in unsuitable rental housing due to the low-paid and transient nature of their work.

According to the 2016 census, over 8,400 healthcare and social assistance workers were living in rented group households in Sydney. Over 1,800 were estimated to be homeless. One Flatmates.com listing clearly expressed the difficulties healthcare workers’ face when seeking a share rental during the pandemic:

For those who think I might have COVID just because I’m a nurse, I can assure you that I don’t have COVID!!! 😛 (Flatmates “person” listing, April 2020)

The difficulties lower-income renters face in Australia’s major cities reflect a chronic undersupply of social and affordable housing. Pre-pandemic studies suggested the rise of short-term accommodation platforms such as Airbnb added to these pressures by draining properties from the permanent rental supply.

Read more: As demand for crisis housing soars, surely we can tap into COVID-19 vacancies

What happened to short-term rental housing?

We looked at Airbnb listings in Sydney and Hobart between March and April 2020. Using Inside Airbnb data, we found the number of whole homes listed on Airbnb for more than 60 days a year decreased by 22% in Hobart and 14% in Sydney in that time.

Vacancy rates, rental bonds data and Flatmates.com.au listings suggest these decreases occurred because Airbnb owners converted their properties into permanent rentals.

This translated to better outcomes for local renters. Even modest reductions in Airbnb listings were associated with increased permanent rental supply and lower local rents.

Median rents decreased in the June quarter in nine selected Sydney local government areas (LGAs) and Hobart’s four main LGAs. Rents fell by 2-9% in both cities.

Hobart was a particularly interesting case study because of its large penetration of Airbnb. The Airbnb market in Hobart City LGA is about 11% of the total private rental market. It experienced a much smaller drop in rental demand than Sydney because of its smaller number of temporary overseas migrants.

The drop in rents was directly proportional to the size of the Airbnb market in each LGA. Hobart City with an Airbnb density of 11% had a decrease in median rents of 9%. Glenorchy with an Airbnb density of 1% had only a 2% decrease in median rents.

Read more: Ever wondered how many Airbnbs Australia has and where they all are? We have the answers

How to improve life for renters on the margins

Our study contributes to a growing body of evidence on ways to improve the housing circumstances of lower-income renters and people at risk of homelessness.

Government action, such as increased JobSeeker and JobKeeper payments during the pandemic, has helped people to continue to pay rent and avoid resorting to precarious rental situations. However, even with these increases low-income renters can struggle to pay rent in unaffordable markets.

Obviously, increasing the supply of social and affordable housing would reduce dependence on the precarious and marginal rental market.

Similarly, a permanent increase in income-support payments such as JobSeeker and/or Commonwealth Rent Assistance would enable more households to get adequate housing without extreme financial stress.

Read more: $1 billion per year (or less) could halve rental housing stress

Higher regulation of the private rental sector would increase security for tenants and improve accommodation standards. We could look to New Zealand’s “healthy homes” framework for inspiration.

Finally, to preserve permanent housing supply in high-demand markets, states should impose controls on short-term Airbnb-style rentals.

These steps are critical to provide safe and secure accommodation for those on the margins of housing markets as part of Australia’s post-pandemic recovery.

– ref. What did COVID do to rental markets? Rents fell as owners switched from Airbnb – https://theconversation.com/what-did-covid-do-to-rental-markets-rents-fell-as-owners-switched-from-airbnb-151095

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Smith, Professor of Archaeology, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University

The devastation wrought by last summer’s unprecedented bushfires created blackened landscapes across Australia. New life is sprouting, but with fires burning again in New South Wales and Queensland we have once more seen burnt land and smoke plumes.

The findings of the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements are a reminder that we need to change our approach to bushfire management. One way of doing so is by rethinking the notion of a blackened landscape, embracing the positive qualities of contained fires.

Learning to love blackened earth will not be easy. It involves a fundamental change in aesthetic values — thinking through prejudices often attached to the colours of black and white.

‘Nice and clean’

When we were conducting fieldwork with Phyllis Wiynjorroc, the senior traditional owner at Barunga, Northern Territory, in 2005 we came across some country that had been burnt off by traditional firing.

Phyllis commented that it was “nice and clean”. To her eyes, a blackened landscape is pristine and beautiful.

Read more: Our land is burning, and western science does not have all the answers

Such landscapes are valued in many parts of the world. A darkened land can be valued because it is rich in humus. Amazonian Dark Darths, for instance, (also known as Indian black earth) are known for their fertility.

In sub-Saharan Africa, meanwhile, local people strategically enrich nutrient-poor soils to produce highly productive African Dark Earth.

As others have observed, Indigenous wisdom could help prevent Australian bushfires. Aboriginal cultural burning is low-intensity. Fires burn in a mosaic pattern (like a chessboard), allowing animals to move between areas. Afterwards, the burnt hollows of trees provide homes for selected animal species and some plants regenerate.

Aboriginal people, anthropologists and archaeologists have called for a return to cultural burning practices. Authorities also conduct controlled burning, with debatable sucess. We need more research on these aspects of Indigenous and Western science.

Read more: Strength from perpetual grief: how Aboriginal people experience the bushfire crisis

Concepts of colour

We see colour not only through a cultural lens but also through our own embodiment. A white-skinned tourist once told us that the landscape after a reduction burn looked black and dirty. She was so repulsed that she planned to make representations to politicians to ban such burns. This contrasts to the aesthetics of Aboriginal land management practices.

Non-Indigenous people typically connect the colour black with danger and bad things, while white is associated with purity and good things. This is obviously not the case for Aboriginal people.

Read more: Languages don’t all have the same number of terms for colors – scientists have a new theory why

Many Indigenous people (including the Aboriginal author of this article) find phrases like “Black Saturday” offensive. If the recent bushfire season had been dubbed “Australia’s White Devil”, it might have been similarly offensive to non-Indigenous people.

The challenge ahead will be to rethink our assumptions and create new, positive ways to think about the black colours of a burnt landscape.

Aesthetics and identity

An Australian identity for the 21st century will need to embrace new understandings of our landscapes. One artist who grappled with the aesthetics of bushfire landscapes was Fred Williams (1927-1982). His celebrated bushfire series was prompted by a fire that stopped 100 metres short of his home in February 1968. This experience fundamentally altered Williams’ vision of the Australian landscape.

His groundbreaking artistic response was a detailed and repeated focus on burnt land that helped reshape Australian perceptions of bushfire. As writer John Schauble has noted, the series contains depictions of “the fire itself, the burnt landscape, those dealing with a single burning tree and the fern diptych”.

Williams, he has written, “examines not just the forest as a whole, but the minutiae of its rebirth, depicting individual plants as well as sweeping landscapes”.

Like Williams, we will have to alter our appreciation of what an Australian environment looks like.

Where there is smoke …

Rethinking our cultural appreciation of fire as we explore links between bushfires and climate change, will also require a reappraisal of smoke.

As David Bowman states in Australian Rainforests: Islands of Green in a Land of Fire, “Living in the bush means learning to live with fire”. The gum tree naturally drops leaves and small branches. It annually sheds bark. Throughout Australia, this provides the fuel that makes fires and smoke almost inevitable.

There are many kinds of smoke. There is the unwelcome smoke of last fire season, which clouded Australian cities and towns, lapped the globe, and was visible from space.

Then there is smoke from contained fires. Smoking ceremonies have been a part of Aboriginal cultural practices for centuries, if not millennia. Ngarrindjeri Elder, Major Sumner, uses smoke as part of the ceremonies associated with the repatriation of human remains. Smoke may be used in Welcome to Country ceremonies and at the opening of Aboriginal Studies Centres.

On Phyllis Wiynjorroc’s lands, Aboriginal women use smoke from burning selected leaves to protect newborn babies. Research has shown that traditional smoking techniques can produce smoke with significant antimicrobial effects.

Noticing

Monitoring when the landscape around us is blackened through the right kind of burning will help us become more aware of (and comfortable with) regular burning practices. We will also notice when such burning is needed.

How we interpret colour is culturally conditioned and often unconscious. Negative connotations of the colour black have long been challenged.

Clearly, there is more than one form of blackened landscape. But if we can learn to love the right kind, we might be able to limit our experience of the other.

– ref. Not all blackened landscapes are bad. We must learn to love the right kind – https://theconversation.com/not-all-blackened-landscapes-are-bad-we-must-learn-to-love-the-right-kind-129547

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

The Chinese embassy has suggested the Morrison government is trying to “stoke domestic nationalism” in its denunciation of an offensive Chinese tweet depicting an Australian soldier holding a knife to a child’s throat.

In a Tuesday statement the embassy also said the government should “face up to the crux of the current setback of bilateral relationship and take constructive practical steps to help bring it back to the right track”.

It did not say how this should be done.

The statement was the latest salvo in the angry exchanges between the two countries over the tweet posted by Lijian Zhao, director general of the information department in the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

The tweet followed the Brereton report on atrocities allegedly committed by some members of Australian special forces in Afghanistan.

Morrison on Monday attacked the tweet, with its falsified image, as offensive and outrageous. The Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Frances Adamson, complained to the Chinese ambassador.

The embassy said “the rage and roar of some Australian politicians and media is nothing but misreading of and overreaction to Mr. Zhao’s tweet.

“The accusations made are simply to serve two purposes. One is to deflect public attention from the horrible atrocities by certain Australian soldiers.

“The other is to blame China for the worsening of bilateral ties. There may be another attempt to stoke domestic nationalism.”

“All of this is obviously not helpful to the resetting of bilateral relationship, ” said the statement, attributed to an embassy spokesperson. “It’s our advice that the Australian side face up to the crimes committed by the Australian soldiers in Afghanistan, hold those perpetrators accountable and bring justice to the victims.”

Having made his point about the tweet very strongly on Monday, Morrison on Tuesday did not want to escalate the row further. He told the Coalition parties meeting the Australian response did not need further amplification.

Earlier an aggressive article from the editor-in-chief of China’s Global Times, an official mouthpiece, said: “Australian troops and fleets should leave Asia and coastal waters of the Asian continent,

“More precisely, they should run as far as they can. The Morrison administration is making Australia provocative and wanting a spanking.”

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said NZ had raised the tweet with China.

“New Zealand has registered directly with Chinese authorities our concern over the use of that image,” she said.

She said the post was not factual “and, of course, that would concern us”.

Afghanstan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement it was “aware of a photo showing an Australian soldier’s misconduct with an Afghan and has started investigating the case”.

It said the ministry and the Australian government were “jointly working to investigate the misconduct of the Australian soldiers in Afghanistan. The aim of the investigation is to ensure that the perpetrators are identified and brought to justice.”

It added that Afghanistan believed “both Australia and China are key players in building and maintaining international and regional consensus on peace and development in Afghanistan. Afghanistan hopes to maintain and strengthen cooperation with the two countries.”

As the fallout from the Brereton report continues on multiple fronts, including with pressure from the government and others for those up the chain of military command to be accorded more responsibility for what had happened in Afghanistan, Defence Minister Linda Reynolds said: “the report does demonstrate very serious failures of leadership over many years in the Australian Defence Force and across the defence organisation more widely.

“The reasons for those leadership failures and command failures need serious analysis and considerations. …

“Any of the allegations of criminality in that report are going through the Office of Special Investigator and they will be carefully considered through the Australian criminal justice process with the presumption of innocence, of course. But there are serious issues that now need to be addressed in how this happened and how it was able to happen for so long.”

– ref. China hits out again – then tells Australia to fix the relationship – https://theconversation.com/china-hits-out-again-then-tells-australia-to-fix-the-relationship-151218

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Conley Tyler, Research Fellow, Asia Institute, University of Melbourne

China has certainly got Australia’s attention with a highly inflammatory tweet from a government spokesperson. It has provoked the desired reaction — a storm of outrage.

Read more: Australia demands apology from China over ‘repugnant’ slur on Twitter

This is the latest in an ever-growing list of problems between Australia and China. In recent days, China imposed new tariffs on wine, while Australia threatened legal action on barley.

None of this is inevitable. Australia and China may not be best friends anytime soon, but they can reset the relationship.

Australia could make one big gesture and two small to improve its relationship with China. As federal parliament meets in Canberra, there is even an opportunity to start this week.

What’s wrong?

It’s the multi-billion dollar question: what could the Australian government do if it wanted to reset the relationship with China?

Sometimes when China has dealt out economic punishment, the desired result has been clear — such as pressuring South Korea to cancel a missile defence system. But in Australia’s case, China’s displeasure is not directed towards one policy. It’s more a sense Australia has been acting in an unfriendly, hostile manner and this has consequences.

We know this because China recently leaked a 14-point list of grievances via the Australian media. It contained no surprises, but is useful to show where there may be room to manoeuvre.

Beijing’s 14 points

Out of the 14, there were only a few relating to what I see as non-negotiable interests. These relate to Australia’s criticism of human rights abuses in China, cyber-attacks and the South China Sea dispute.

Quite a few should also be interpreted as venting — such as China’s criticism of Australia’s foreign interference powers and Australia’s decision to exclude Huawei and ZTE from the 5G network over national security concerns. Realistically, Australia is not going to reverse these decisions.

Read more: Chinese reveal their journalists in Australia were questioned in foreign interference investigation

Similarly, Australia’s call for an inquiry into COVID-19, questions over the origins of the virus, alleged raids on Chinese journalists and revoking visas for Chinese scholars are now in the past.

Others on the list are gripes China knows the Australian government can’t do much about, such as “antagonistic” media reports or members of parliament making “outrageous” comments.

But the language used in the 14-points suggests many of the problems are less about the policy and more about how it’s been communicated, such as former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announcing foreign interference legislation as “standing up to China”.

Read more: An all-out trade war with China would cost Australia 6% of GDP

Australia may come to regret being stridently tough on China without thinking through the real-world consequences. It costs China very little to punish Australia economically in sectors where it has other suppliers or wants to encourage domestic production.

If the core problem is a perception that Australia is unfriendly, this suggests the best way to show a desire for better relations is through a big gesture — ideally one that is showy but low cost. China has said it wants actions, not words, so a speech alone won’t cut it.

The grand gesture

If Australia did want to signal a desire to be more friendly without changing any of its policies, what might it do?

The best candidate would be to sign up for the Belt and Road Initiative. There is zero chance this will happen — despite earlier neutral comments, the federal government has made this clear. But it meets all the criteria for a gesture to reset the relationship.

First, it’s entirely symbolic and doesn’t bind Australia to do anything. Australia can participate in individual projects or not as it chooses. Second, there’s no material cost to Australia, or any need to alter substantive policies. Yet it would be read as a significant gesture by China.

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

The fact that it’s not on the table shows how the range of options to pursue the national interest has been narrowed by priming the public to see China as an enemy, rather than as a challenge to be managed.

Two other options

There are two smaller options that are achievable and in Australia’s interests. And they are both before parliament.

First, the Senate is currently debating a bill to give the Foreign Affairs Minister the power to cancel international agreements entered into by state governments, local councils and universities. China has specifically named this in its grievances as “targeting” China.

Read more: Morrison’s foreign relations bill should not pass parliament. Here’s why

I’ve argued in detail why it’s a terrible piece of legislation that would impose a large compliance burden and negatively affect Australia’s international engagement. It would be in Australia’s own interests to drop it and come up with a better, more targeted response.

Second, parliament is also looking at amendments to foreign investment rules, which China singled out at the top of its list as “opaque”. Foreign investment puts money into the Australian economy so this is an area of potential mutual interest.

China’s complaint is the lack of transparency about which investments get approved — it sees the process as ideological. The Australian government could, for example, postpone proposed amendments and consult with investor countries about how the process could be improved in Australia’s self-interest.

A diplomatic mindset

Some will say Australia shouldn’t do any of these things precisely because China might want them. And China is hardly helping its case by exercising subtle or effective diplomacy.

But deciding to always oppose lets China control your behaviour. We need a negotiation mentality. We need to find things we don’t mind giving that China values in order to get what we want. That’s not “capitulation” or “obeisance” — it’s acting in our own self-interest.

Australia has no ability to remake China into a completely different country. We need to live with it. This means both standing up to China and getting along — hardening our defences, while ensuring our economic prosperity. Without an economy, a country can’t pay to keep itself safe.

Australia is not under military attack, offensive as China’s “wolf warrior diplomats” can be.

Australia and China have disputes that can and should be managed diplomatically. It is not inevitable we must have a bad relationship – and it’s certainly not a sign of success if we do.

– ref. Australia can repair its relationship with China, here are three ways to start – https://theconversation.com/australia-can-repair-its-relationship-with-china-here-are-three-ways-to-start-150455

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert McLachlan, Professor in Applied Mathematics, Massey University

Following this week’s climate emergency declaration, New Zealand will have to face up to the fact it has one of the worst climate records of industrialised nations.

Of 43 industrialised countries — known as Annex 1 countries — 31 are experiencing a drop in emissions. But 12 have seen net emissions increase between 1990 and 2018, and New Zealand is near the top of this group.

As part of the Paris Agreement, countries were asked to submit emissions reduction targets. These Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are a measure of a nation’s commitment to contribute to the goal of limiting warming to well below 2℃.

New Zealand submitted its NDC in 2015, with a headline target of bringing emissions down over the coming decade to 30% below 2005 levels. But this is not what it seems.

New Zealand’s NDC confuses the issue by adopting a target of net emissions in 2030 compared to a baseline of gross emissions in 2005. This target actually allows New Zealand to increase net emissions.

Read more: By declaring a climate emergency Jacinda Ardern needs to inspire hope, not fear

Last year, New Zealand introduced the Zero Carbon Act, making it one of few countries to have a zero-emissions goal enshrined in law. But current short-term policies do not yet keep up with the ambition to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

Fair and ambitious climate action

It was clear at the time of the Paris Agreement that countries’ initial targets would be woefully insufficient for limiting warming to well below 2℃. Therefore, the agreement requires countries to show a “progression over time” to reflect each country’s “highest possible ambition”.

In addition to increasingly more ambitious targets, countries were also asked to explain why their intended contribution to the common aim was fair. Many did so, but not New Zealand.

Some countries argued their contribution was fair because their total share of global emissions was small. Others said their per-capita emissions were small, while some high-emitting nations pointed out their per-capita emissions were falling. If those arguments weren’t applicable, some countries said it was particularly hard for them to reduce emissions, so their fair share should be smaller.

As any child in the playground complaining “That’s not fair!” would recognise, these are just self-serving excuses for inaction, rather than justifiable bases for determining fairness.

Read more: Why our response to climate change needs to be a just and careful revolution that limits pushback

Who decides what’s fair

The official United Nations (UN) review of climate plans won’t happen until 2023. For now, we have to rely on outside assessments. Two major ones, by Climate Action Tracker and the Climate Equity Reference Project, illustrate some possible approaches.

Climate Action Tracker argues an approach is fair if it would lead to the outcomes agreed in Paris, were it to be followed by all countries. On that basis, New Zealand’s NDC was rated insufficient, consistent with a world that would be 3℃ warmer.

The Climate Equity Reference Project attempts to determine universally agreed criteria of fairness, based on UN agreements and on discussions with social, environmental, development and faith groups around the world. They found there should be a component of historical responsibility — who got us into this mess, and who benefited from it?

This can be assessed by cumulative emissions from some starting point, such as 1850 or 1950. There should also be an element based on a country’s ability to act, assessed by GDP above a certain threshold.

Under this approach, New Zealand’s target would need to be for net emissions to reach zero by 2030, and to go negative after that by storing carbon and by investing in emission reductions in other countries. These conclusions were recently endorsed in a detailed study by Oxfam NZ.

Zero net emissions by 2030 is just not possible. New Zealand hasn’t even started reducing emissions yet.

Wealthy nations should shoulder more responsibility

So what can you do when you’ve agreed to something that you can’t achieve? The first step has to be to acknowledge the situation and to determine a fair contribution. New Zealand hasn’t done that yet — our present NDC (updated in April 2020 to reflect the Zero Carbon Act) does not mention fairness.

The second step is to work out the highest possible ambition. For example, New Zealand could follow the EU lead of cutting emissions by a further 42–48% in the next decade.

The Climate Change Commission, set up under the Zero Carbon Act, gives New Zealand a framework for addressing this. The commission is expected to release a consultation document in February, reviewing the NDC and preparing emissions budgets out to 2035.

The commission’s chair, Rod Carr, has acknowledged the importance of fairness in determining the NDC, saying:

I think fair share is a really good conversation for New Zealanders to have […] We’re a wealthy, developed nation. The wealthy nations, with the higher incomes per capita, do have a responsibility for doing more than the average.

The commission will also advise on how much of New Zealand’s contribution should be met domestically or internationally, and how much should be met by planting trees versus actually reducing emissions.

The latter is already a contentious issue, as the payments for “carbon farming” (which New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme, uniquely in the world, includes) are leading to unrest in the farming and environment sectors.

If people are paid to store carbon in trees today, who bears the responsibility for maintaining that store indefinitely, and who bears the risk should it fail?

Climate change minister James Shaw has acknowledged the present target is weak, compared to what the US, EU and China are now considering, and that he is expecting a stronger target to be recommended by the commission next year.

New Zealand has put in place new institutions and mechanisms to cut emissions and to phase out fossil fuels. Now, we put them to work.

– ref. Climate emergency or not, New Zealand needs to start doing its fair share of climate action – https://theconversation.com/climate-emergency-or-not-new-zealand-needs-to-start-doing-its-fair-share-of-climate-action-151083

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Arianna Olivelli, Research Affiliate, CSIRO

It’s estimated about two million tonnes of plastics enter the oceans from rivers each year. But our waterways aren’t just conveyor belts transporting land waste to the oceans: they also capture and retain litter.

Currently, the most common method for monitoring litter relies on humans conducting on-ground visual counts. This process is labour-intensive and makes it difficult to monitor many locations simultaneously or over extended periods.

As part of CSIRO’s research to end plastic waste, we’ve been developing an efficient and scalable environmental monitoring system using artificial intelligence (AI).

The system, part of a larger pilot with the City of Hobart, uses AI-based image recognition to track litter in waterways.

Global insights help build a reliable model

The technology is underpinned by two branches of AI: computer vision and deep learning. Computer vision involves training computers to understand and interpret images and videos, whereas deep learning imitates how our brains process data.

Drawing on these capabilities, we worked in partnership with Microsoft (using its Azure cloud computing services) to develop an automated system for monitoring river litter.

We have been detecting and classifying items floating on the surface of Hobart’s stormwater channels, the River Thames in the UK and the Buriganga River in Bangladesh.

We’ve remotely analysed the amount of litter, the type of litter and how this changes across locations.

Major damage from food packaging and bottles

Our work relies heavily on two applications of computer vision. These are “object detection” and “image classification”.

Object detection specifies the location of a particular object in an image and assigns it a label. Image classification assigns one or more labels to the image as a whole.

Before either of these models can be applied reliably, however, they have to be trained, tested and validated using a large number of labelled images. For this, we drew from our footage of river litter collected from Hobart, London and Dhaka.

Our dataset now contains more than 6,100 images with 14,500 individual items. The items are labelled across more than 30 categories including plastic bottles, packaging, beverage cans, paper and plastic cups.

Our data revealed food packaging, beverage bottles and cups were by far the most frequently spotted litter items across all three countries.

Fake images aren’t always harmful

To build a well-performing machine learning model, we needed a balanced set of training images featuring all item categories — even if certain categories are more frequent in real life.

Introducing synthetic (computer generated) images to our dataset was a game changer.

These images were generated by Microsoft’s synthetics team based in Seattle. They rendered various objects and superimposed them over backgrounds obtained from our field photos.

Once the digital objects were created, the superimposition process was automatic. Thus, the team managed to produce thousands of synthetic pictures over just a few weeks, rapidly expanding our training dataset.

How are objects identified?

There are a few steps by which our system identifies litter objects in photos. First, the photos are all scored against a single-label (“trash”) object detector. This identifies items of litter in the frame and stores their coordinates as annotations.

These coordinates are then used to isolate the items and score them against an image classifier which includes all the litter categories.

Finally, the model presents the category it thinks the item most likely belongs to, along with a suggested probability for how accurate this guess is.

An AI-driven approach to litter management allows a quicker response than a manual system. But when it comes to litter, the major challenge lies in creating a model that can account for millions of different shapes, colours and sizes.

Read more: As cities grow, the Internet of Things can help us get on top of the waste crisis

We wanted to build a flexible model that could be transferred to new locations and across different river settings, including smaller streams (such as Hobart’s stormwater system) and large urban rivers (such as the River Thames or the Buriganga River).

This way, rather than building new models for each location, we only have to deploy more cameras. Data retrieved could help identify litter hot spots, implement better waste-related policies and improve waste management methods to make them safer, smarter and relatively cheaper.

Keeping an eye on Hobart’s litter

We’ve also been collaborating with the City of Hobart to develop an autonomous sensor network to monitor gross pollutant traps, such as floating barriers or litter socks.

These structures, integrated into Hobart’s stormwater drainage system, are supposed to prevent solid waste such as cans, bottles, tree branches and leaves from reaching the estuary and ocean.

We currently have a network of sensors and six cameras installed under bridges tracking litter in the traps. The system can inform an operator when a trap requires emptying, or other maintenance.

Once in full use, the technology will provide almost real-time monitoring of litter around Hobart, assisting efforts to reduce environmental harm caused by stagnant and potentially hazardous waste lost to the environment.

Read more: How sensors and big data can help cut food wastage

– ref. From Hobart, to London, to Dhaka: using cameras and AI to build an automatic litter detection system – https://theconversation.com/from-hobart-to-london-to-dhaka-using-cameras-and-ai-to-build-an-automatic-litter-detection-system-150950

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

The Morrison government is confronting the ABC board over the Four Corners’ “Inside the Canberra Bubble” expose, demanding chair Ita Buttrose answer 15 questions about the program within 14 days.

The program featured Rachelle Miller, a former staffer to minister Alan Tudge, saying she’d had an affair with him, and also alleging minister Christian Porter, now attorney-general, was seen cuddling a staffer of another minister in a Canberra bar in 2017. Porter denied the claim.

The complaint, sent from Communications Minister Paul Fletcher, is the latest in a series over the years from the Coalition.

Buttrose, who was appointed by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, strongly defended the ABC in a recent speech, describing it as “one of the lynchpins of our democratic society. It is not designed to make those under scrutiny feel comfortable. It exists to provide checks and balances and hold those in power to account, and as such it is the voice, and therefore the embodiment, of Australian democracy”.

Fletcher refers to evidence given to a Senate committee by ABC managing director David Anderson last month. He said at the time, “the chair has seen the program and supports the decision to publish it”. He was giving evidence hours before the program aired.

In his letter, Fletcher asks why the board considers it appropriate to compromise the privacy of the ministers by dealing extensively with aspects of their personal lives in the way the program did.

He also questions the failure to report denials by the woman in the bar of the alleged nature of that incident and of any relationship with Porter. (Porter has said the woman denied off the record to Four Corners the characterisation of the bar incident.)

Fletcher asks why the board judges the personal lives of politicians newsworthy.

“Does the board consider that it is consistent with the duty of impartiality that the program deals with allegations solely against Liberal MPs? Does the board say that there are no such relationships involving Labor, Green or independent politicians?” he asks.

“Why should an objective observer not conclude that the program evidenced clear bias against the Liberal Party, with this bias evident in the choice of persons interviewed, the making of specific allegations in the face of clear factual denials, and the fact that the program failed to investigate or report on conduct engaged in by Labor, Greens or independent politicians?”

Miller had lodged a formal with the Department of Finance about her treatment while working for Tudge and subsequently, when she worked for Michaelia Cash.

Below is the full list of Fletcher’s questions:

1. Why does the board consider it is appropriate that the privacy of the attorney-general and minister Tudge (the ministers) should be compromised by the way in which the program deals extensively with aspects of their personal lives? How is this consistent with the stated importance of respect for privacy in the code of practice, including whether intrusion into private lives was proportionate in the circumstances?

2. How is it consistent with the code of practice’s reference to fair treatment and impartiality for the ABC to include in the program extensive materials regarding conduct over a quarter of a century ago by someone who was then a university student and even a school student?

3. The managing director told the Senate committee that all relevant information had been provided to the ministers who were the subject of the program. Is the board satisfied that this statement is true? What inquiries did the managing director make before making that statement?

4. Does the board consider it is consistent with the duty of accuracy and impartiality and the principle of fair and honest dealing that the program failed to report that the woman the subject of the alleged incident in the Public Bar and the subject of the alleged relationship with the attorney-general denied both these allegations to those preparing the program?

5. In light of these denials by the woman, does the board believe it was appropriate for the program to present statements by Senator [Sarah] Hanson-Young as purportedly corroborating Ms Miller’s allegations?

6. On what basis did the program determine that the claims concerned the same woman? Should the ABC have asked the woman whether she had spoken to Senator Hanson-Young? If the ABC did not ask this of the woman, does the board consider this to be consistent with its duties relating to accuracy and impartiality and the principle of fair and honest dealing?

7. Why does the board consider it appropriate and in the public interest that this woman’s privacy should be compromised by this program? How is the program, and the allegations contained within it, consistent with the stated importance of respect for privacy in the code of practice?

8. Why, in the judgement of the board, are the personal lives of politicians newsworthy?

9. If the board’s answer to the previous question is that the ministerial code makes it so, then:

   a. which of the conduct alleged in the program does it say breached the ministerial code?

   b. what is the relevance to the ministerial code of the allegations extensively made in the program concerning conduct by the attorney-general at several stages of his life before he became a minister?

10. Why in the judgement of the board is the existence of a consensual relationship between a politician and a staff member that occurred prior to the introduction of the ministerial code considered newsworthy?

11. Does the board consider that it is consistent with the duty of impartiality that the program deals with allegations solely against Liberal MPs? Does the board say that there are no such relationships involving Labor, Green or independent politicians?

12. How is it consistent with the duty of impartiality that the program did not disclose to viewers the strong political affiliations, opposed to the Liberal Party, of some of those who commented, including a lawyer long aligned with the labour movement, Mr Josh Bornstein and a former candidate for Labor preselection, Ms Jo Dyer?

13. How is it consistent with the duty of impartiality that the mix of those interviewed for the program was overwhelmingly weighted towards those either politically hostile towards the Liberal Party or personally hostile towards or motivated by animus against the ministers?

14. Why should an objective observer not conclude that the program evidenced clear bias against the Liberal Party, with this bias evident in the choice of persons interviewed, the making of specific allegations in the face of clear factual denials, and the fact that the program failed to investigate or report on conduct engaged in by Labor, Greens or independent politicians?

15. Why should an objective observer not conclude that the program demonstrates a failure by the board in its duty under section 8 of the ABC Act to ensure that the gathering and presentation of news and information by the ABC is accurate and impartial according to the recognised standards of objective journalism?

– ref. Government puts 15 questions to ABC chair Ita Buttrose over ‘Canberra Bubble’ program – https://theconversation.com/government-puts-15-questions-to-abc-chair-ita-buttrose-over-canberra-bubble-program-151197

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Smith, Associate Professor in Disaster and Emergency Response, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University

How does a virus stop? — Angela Gaganis, year 1, Adelaide

There’s a scene in the movie “Wreck It Ralph” where Sergeant Calhoun describes some of the bad guys, called “Cy-Bugs”.

Calhoun says “Cy-Bugs are like a virus… All they know is eat, kill, multiply”. She goes on to say “viruses do not stop!”

Well, do they? It’s a great question, Angela.

It can be confusing when some people, like the president of the United States, say this new COVID virus will go away on its own.

The short answer is that while some viruses gradually disappear, most viruses don’t just “go away”.

Viruses are actually really clever at finding ways to hide, just waiting for an opportunity to come back.

Some viruses do disappear

You might already know that some viruses give us the flu. You might not know that every flu virus that infected humans until about 120 years ago has now disappeared (or “gone extinct”, as scientists say). Some other more recent ones have disappeared too.

For instance, the virus that caused a terrible flu outbreak in 1957, which killed about 100,000 people in the United States, has now disappeared.

A virus that caused a horrible disease called “Spanish flu” is another good example. Back in 1918, this virus caused a worldwide disease outbreak (a pandemic) and lots of people sadly died. The virus continued to pop up in some places until 1921.

But by then, lots of people were immune to it, because their bodies had learned how to fight it off. This meant it didn’t carry on spreading like a pandemic, but instead just popped up here and there.

Because of this, the strain that caused the pandemic mainly disappeared.

So can we get rid of the COVID virus too?

Sometimes we try to make a virus go extinct on purpose. We generally use vaccines (sometimes called “needles” or “jabs”) to do that. A vaccine helped us get rid of a virus called smallpox, which used to be one of the world’s scariest diseases.

Vaccines are also hopefully going to get rid of viruses called polio and measles.

Scientists are trying as hard as they can to make a COVID vaccine. In fact we might end up with more than one type of vaccine to fight the COVID virus.

If we do get them, they will help a lot but might not stop the virus completely. This means some people would still get infected, although nowhere near as many people as before.

Read more: The original Sars virus disappeared – here’s why coronavirus won’t do the same

The situation is a bit similar to another new disease, called swine flu, which appeared about 11 years ago. It was different from other flu strains, so it spread a lot and became a pandemic. The same thing has happened now with COVID.

About one person in every ten people in the world caught the swine flu virus before scientists could make a vaccine.

After a year, the vaccine had arrived and less and less people were getting swine flu. The swine flu virus didn’t disappear — it was still hiding out ready to infect people. But because we had a vaccine, not as many people got sick.

How and when will COVID end?

SARS is a virus similar to COVID. It was identified in 2003 and infected more than 8,000 people. But since 2004, it has not been seen again in humans.

We got rid of it by doing a mixture of different things. This included isolation and quarantine, which you might know as “iso”.

We’re using similar measures to fight COVID. So why did they work to stop SARS, but haven’t got rid of COVID yet?

One big problem is that COVID can spread without someone even feeling ill. This means you can pass it on even if you don’t have a cough or a runny nose.

For this reason, some scientists say we will never be able to make the COVID virus go away completely.

Instead, it will probably become a disease that makes some people sick every year, like the flu. It will almost certainly be with us for a long time, even after the pandemic is over.

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au

– ref. Curious Kids: how does a virus stop? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-how-does-a-virus-stop-148916

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gary Mortimer, Professor of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour, Queensland University of Technology

Christmas marks a peak in consumerism across the West. Despite the COVID downturn, this Christmas the spending frenzy is unlikely to be dampened.

One consumer sentiment survey showed about 12% of people expect to spend more this Christmas than in previous years. About one-third expected to spend less – a similar result to previous years. And retailers are also feeling optimistic: more than one in three expect Christmas sales to exceed 2019 by more than 5%.

All this festive spending creates significant waste, particularly in the form of unwanted gifts.

So before you finish your Christmas shopping, it’s worth considering why we feel forced to spend big on gifts during the silly season, and whether there are better, greener alternatives.

Really, you shouldn’t have

Research by ING found A$400 million worth of unwanted presents were gifted in Christmas 2018, comprising about 10 million items.

Topping the list were novelty items (51%), candles (40%), pamper products (40%), pyjamas or slippers (35%) and underwear or socks (32%).

Charity groups are inundated with unwanted goods directly after Christmas. Not all of these are resold – charities reportedly send about 60,000 tonnes of unwanted items to landfill every year.

This waste comes at a huge cost, not only to household budgets but also to the environment. Recent research on the topic is hard to come by, but in 2007 researchers from the Stockholm Environment Institute examined consumption over the festive season, and found 80kg of carbon dioxide per person could be saved if unwanted gifts were not purchased.

Why do we feel obliged to buy?

Gift-giving is a complex emotional process. And it’s not necessarily always a positive experience: a 2016 survey found 43% of Australian shoppers felt forced to spend money at Christmas.

Research suggests Christmas gift-giving is less about altruism, and becoming more about social pressure to reciprocate – the expectation that when we receive a gift, we will give one in return. And reciprocity does not necessarily bring happiness. One study dating back to 1990 found those who gave an obligatory gift had negative feelings about the act afterwards.

In particular, some respondents felt their freedom to choose a gift was curtailed by perceived obligations – that they had to reciprocate with a gift of similar type, price or brand. This triggered psychological “reactance” – the unpleasant arousal people experience when their free behaviours are threatened.

Read more: How to choose the right Christmas gift: tips from psychological research

Gift-giving can be a way of showing appreciation, but you don’t necessarily need to spend up big. Research shows while gift-givers might expect a gift to be appreciated more if it was expensive, recipients reported no such association.

Or you could spend nothing at all, by regifting an unwanted present. In some circles of contemporary society, regifting is frowned upon. Respondents in one study went so far as to describe regifters as lazy, thoughtless and disrespectful.

However in some cultures, regifting is considered normal. For example, a classic 1922 ethnographic study describes a ritual followed by people of the Massim archipelago in Papua New Guinea. Called Kula, it involves people travelling to a nearby island and presenting residents with shells and necklaces. The recipients would keep the gifts for a time, then pass them to others, and on it went.

To these islanders, keeping gifts destroyed the value created by the act of giving, while regifting maintained it.

5 ways to have a green Christmas

There are lots of ways to give a gift without hurting the planet. And since the COVID-19 pandemic forced many activities online, the options are even greater. Here are a five options:

1. Virtual and digital gifts: these range from electronic gift vouchers that allow the receiver to buy what they really want, to subscriptions to streaming services, audiobooks and even virtual bouquets.

Due to COVID, virtual travel, which began for many as a temporary measure, may now be around to stay. Or you could gift a virtual Christmas event such as cooking classes, cocktail-making experiences and virtual craft workshops.

2. Give an experience: Experiences are events such as concerts, jet boating, spa treatments or a romantic evening cruise. Research shows experiential gifts contribute more to consumer happiness than material purchases.

Giving experiential gifts also strengthens social connections between givers and recipients.

Read more: Virtual reality has been boosted by coronavirus – here’s how to avoid it leading us to dystopia

3. Regift: Regifting, if done thoughtfully, can be a great way to avoid unwanted presents ending up in landfill.

The practice is actually quite common. One consumer survey shows when people receive unwanted gifts, 25% give them to someone else. And on websites such as Gumtree, you can even buy other people’s unwanted gifts. At the time of writing, products for sale included an unworn Maurice Lacroix men’s watch, an electric drum kit and a new Samsung smart TV.

4. Go handmade: Handmade gifts are unique and help forge a connection between the giver and the receiver. And even when you purchase the handmade gift rather than make it yourself, research shows recipients usually perceive that the gift symbolically contains “love”.

Etsy has become the global marketplace for handmade gifts and vintage treasures. But keep in mind that if you order a handmade gift from the other side of the world, transporting it will generate carbon emissions.

5. Upcycle: Upcycling prolongs the life of old objects by creatively reshaping them into new products. For example, an old jar might become a hanging plant pot, or a reclaimed door might be repurposed as a table top.

Research has found when people are told about the past identity or “story” of an upcycled product, the person feels “special” and demand for the product increases.

Read more: Your Christmas shopping could harm or help the planet. Which will it be?

– ref. Feeling pressured to buy Christmas presents? Read this (and think twice before buying candles) – https://theconversation.com/feeling-pressured-to-buy-christmas-presents-read-this-and-think-twice-before-buying-candles-150174

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alasdair Macintyre, Associate lecturer visual arts, artist, PhD candidate, Australian Catholic University

Review: The Motorcycle — Art, Design, Desire at Queensland Art Gallery of Modern Art

Motorcycles are such a guy thing, right? Think Steve McQueen in The Great Escape, Arthur Fonzarelli in television’s Happy Days and Daniel Craig’s James Bond. All blokes, exuding controlled coolness, astride impressively loud, throbbing engines.

Yet in Motorcycles — Design, Art, Desire, this summer’s blockbuster exhibition at Queensland Art Gallery of Modern Art (QAGoMA), there is a mean red motorcycle that was ridden by the fastest Australian woman on two wheels, Kim Krebs.

How fast did she go? The numbers are hard to get your head around: 244 miles per hour. That’s miles. In kilometres that is a tick under 350 per hour. Think of the legal limit you can drive along the highway and multiply it by three … and she is still attempting to go even faster.

Kreb’s record breaking ride is one of a hundred motorcycles in the exhibition, drawn from collections all over the world by curators Charles M. Falco and Ultan Guilfoyle.

Read more: Celebrating the feminist Holden

Motorcycles? In an art gallery?

This is a niche category exhibition that follows similar QAGoMA shows such as the fashion house Valentino Retrospective, Past/Present/Future (2010), California Design: Living in a Modern Way (2013-14) and Marvel: Creating the Cinematic Universe in 2017.

The Marvel exhibition drew over a quarter of a million visitors (I confess I had season tickets and still miss seeing Hulkbuster each week) clearly indicating such shows, however singular, have broad appeal.

QAGoMA director Chris Saines says the gallery runs with a broad definition of what constitutes modern culture. Accordingly, people who ordinarily would not visit art galleries beat a path to this one for specialised exhibitions. Niche shows appeal to specific demographics, who have a rusted on dedication to their passion.

With the opening of Queensland’s borders following coronavirus restrictions perfectly coinciding with this exhibition, there will surely be a steady stream of two-wheeled devotees making their way to Brisbane.

But this show will also educate and inform those with an interest in design, modern history, popular culture, and art, who are willing to learn something new, and like me, may start to see motorcycles in a different way.

Read more: What evolution and motorcycles have in common: let’s take a ride across Australia

From original steampunk to future motors

Encompassing early models from the Victorian era (bicycles with an engine strapped to them, very steampunk), through the mid-20th century’s chrome muscle machines, to sleek concept bikes of the future powered by electricity, this exhibition covers the motorbike’s 150-year history.

All the big names are here: Norton, Triumph, BSA, Ducati, Honda, Kawasaki. There are also a number of bespoke style designers, including Australia’s Deus Ex Machina, whose ultracool Drover’s Dog (2009) accommodates a surfboard on its side.

Exhibition designer Michael O’Sullivan has used the gallery’s expansive ground floor to great effect. The angular architecture reflects and amplifies the stars of the show, setting this exhibition apart from a mere motor show exposition.

Each item is treated like a fine art object, gleaming chrome lit to perfection, positioned just so. Information panels inform the curious lay person and digital projection screens show great motorcycle movie moments to seal the deal.

There are of course elements within the design of the motorcycles that reflect fine art values of their era, most notably German Bauhaus and Art Deco influences, when motorcycles morphed from the simple functionality of economical transportation to aesthetically pleasing status symbols.

Read more: Explainer: who owns the copyright to your tattoo?

Slow riders and low riders

The oldest known motorcycle, and the first that exhibition visitors see, was developed by Frenchman Louis-Guillaume Perreaux. Steam-powered, the 1871 model had a top speed of 14 kilometres per hour and being mainly made of timber, would not have been a comfortable ride.

Contrast this with the cruiser motorcycles a century later, most notably by Harley-Davidson, when riders reclined on customised bikes, such as the almost impossibly elongated Chopper, just like the one ridden by Dennis Hopper and Peter Fonda in Easy Rider (1969).

On the eve of the exhibition, land racer Krebs described what it feels like to ride in excess of 200 miles per hour. She spoke of feeling a kind of serenity, as she travels so fast across the salt plains that the roar of her turbo-charged engine is left far behind her.

“What are you aiming for?” a journalist asked her.

“I am aiming for forever”, she replied.

Just like something an artist would say.

The Motorcycle — Art, Design, Desire is showing at QAGOMA until 26 April 2021.

– ref. Born to be wild — revelling in the design and desire of the motorcycle – https://theconversation.com/born-to-be-wild-revelling-in-the-design-and-desire-of-the-motorcycle-150067

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shane Cronin, Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Auckland

The decision by Worksafe, a government agency focused on workplace safety, to bring criminal charges against 13 parties in relation to last December’s eruption of Whakaari/White Island heralds a new chapter for volcano scientists in New Zealand.

On December 9, 2019, 22 people died and 25 suffered injuries when Whakaari erupted. They were not locals caught by a bigger than expected eruption. They were tourists and their guides on an adventure tourism visit to the island and the volcanic vent.

It is now clear that even though the volcanic alert level had been raised to “unrest” several days before the eruption, the visitors and their guides were unaware of the likelihood and especially the consequences of an eruption.

Had they known, as we do now, that there was a 10% chance of an eruption over a 48-hour period and their risk of death and injury was so high, no one would have gone onto the island.

Why didn’t we know that at the time? We live in an uneasy truce with volcanoes, and we do not make the rules, nor do we even know many of them. As deeply as we delve into the physical and chemical processes behind volcanic activity, each eruption brings surprises.

Read more: New Zealand’s White Island is likely to erupt violently again, but a new alert system could give hours of warning and save lives

Volcano warnings

The main science agency responsible for volcanic warnings, GNS Science, is one of the parties charged. To what extent should volcanologists, or the agency they work for, be culpable for the loss of lives during an eruption?

Volcanology has always been an observational activity. Throughout the world, descriptions of eruptions are recorded in cave art, legend and myriad images and cultural references. Formal descriptions of volcanoes are just an extension of this.

In this age of big data, micro-sensors and instant communication technologies, we have made rapid advances in our understanding of volcano behaviour. We now apply computational and numerical models to recognise signal patterns that may precede an eruption, but our knowledge of the actual processes behind these lags behind.

This knowledge gap often leads to hesitation in applying our most advanced tools.

Bolder implementation of new technologies

The Worksafe charges are a symptom of society demanding greater precision in warnings of volcanic eruptions. These are not unreasonable demands, considering the tragic consequences of missing the warning signals.

How do we face up to this expectation as volcanologists?

Primarily, we must be brave enough to try new things. Technology untested by actual events is risky, but volcanoes are not an ideal production line. They do not erupt often enough, or on a convenient schedule to effectively develop and test new systems well.

Also, each volcano is subtly different. This means we must be prepared as scientists and science agencies to be wrong, and we must prepare our communities for our failures.

Read more: Call for clearer risk information for tourists following Whakaari/White Island tragedy

We must harness the criticism of society to be bolder in our work. Clearly, we have not done enough to avoid the Whakaari tragedy, nor many other catastrophes over the past decades around the world. None of these calamities can be laid solely at the feet of volcano scientists, but our science advances can help other agencies do their work better.

Call for open flow of information

We must also push against political and corporate systems that attempt to control or sanitise science advice. Fear of being held legally or socially culpable for well-intentioned, but ultimately incorrect advice means new technology takes too long to be implemented.

The prime minister’s chief science advisor, Juliet Gerrard, has issued a statement highlighting the importance of science advice in emergencies.

Attempts to limit access to science through institutional or other barriers and preventing scientists from giving their free and frank advice in emergency situations […] places a handicap on good decision making by our officials and politicians. Only by being able to access all the available knowledge, including its level of uncertainty and whether it is disputed, can decision makers effectively weigh up the possible consequences of the paths forward, guided by the best evidence.

We must be much clearer about how volcanic hazard and risk is communicated to tourists, especially on volcanoes with a history of frequent eruptions. It is telling that the last five eruptions at Whakaari were not predicted, despite constant seismic monitoring over this time.

We also need a more proactive system that operates in real time and is more intuitive than the current volcanic alert level approach used widely around the world.

Questions and blame

Where does this leave volcano scientists in considering the court proceedings against GNS Science? Perhaps, the best approach is to welcome it.

A healthy society should review the role of science agencies in the prevention of disasters. Hard questions need to be asked so victims and their families can be sure we have done our best, with the best of our knowledge at the time.

But this should not be about blame. It should be about closing the gap between societal expectations of hazard information and how it is used or enforced at dangerous volcanoes — which is another topic addressed by charges also laid against those responsible for administering access to Whakaari.

From a scientist’s point of view, these charges against a science agency should be a call for innovation. Recognising the mass fatalities at Whakaari and other monitored volcanoes in recent times (including Ontake, Japan in 2014 and Merapi, Indonesia in 2010), we must do better to avoid a possible “next time”.

– ref. Scientists should welcome charges against agency over Whakaari/White Island — if it helps improve early warning systems – https://theconversation.com/scientists-should-welcome-charges-against-agency-over-whakaari-white-island-if-it-helps-improve-early-warning-systems-151174

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Aidan Hotan, ASKAP lead scientist, CSIRO

Astronomers have mapped about a million previously undiscovered galaxies beyond the Milky Way, in the most detailed survey of the southern sky ever carried out using radio waves.

The Rapid ASKAP Continuum Survey (or RACS) has placed the CSIRO’s Australian SKA Pathfinder radio telescope (ASKAP) firmly on the international astronomy map.

While past surveys have taken years to complete, ASKAP’s RACS survey was conducted in less than two weeks — smashing previous records for speed. Data gathered have produced images five times more sensitive and twice as detailed as previous ones.

What is radio astronomy?

Modern astronomy is a multi-wavelength enterprise. What do we mean by this?

Well, most objects in the universe (including humans) emit radiation over a broad spectrum, called the electromagnetic spectrum. This includes both visible and invisible light such as X-rays, ultraviolet light, infrared light and radio waves.

To understand the universe, we need to observe the entire electromagnetic spectrum as each wavelength carries different information.

Radio waves have the longest wavelength of all forms of light. They allow us to study some of the most extreme environments in the universe, from cold clouds of gas to supermassive black holes.

Long wavelengths pass through clouds, dust and the atmosphere with ease, but need to be received with large antennas. Australia’s wide open (but relatively low-altitude) spaces are the perfect place to build large radio telescopes.

We have some of the most spectacular views of the centre of the Milky Way from our position in the Southern Hemisphere. Indigenous astronomers have appreciated this benefit for millennia.

Read more: From 7809 Marcialangton to 7630 Yidumduma: 5 asteroids named after Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

A stellar breakthrough

Radio astronomy is a relatively new field of research, dating back to the 1930s.

The first detailed 30cm radio map of the southern sky — which includes everything a telescope can see from its location in the Southern Hemisphere — was Sydney University’s Molonglo Sky Survey. Completed in 2006, this survey took almost a decade to observe 25% of the entire sky and produce final data products.

Our team at CSIRO’s Astronomy and Space Science division has smashed this record by surveying 83% of the sky in just ten days.

With the RACS survey we produced 903 images, each requiring 15 minutes of exposure time. We then combined these into one map covering the entire area.

The resulting panorama of the radio sky will look surprisingly familiar to anyone who has looked up at the night sky themselves. In our photos, however, nearly all the bright points are entire galaxies, rather than individual stars.

Take our virtual tour below.

Astronomers working on the catalogue have identified about three million galaxies — considerably more than the 260,000 galaxies identified during the Molonglo Sky Survey.

Why do we need to map the universe?

We know how important maps are on Earth. They provide crucial navigational assistance and offer information about terrain which is useful for land management.

Similarly, maps of the sky provide astronomers with important context for research and statistical power. They can tell us how certain galaxies behave, such as whether they exist in clusters of companions or drift through space on their own.

Read more: When you look up, how far back in time do you see?

Being able to conduct an all-sky survey in less than two weeks opens numerous opportunities for research.

For example, little is known about how the radio sky changes over timescales of days to months. We can now regularly revisit each of the three million galaxies identified in the RACS catalogue to track any differences.

Also, some of the largest unanswered questions in astronomy relate to how galaxies became the elliptical, spiral, or irregular shapes we see. A popular theory suggests large galaxies grow via the merger of many smaller ones.

But the details of this process are elusive and difficult to reconcile with simulations. Understanding the 13 billion or so years of our universe’s cosmic history requires a telescope that can see across vast distances and accurately map everything it finds.

High technology putting new goals within reach

The CSIRO’s RACS survey is an amazing advance made possible by huge leaps in space tech. The ASKAP radio telescope, which became fully operational in February last year, was designed for speed.

CSIRO’s engineers developed innovative radio receivers called “phased array feeds” and high-speed digital signal processors specifically for ASKAP. It’s these technologies that provide ASKAP’s wide field of view and rapid surveying capability.

Over the next few years, ASKAP is expected to conduct even more sensitive surveys in different wavelength bands.

In the meantime, the RACS survey catalogue is greatly improving our knowledge of the radio sky. It’ll continue to be a key resource for researchers around the world. Full resolution images can be downloaded from the ASKAP data archive.

– ref. We’ve mapped a million previously undiscovered galaxies beyond the Milky Way. Take the virtual tour here. – https://theconversation.com/weve-mapped-a-million-previously-undiscovered-galaxies-beyond-the-milky-way-take-the-virtual-tour-here-148442

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Herrero, Research Leader in Virology and Infectious Disease, Griffith University

Over recent weeks and months, we’ve heard of several COVID cases in which people have tested positive after previously clearing the virus.

Scientists are hopeful being infected with COVID-19 confers immunity for a length of time. But some of these instances have raised concerns about reinfection. Although rare, it seems to be possible.

The other thing which could be at play in many of these cases is “prolonged viral shedding”.

Both phenomena are probably more common than we realise. But it’s important to understand the differences between the two.

What is viral shedding?

When you’re sick with a virus, the cells in your body hosting the infection release infectious virus particles, which you then shed into the environment. This process is called viral shedding.

For SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, shedding primarily occurs when we talk, cough, sneeze, or even exhale. SARS-CoV-2 can be shed in a person’s stool, too.

Research shows shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 begins before a person starts displaying symptoms, and peaks at or just after symptom onset (usually four to six days after infection).

Shedding can continue for several weeks after a person’s symptoms have resolved — there’s no standard time frame.

Research has identified shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 virus particles from up to eight days after symptom onset in hospitalised patients, to up to 70 days after diagnosis in an immunocompromised person.

Not all shedding is equal

In the above cases, the viral particles being shed are infectious, which is what we as virologists consider viral shedding to mean. But during COVID-19, the definition of shedding has been broadened to include the shedding of viral genetic material (RNA).

Although RNA constitutes fragments of the virus, these aren’t necessarily infectious fragments.

Studies measuring the shedding of viral genetic material from the respiratory tract have reported shedding typically lasts around 17 days.

Shedding of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material can persist for more than 80 days in the upper respiratory tract, and over 120 days in the stool.

Where people have recovered and then later test positive again — or return a “weak positive” result — the test has picked up viral genetic material. We don’t know whether the virus is infectious at this point.

Read more: A man in Hong Kong caught COVID-19 a second time. Here’s why that’s not surprising (and there’s no need to panic)

So, how can you tell?

Currently there’s no simple way to determine whether a person is shedding infectious virus, or how much.

The “gold standard” method used to diagnose COVID-19 is the PCR test. PCR tests detect viral genetic material (RNA in the case of SARS-CoV-2) from a patient’s swabbed samples.

But they can’t determine whether the virus is alive or dead, or, in other words, if the virus is infectious.

The level of infectious SARS-CoV-2 can only be determined using infectivity methods (called assays). These are common in research laboratories, but are not used as diagnostic tests.

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

Why do some people shed for longer?

There’s no evidence to suggest people who shed SARS-CoV-2 genetic material for a long time in their faeces have been sicker with COVID-19. Though some research has found prolonged shedding in the respiratory tract can be linked to more severe disease.

We don’t fully understand the factors that make a person a “long shedder”, but research into this is ongoing. Certain groups have been associated with prolonged SARS-CoV-2 shedding, including males, children, older adults, and people with compromised immune systems.

There’s also speculation factors such as the amount of SARS-CoV-2 which caused the infection (the viral dose), and possibly the viral strain, may play a role.

In the absence of targeted antiviral drugs, shedding can’t be stopped. But, by sticking to COVID-safe guidelines such as keeping an adequate distance from others, wearing a face mask, and practising hand hygiene, we can minimise the risks from a person unknowingly shedding infectious virus.

Long viral shedding versus reinfection

Reports of reinfection — in the sense of a new infection, rather than prolonged or intermittent shedding of the same one — have been limited to date. One source collating confirmed reinfection cases indicates there have been just 26 worldwide.

Evidence we have from other coronaviruses suggests the risk of reinfection may be lower in the first 90 days after initial infection.

Some studies on COVID-19, both published and not yet formally published in a peer-reviewed journal, suggest immunity may last for several months. But we need more evidence on this topic, which we will accumulate as time passes.

Where a person does test positive several weeks or months after they’ve recovered, the difficulty is confirming reinfection. That’s because this requires genetic testing of both infections to determine whether they are in fact different.

Given this is time consuming and the technology isn’t widely accessible, it’s highly likely there are more than 26 cases of reinfection around the world.

Read more: New research suggests immunity to COVID is better than we first thought

Shedding, reinfection and community spread

While the virus appears to be under good control in Australia, prolonged viral shedding and reinfection are probably two of the most important drivers of SARS-CoV-2 community transmission around the world.

Understanding how and for how long people can shed SARS-CoV-2, and which factors increase the risk of viral shedding or reinfection, can help us to improve surveillance and reduce the rate at which the virus spreads.

– ref. What’s the difference between viral shedding and reinfection with COVID-19? – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-difference-between-viral-shedding-and-reinfection-with-covid-19-150547

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan McConnell, Research Fellow at the Australian German Climate and Energy College, University of Melbourne

Several Australian states are going it alone on the the energy transition. The policies adopted by New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and others represent major departures from the existing national approach, and run counter to the neoliberal principles underpinning the current system.

Most notably, the NSW Coalition government announced its electricity infrastructure roadmap. The government says by 2030, the policy will enable A$32 billion in private sector investment, and bring 12 gigawatts of new renewable energy capacity online. This is roughly equivalent to the amount of large-scale wind and solar installed in the National Electricity Market to date.

The states were forced to act on renewables after the federal government effectively vacated the policy space. The NSW law has been widely hailed as a victory for the clean energy transition, but also represents a return to the centrally planned system of decades past. In fact, it may well signal the breakup of the National Electricity Market as we know it today.

This presents risks and challenges which, if not managed carefully, may result in white elephants and higher electricity bills for consumers.

A very brief history of the National Electricity Market

Before the 1990s, electricity supply was fundamentally understood as a state responsibility. State-owned companies were tasked with generating, distributing and supplying electricity.

But in the 1990s, things changed, for several reasons. First, the cost of electricity supply was rising at a concerning rate. Second, neoliberalism began to dominate economic reform in Australia and internationally. Governments saw their jobs less as providing services (such as electricity), and more as promoting markets and competition to make systems, such as electricity supply, more efficient.

Also in the 1990s, two key inquiries – the Productivity Commission’s report into energy generation and distribution, and the Hilmer inquiry into national competition policy – identified issues in the electricity industry. These included wasteful overinvestment, largely driven by the political imperatives of keeping the lights on at all costs, and creating jobs in specific locations and electorates.

Read more: The National Electricity Market has served its purpose – it’s time to move on

A new, reformed system, the National Electricity Market, began operating in 1998. It included all states and territories except Western Australia and the Northern Territory. In this new system, market logic – rather than central planners and bureaucrats – would decide the the location, timing and type of new energy generation investment. Private firms would supply electricity to consumers using price signals and contract markets to guide decisions.

Key to this new system was a set of highly prescriptive rules, and a process to develop them. This culminated in the Australian Energy Market Agreement and the establishment of three national energy market institutions we have today:

• Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC), which develops the rules
• Australian Energy Regulator (AER), which enforces the rules
• Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), which operates the market and is supposed to follow the rules.

This market structure, and strict separation of powers and functions, was partly to isolate policy and investments from the political whims of the day.

Market breakdown

The NSW government legislation is the latest, and perhaps most significant, in a string of policies to reject the old national market approach. Grattan Institute energy director Tony Wood described it as “the most extreme intervention we have seen to date, and moves even more closely to a centrally planned energy system and away from a market approach, than anything else I have seen to date”.

NSW is not alone here. In Victoria, the Andrews government is building the Southern Hemisphere’s biggest battery at Geelong, under a new law that sits outside the national framework. And government this month also announced a A$550 million budget plan to create six renewable energy hubs, and also bring another 600 megawatts of renewable energy generation online.

In recent years Queensland introduced a third state-owned electricity generator, CleanCo, and South Australia built its battery and peaking generators outside the national market framework.

Such interventions are not limited to the states. The federal government is building the Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro scheme. It has threatened to build a 1,000MW gas generator, and has established a scheme to underwrite energy investments. And the Energy Security Board has the power to make rules outside the regular process, which it used most recently to tighten the standards around energy reliability.

Read more: NSW has joined China, South Korea and Japan as climate leaders. Now it’s time for the rest of Australia to follow

The breakdown can largely be sheeted home to one factor: a lack of climate policy at a national level. This has left the states with little option than to manage the energy transition, and climate action, on their own.

The NSW policy will undoubtedly affect projects already in the pipeline. Following the announcement, both AGL and Energy Australia put the brakes on battery and gas projects in the state.

And the Australian Energy Council, which represents major electricity retailers, expressed “concern about its impact on the functioning of an increasingly interconnected National Electricity Market and the complexity it will certainly add to investment decisions”.

Energy market 2.0?

It’s hard to argue against a democratically elected state government pursuing what is within its constitutional remit – particularly given the federal failure on climate policy. But existing institutions and frameworks are not equipped to govern that kind of system.

So if the states do continue to go it alone, we need a new national accord which clarifies the roles and responsibilities of each government. That would ensure we don’t repeat mistakes of the past, and in particular excessive over investment for which consumers foot the bill.

Read more: Explainer: what is the electricity transmission system, and why does it need fixing?

– ref. Australia’s states have been forced to go it alone on renewable energy, but it’s a risky strategy – https://theconversation.com/australias-states-have-been-forced-to-go-it-alone-on-renewable-energy-but-its-a-risky-strategy-151086

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Mundy, Senior research fellow, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

The middle years of school are defined as being from 8-14 years of age. These were often described as a latent or quiet phase of development.

We now understand this is not the case — the middle years are a foundational period for development. But there is not enough support in the education system to help young people during this period — which includes the often stressful transition from primary to secondary school.

The importance of the middle years

Much of our new understanding on the importance of the middle years comes from studies looking at the effects of puberty, such as the Childhood to Adolescence Transition Study (CATS). This has been following 1,200 Melbourne students from when they were in Year 3. In 2020, members of the group are aged 16-17.

Most of our knowledge of puberty has focused on a period that begins at around 10-11 years of age with the production of oestrogen and testosterone. This results in the development of secondary sexual characteristics (breasts, facial hair) and the ability to reproduce.

Before this period, is a process that begins at around 6-8 years of age with a rise in adrenal hormones. These hormones lead to the development of armpit hair and pubic hair, as well as acne.

Apart from infancy, the biological changes of puberty bring the greatest shifts in brain development. These pubertal changes drive a different engagement with the social world.

Read more: Book review: The New Puberty

During the middle years, which coincide with puberty, peer relationships become increasingly important. In a recent study, we found two-thirds of students between the ages of 8 and 14 reported being bullied frequently in the past four weeks. And 35% reported frequent bullying in multiple forms, such as physical and verbal attacks.

It is now increasingly recognised bullying peaks during these middle years — rates are typically lower in early primary school. For boys, bullying declines with age, but for girls it persists into secondary school.

How children’s health affects education

There is a close connection between health and education during the middle years, particularly in the transition to secondary school.

In a typical classroom in mid-primary school, around five students have emotional problems and five have behavioural problems. These students will begin secondary school a year behind their peers in numeracy skills.

This is independent of the presence of developmental vulnerabilities children may have when they start school. These include having problems that impact physical health and/or language and communication skills.

Read more: 3 out of 10 girls skip class because of painful periods. And most won’t talk to their teacher about it

Governments have invested heavily in preschool education and preparing children for school entry, such as increasing funding for more children to attend kindergarten. They also invest in identification and support of younger children with particular developmental vulnerabilities. But the middle years haven’t seen the same level of commitment.

In 2015, the Victorian Auditor General tabled a report into school transitions (early childhood to prep, prep to primary and primary to secondary). It noted the education department …

has developed a comprehensive and well-researched framework to support early-years transitions. This has led to a greater uniformity of approach and contributed to improved early-years transition outcomes. However, it does not provide the same levels of support and guidance to schools to transition students from primary to secondary school.

Similarly, there is still a lack of evidence-based, system-wide strategies that adequately respond to the educational, social and emotional needs of children in the transition to secondary school. This is despite evidence a stressful transition to secondary school may have long-term negative outcomes, such as school disengagement and poor academic performance.

The middle years have also been neglected when it comes to health. There have been major investments in service delivery systems for students in the early years and older adolescents (such as Headspace). In contrast, little attention has been given to the middle years. Yet one half of all adult mental health problems emerge by age 14 with symptoms often appearing in the preceding years.

Remote learning could have made it worse

Remote learning and physical distancing during COVID- 19 may have an unequal effect on students’ mental health and learning during the middle years.

Remote learning could cause greater disengagement and loss of learning for students who have recently transitioned to secondary school. With the disruption, many students may not have established strong routines and relationships with peers and teachers.

Students who fall behind during this period may find it difficult to catch up without proper support.

Read more: One quarter of Australian 11-12 year olds don’t have the literacy and numeracy skills they need

During the middle years, there is a shift in the relationship between parents and children — as children start to orient away from parents, towards their peer group. These changes can be seen as an opportunity to reestablish parent-child relationships, especially in the COVID-19 climate.

Research shows when parents are interested in their child’s learning, involved in an age appropriate way and have good communication with their child, it helps the child’s development, reduces risky behaviours and leads to fewer mental health problems.

Parents’ involvement in their child’s learning also leads to better academic performance and stronger school engagement.

The rise in remote learning and move to COVID-normal offers a chance for parents to become more actively involved with their child’s learning.

Beyond the family home, schools are the most important context for development. School teachers can successfully identify students that are likely to encounter issues in Year 7. Connection and familiarity between teachers and students can improve engagement with school.

Teachers also have an important role in providing a positive social environment for peer relationships and skill development.

Although the middle years are a time when students are at risk of school disengagement and health problems, these years are also a time of opportunity. Environmental effects, such as the school and peer environment, are particularly strong and intervention may have the greatest impact.

All young people must be supported during this phase of life. And governments must provide targeted programs to support those most at risk.

This should be aimed at strengthening social and emotional learning, improving the primary to secondary school transition, and enabling more effective links between education and health services.

This article was written with input from masters student Helen Ramsay.

– ref. The missing middle: puberty is a critical time at school, so why aren’t we investing in it more? – https://theconversation.com/the-missing-middle-puberty-is-a-critical-time-at-school-so-why-arent-we-investing-in-it-more-150071

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Juan Francisco Salazar, Professor, School of Humanities and Communication Arts & Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University

Antarctica Day celebrates the icy continent and its unique governance system. It’s the anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty’s adoption on December 1 1959. Framed in a spirit of global co-operation, the treaty acknowledges Antarctica does not belong to any one country. Article IV states:

No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica or create any rights of sovereignty in Antarctica.

In practice the region is the subject of intense commercial and geopolitical interest. Our work over the past four years has made clear the benefits of developing strategies to foster international co-operation among the five so-called Antarctic “gateway” cities rather than international competition.

Read more: Five cities that could change the future of Antarctica

These five cities on the Southern Ocean rim — Cape Town, Christchurch, Hobart, Punta Arenas and Ushuaia — share a unique interest in Antarctica and an opportunity to shape its future.

How do their residents feel about Antarctica?

Our survey of 1,659 residents of these cities in July this year found they care deeply about the icy continent. Overall, and for many particular groups, environmental care greatly outweighs economic interests. Many residents express hope that this care might translate into more protective policies and action.

However, emotions were mixed, with pessimism and sadness also common responses. When we asked people how they feel about “the future of Antarctica in the next 20 years”, “hope” took first place, followed closely by “pessimism” and “sadness”.

The survey is part of the Antarctic Cities Project, which finishes this month. For the past four years an international team of researchers, city officials, national Antarctic programs and youth groups have worked together to develop a framework to strengthen Antarctic connections and a sense of guardianship for the continent. The framework encompasses the cities’ own urban sustainability strategies within a wider concern for the planet.

Our work focuses on shifting from the limited idea of “gateway” to this broader sense of becoming Antarctic “custodial cities”.

Our online survey of the cities’ residents over the age of 18 asked:

• how informed they felt about the relationship between their city and Antarctica

• their opinion on how important Antarctica is to their city’s identity

• how responsible they, their families and friends think they are for the future of Antarctica.

We posed the question: “Why is it important for your city to develop an identity in relation to Antarctica?” The response “it drives us to take care of the environment” was most common (57%) across all five cities. Other responses included:

• “it creates a unique brand for our cities” (36%)
• “it creates more jobs” (32%)
• “it attracts more tourists” (31%)
• “it reinforces residents’ attachment to place” (29%).

Caring for the environment was the most selected option for all ages. Women felt this particularly strongly. Men favoured the more economically oriented options, “it generates more jobs” and “it attracts more tourists”.

Women and people between the ages of 31 and 40 reported higher levels of “hope” and lower levels of “indifference”. Indifference was higher among people between 18 and 30, reaching 16.42%. In this age group, and with men overall, “pessimism” significantly outweighed “hope”. Punta Arenas and Ushuaia residents expressed more “hope” than in other cities.

Young people’s expressions of pessimism and indifference bear witness to the urgent work of reforming our relationship to the Antarctic region. They will be the beneficiaries, and increasingly the drivers, of this reform.

A decade of co-operative custodianship

The cities first came together with the 2009 signing in Christchurch of a statement of intent to promote peaceful co-operation. Though it expired 18 months later, various city and national government policies have reinforced the five cities’ “Antarctic gateway” status. They have put forward visions for enhancing and capitalising on their Antarctic identities, a key part of their relationship to the world.

In an example of action at a local level, the City of Christchurch is moving towards a custodianship model by basing its 2018 Antarctic strategy on two key principles:

• embracing the Maori principle of Kaitiakitanga – meaning guardianship, protection, preservation or sheltering – and a customary way of caring for the environment based on traditional Māori world view to guide the city’s involvement in the region

• taking a leadership role in sustainable actions for the benefit of the Antarctic region and the city.

Read more: Non-human Democracy: in the Anthropocene, it cannot be all about us

In coming together, the five cities are showing they can play an important role in defining how Antarctica is imagined, how discourse is framed and how the continent is vicariously experienced.

The Antarctic Cities Project has created an interlinked network of organisations that can learn from and benefit each other. This network of local government, national Antarctic programs, youth groups and polar organisations has produced Antarctic Futures, an educational online serious game.

The network also founded the Antarctic Youth Coalition. It was launched in February 2020 during an expedition to Antarctica with the Chilean Antarctic Institute.

Five young leaders from each of the cities steer the coalition. This year they put together an online Antarctica Day Festival to celebrate and learn more about the ongoing importance of this polar region.

Principles for Antarctic cities

During 2020 we began work on a Charter of Principles for Antarctic Cities in collaboration with the Hobart and Christchurch city councils. It draws from Christchurch’s 2018 Antarctic Gateway Strategy and the 2017 Tasmanian Antarctic Gateway Strategy. This charter will guide sustainable urban practice and embrace Antarctica’s significance to the economies of these cities while charting ways forward for sustainable development.

The charter aims to celebrate the unique polar heritage of these cities and emphasises the crucial role of youth organisations for engaging with the future of Antarctica. And it acknowledges that human connections with Antarctica extend well beyond the last two centuries, embracing Indigenous conceptions of caring for Country, both land and water.

In the Anthropocene, global public consciousness of, and responsibility for, the icy continent in a time of climate change is increasing. These cities’ relationship with the region to their south and to each other is a valuable part of their urban identity and Antarctica’s future – something worth celebrating on Antarctica Day.

Read more: New research shows the South Pole is warming faster than the rest of the world

– ref. Custodians of Antarctica: how 5 gateway cities are embracing the icy continent – https://theconversation.com/custodians-of-antarctica-how-5-gateway-cities-are-embracing-the-icy-continent-148006

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Vicars, Sessional Lecturer, University of New England

In this series, we look at under-acknowledged women through the ages.

Before the glamorous flyers of the 1930s like Amelia Earhart, “Chubby” Miller and Nancy Bird Walton, another woman opened the way to the skies — and were it not for a tragic twist of fate, her name might now be just as familiar.

Her name was Millicent Maude Bryant, and in early 1927, she became the first woman to gain a pilot’s licence in Australia. She was also first in the Commonwealth outside Britain.

Read more: Hidden women of history: Catherine Hay Thomson, the Australian undercover journalist who went inside asylums and hospitals

A boundary-pusher who met an untimely end

Millicent was born in 1878 at Oberon and grew up near Trangi in western New South Wales. Her family, the Harveys, moved to Manly for a period after a younger brother, George, contracted polio (one of the treatments was “sea-bathing”). She met and married a public servant 15 years her senior, Edward Bryant. They had three children but the couple separated not long before Edward died in 1926.

Later that year, Bryant began instruction with the Australian Aero Club at Mascot in Sydney. At the time, the site of the current international airport was just a large, grassy expanse with a few buildings and hangars.

Bryant was accepted by the Aero Club’s chief instructor, Captain Edward Leggatt (himself a noted first world war fighter pilot), soon after the club had opened its membership to women.

Even then, though, she was unusual: here was a 49-year-old mother of three taking up the challenge of flying which, in the 1920’s, was still as dangerous as it was exciting and glamorous.

She quickly progressed, ahead of two other younger, women students, and made her first solo flight in February, 1927. By this time, newspapers all around Australia were following her story, and in late March she took the test for the “A” licence that would enable her to independently fly De Havilland Moth biplanes.

She passed, and with the issue of her licence by the Ministry of Defence, Bryant was acclaimed as the first woman to gain a pilot’s licence in Australia.

Why, then, isn’t she better known in our day? While Bryant immediately began training for a licence to carry passengers and flew regularly in the months that followed, it was her particular misfortune to step onto the Sydney ferry Greycliffe on its regular 4.14pm run to Watson’s Bay on November 3, 1927.

Less than an hour later, she was among 40 dead after the ferry was cut in half off Bradley’s Head by the mail steamer Tahiti. It was Sydney’s worst peacetime maritime disaster. Bryant was still only 49.

Her funeral two days later was attended by hundreds of people and accorded a remarkable aerial tribute, as the Wellington Times reported:

Five aeroplanes from the Mascot aerodrome flew over the procession as it wended its way to the cemetery. As the burial service was read by the Rev. A. R. Ebbs, rector of St. Matthew’s, Manly, one of the planes descended to within about 150 feet of the grave, and there was dropped from it a wreath of red carnations and blue delphiniums … Attached to the floral tribute was a card bearing the following inscription:

5th November, 1927. With the deepest sympathy of the committee and members of the Australian Aero Club — N.S.W. section.

A pioneer in life as well as the sky

Bryant’s story quickly lapsed into obscurity. Fortunately, some 80 years later, the rediscovery in the family of a collection of letters and other writings has enabled Bryant’s life beyond her flying achievement to be rediscovered.

The letters were — and are still until they are added to the collection of Bryant’s papers in the National Library — held by her granddaughter, Millicent Jones of Kendall, NSW, who rediscovered them in storage at her home.

The main correspondence is a conversation with her second son, John, in England. It covers the period she was flying, though it only moderately expands on the flights recorded in her logbook.

However, her letters and writings reveal much more about Bryant herself, her relationships, her feelings and her leisure, business and political activities. And they make it apparent that she was as much a pioneer in life as well as in the sky.

For one, flying was not Bryant’s only unconventional interest. She was also an entrepreneur, registering an importing company in partnership with John, who went on to become a pioneer of the Australian dairy industry.

She opened a men’s clothing business, Chesterfield Men’s Mercery, in Sydney’s CBD. However, disaster struck when it was inundated with water mere weeks after opening, following a fire in the tea rooms upstairs.

Bryant then became a small-scale property developer, buying and building on land in Vaucluse and Edgecliffe. She’d been well tutored in this by her father, grazier Edmund Harvey (a grandfather of billionaire Gerry Harvey), whose own holdings eventually included a large part of the Kanimbla Valley west of the Blue Mountains.

An excellent horsewoman, Bryant was also an early motorist who had driven over 35,000 miles around NSW and who could fix her own car. She was a keen golfer and reader and even a student of Japanese at the University of Sydney.

Several fragments of a family saga she planned to write, based on her own life, are among her papers. One sheet, entitled “A Life”, summarises in a series of rough notes rather more than she might have told anyone about her inner world.

Marriage – mistakes – children – despondency. Ill-health. Great desire to “live” and create things…

She notes that a trip abroad was a complete success but

it furnished a heart interest which lasted for fourteen years until hope died owing to a marriage.

This fragment provides some background to her taking, in her forties, the unusual step at that time of leaving her marriage and family home to start life afresh with her sons.

This was not long before she took her first flight, probably with Edgar Percival, a family friend and later a successful aircraft designer whose planes won air races and were noted for their graceful lines.

Vigour, values and conflicts

Growing up in the NSW inland late in the 19th century, Bryant would have begun with a fairly traditional view of what it meant to be a wife and mother.

However, her early life was also “free-spirited” (as one newspaper described her upbringing) and her determination to make decisions and shape her own life put her on a collision course with gender role expectations common at the time.

Learning to fly, especially in middle age, was a breakthrough she pursued perhaps even more keenly after being denied work with the Sydney Sun newspaper solely because she was married.

Bryant clearly came to hold strong ideas about what a woman could and couldn’t do, and her life shows a determination to make her own path, despite confronting obstacles that are still familiar in our own time.

Bryant is not just a figure in aviation history. Her life — spanning the colonial period, the newly-federated nation and the tragedies of World War I — came to reflect the vigour, values and conflicts of Australia in the early 20th century.

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

– ref. Hidden women of history: Millicent Bryant, the first Australian woman to get a pilot’s licence – https://theconversation.com/hidden-women-of-history-millicent-bryant-the-first-australian-woman-to-get-a-pilots-licence-146314

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

After government pressure, Chief of the Australian Defence Force Angus Campbell has publicly retreated in the dispute over revoking the Meritorious Unit Citation for the Special Operations Task Group serving in Afghanistan between 2007 and 2013.

When he released the Brereton report on alleged atrocities by some special forces soldiers, Campbell said he would write to the governor-general asking for the citation – which is a group award, separate to those for particular individuals – to be revoked.

Brereton said while many of the soldiers showed great courage and commitment and the group had considerable achievements, “what is now known must disentitle the unit as a whole to eligibility for recognition for sustained outstanding service.”

But as a strong backlash came from some special forces veterans, members of the general public and sections of the media, Scott Morrison indicated he opposed the revocation.

The position shifted at the weekend to putting the future of this and other recommendations in the government’s hands – although Campbell did not himself say anything until late Monday.

In his Monday statement he noted Defence was developing a comprehensive implementation plan on the Brereton recommendations.

“No decisions have yet been made with regard to the appropriate options and approaches to implement the more than 140 recommendations,” he said.

This was a different tack to the impression he gave in releasing the report, when he said he accepted all Brereton’s recommendations.

He said on Monday “the complexity and sensitivity of the issues outlined in the report will take extensive and considered deliberation”.

“Any further action in response to the Inspector-General’s recommendations will be considered as part of the implementation plan, which is being developed with the oversight of the Minister for Defence and the independent Afghanistan Inquiry Implementation Oversight Panel.

“Key issues of public interest such as accountability, referrals to the Government-established Office of the Special Investigator, compensation, honours and awards including citations, ethical development of the force and command, and control of the Australian Defence Force in coalition operations, will all be addressed through the implementation plan.”

When the implementation plan was developed it would be “first considered by Defence leadership and presented to government for consideration and input”.

Campbell’s hasty retreat from his citation decision of less than a fortnight ago will raise questions about whether there will be soft pedalling on other aspects of the Brereton report, although it is considered likely most will be implemented.

However the government now appears locked into letting the citation stand, despite some military experts believing the view of Brereton and Campbell is the correct position.

– ref. ADF Chief Angus Campbell retreats after government’s sortie over citation – https://theconversation.com/adf-chief-angus-campbell-retreats-after-governments-sortie-over-citation-151116

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rod Tyers, Winthrop Professor of Economics, University of Western Australia

China accounts for more than a third of export dollars earned by Australia.

The figures, for the 12 months to October, cover the period of coronavirus disruptions and disputes over trade.

They apply to physical exports rather than harder to measure services, and are dominated by record high Chinese takings of Australian iron ore.

But they mightn’t last.

China is changing, transitioning from growth driven by the iron-ore hungry expansion of cities and manufacturing to growth driven more by the supply of services.

Externally, its “belt and road” infrastructure investments facilitate the supply of resources from locations other than Australia, among them the Simandou iron ore and bauxite deposits in Guinea, West Africa that will eventually offer higher quality ore than Australia from a region China may regard as more friendly.

Read more: Australia demands apology from China over ‘repugnant’ slur on Twitter

Even if this source is slow to emerge, China will seek to diversify its supplies of iron ore by other means, as suggested by Australia’s former ambassador Geoff Raby in his recent book China’s Grand Strategy and Australia’s Future in the New Global Order.

One will be to ensure a steady supply from Brazil which, with China, is a member of the BRICS group of major emerging national economies.

Australia produces few manufactured goods and pays for the considerable quantity it imports by exporting commodities, mostly to China.

The loss of this export channel would be serious, but how serious?

Iron ore matters more than we think

Conversation authors John Quiggin and James Laurenceson argue the effects would be small. They point out that mineral exports account for only 1% of Australia’s national income and that China would hurt itself if it cut off the flow.

But China’s size means the damage to China would be proportionately smaller than the damage to Australia.

And while the mining sector is not the largest in Australia’s economy, its growth since 2002 has brought with it a secondary boom in Australian service industries. Australia’s East Coast cities have prospered even while most of the mining has been occurring in the Pilbara.

Read more: Relax, losing access to China won’t make us the ‘poor white trash of Asia’

The mining boom brought a substantial boost to our terms of trade (the earning power of our exports relative to the cost of our imports), pushing up the Australian dollar and making imported goods much cheaper.

A reversal would see our terms of trade fall and our cost of living rise.

Some commentators place store in our ability to redirect exports of wine and barley, and whatever else is affected by trade disputes, to other customers. At least for iron ore, however, there are few other customers at current volumes. This suggests a decline in export prices and in Australia’s terms of trade.

Damage to us, a mozzie bite for China

So its worthwhile attempting to quantify the damage from a winding back by China of its imports from Australia.

We have conducted simulations of the effect of shutting down Australia-China trade by 95% in which we allow time for capital flows and production and employment to readjust and assume that monetary policy and fiscal balances remain unaltered throughout the world.

We find the shock to the demand for Australian products is large and it is only partially offset by the redirection of our exports, even with a large depreciation of the Australian dollar.

Read more: Hopes of an improvement in Australia-China relations dashed as Beijing ups the ante

The reason for this is that the loss of Chinese exports reduces the rate of return on investment in Australia, forcing financial markets to reallocate finance to other parts of the world.

The effects on Australian gross domestic product and real disposable income per capita are big (6% and 14 %), while those on China are mosquito bites by comparison (0.5% and 2.4%).

It’s wise to be prepared

Important things we can do to hedge against such an occurrence include maintaining strong relations with current and potential export destinations and fostering innovations that will allow our export product mix to adjust so as to better service the markets that remain open.

Examples include the proposal by Ross Garnaut to turn Australia into an exporter of green energy and associated plans by Fortescue and others to raise exports of energy by more than the east coast of Australia currently consumes.

Without such innovations a substantial decline in trade with China would cut investment in Australia and cut living standards.

It is, of course, entirely possible that the worst won’t happen, but we don’t think that’s something Australians can bank on.

If our ship does begin to sink, capital and skills will jump off and what we are left with won’t be enough to support us in the manner we have come to expect.

– ref. An all-out trade war with China would cost Australia 6% of GDP – https://theconversation.com/an-all-out-trade-war-with-china-would-cost-australia-6-of-gdp-151070

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jude McCulloch, Emeritus Professor Monash University, Monash University

Few stories have rocked Victoria as much as the so-called “lawyer X” scandal, which revealed that high-profile criminal barrister Nicola Gobbo had been used by police as an informant.

It triggered a royal commission into the affair, which after months of explosive evidence, has now released its findings.

The Victorian Royal Commission into Police Management of Informants has revealed a gaping hole in police accountability. It has also put a spotlight on a problematic police culture. The police use of a criminal defence barrister as an informant against her own clients is a massive blow to the criminal justice system. During the course of the commission, two of Gobbo’s former clients had their convictions overturned.

So, how will the police in Victoria be held to account and what needs to change to ensure such behaviour is never repeated?

Read more: The Lawyer X scandal is a massive blow to the criminal justice system: here’s why

Key findings and recommendations of the report

The four-volume report has laid bare “the far-reaching and detrimental consequence” of the behaviours of Gobbo and the Victoria Police, which may have denied a large number of people their rights to a fair trial. The commission found the convictions or findings of guilt of 1,011 people may have been affected by the police’s use of Gobbo as a human source.

The commission has recommended the conduct of both Victoria Police and Gobbo be referred to a special investigator to consider whether there is evidence to bring criminal charges and, in the case of serving police officers, disciplinary charges.

It has also recommended a suite of reforms to increase accountability and transparency in relation to Victoria Police’s use and management of informants. This includes independent external oversight and legislation to

ensure that their use is necessary, proportionate, justified and compatible with human rights.

Who polices the police?

The royal commission findings, while focused on the relationship between one informant and Victoria Police, brings into sharp focus the broader issues of police accountability and police culture.

The system for investigating police misconduct, corruption and criminality in Victoria is hopelessly flawed. As it stands, 98% of such cases are investigated by police.

The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) lacks the resources to carry out investigations in most cases and is hamstrung when it does. IBAC considered the Gobbo case in 2015, then sent it back to Victoria Police for investigation. The police showed little interest in probing further.

Read more: Expanding Victoria’s police powers without robust, independent oversight is a dangerous idea

It is worth noting that Gobbo acted as an informant for years before it was revealed publicly. According to the royal commission, more than 100 people within Victoria Police knew about Gobbo, but none raised concerns with the internal Ethical Standards Department or with IBAC.

Police investigating themselves always raises issues of conflict of interest. But this is even more pronounced when a matter involves senior police, or former police commissioners, as in the Gobbo case.

The chair of the royal commission, Margaret McMurdo, has decided not to name any current or former police implicated in criminal conduct, so as not to prejudice future legal proceedings.

In 2018, a joint parliamentary inquiry report into how claims of police misconduct are investigated made 69 recommendations for reforming police oversight in the state. These included better resourcing for IBAC, and that it, rather than police, investigate all cases of serious misconduct.

More than two years since that report was released, the government has not implemented its recommendations.

Police oversight in other countries

Covert operations have long been recognised as providing fertile ground for police corruption and criminality.

Northern Ireland is a telling case. During the decades of the “Troubles” through to the peace process at the turn of the millennium, the covert arm of policing, Special Branch, acted as a force within a force. Some police engaged in and facilitated criminality, including murder.

Read more: Northern Ireland’s police transformation may hold lessons for the US

Radical reforms were made as part of the peace process through the Police Ombudsman Northern Ireland, which was established to provide independent oversight of policing, including their use of covert investigatory powers.

As such, Northern Ireland’s police accountability system is now widely recognised as the gold standard.

The UK’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act also provides a basis for increased control of police human intelligence sources, including intense frontline supervision of officers, clear internal guidelines, and authorisation procedures, performance management and integrity testing of officers.

In addition, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office provides independent oversight of police and other public authorities’ investigatory powers, including the use of human sources.

The Victoria royal commission specifically made reference to the role of the UK’s Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office and the UK law, but did not specifically recommend them as models for Victoria, instead urging consultation with stakeholders to develop a legislative framework.

When the ends do not justify the means

The commission found evidence of “systemic failure in Victoria Police” and

a pervasive and negative cultural emphasis, led from the top down, on getting results, with insufficient regard to the serious consequences for the rights of individuals and the proper administration of the criminal justice system.

Even after the High Court blasted the Victoria Police for “reprehensible conduct” in 2018, its former chief commissioner, Graham Ashton, continued to [defend the police’s actions in the media]t(https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/sep/05/lawyer-x-how-victoria-police-got-it-profoundly-wrong-with-informant-nicola-gobbo), on the basis of getting results in the “gangland wars”.

This “ends justifies the means” rationale, often referred to as “noble cause” corruption, belies an above-the-law mentality. Much evidence was put forth at the royal commission to suggest that Victoria Police rejected or set out to thwart or co-opt systems designed to deliver independent scrutiny.

There have been a series of reviews and inquiries into Victoria Police over the past two decades. They have pointed to deficiencies in its management of informants, along with broader issues related to culture and leadership. Despite this, the royal commission findings reflect many of the same issues.

The commission maintains it is “encouraging” that the new chief commissioner of Victoria Police, Shane Patton, has stated publicly the police will heed the recommendations of the inquiry.

If things are to substantially change, however, reforms need to extend beyond these recommendations.

The recommendations of the 2018 parliamentary inquiry also need to be implemented to ensure that in all cases of serious misconduct, police are investigated by an independent body that has sufficient resources and powers to carry out such investigations effectively.

– ref. Lawyer X inquiry calls for sweeping change to Victoria Police, but is it enough to bring real accountability? – https://theconversation.com/lawyer-x-inquiry-calls-for-sweeping-change-to-victoria-police-but-is-it-enough-to-bring-real-accountability-147836

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daryl McPhee, Associate Professor of Environmental Science, Bond University

As summer descends, sharks may be at the forefront of the minds of many beach goers and reef adventurers.

Globally, the number of shark bites is on the rise, with a threefold increase since 1982. White sharks, bull sharks and tiger sharks are most commonly responsible.

In Australia this year, there have been 20 unprovoked shark bites (when humans don’t initiate contact) — a similar number to recent years. However, we’ve had eight fatalities, the highest on record since 1929. The latest fatality was at Cable Beach in Western Australia, a location not recognised as a shark bite hotspot.

Still, the risk of an unprovoked shark bite is still exceptionally low. You’re more likely to drown at a beach than be killed by a shark. But there are things people can do to reduce the already low risk even further.

What’s behind the shark bite trends?

There is no single reason for the observed trends in unprovoked shark bite.

A 2016 study found more people in the water contributes to rising incidents, as populations around coastal cities and towns increase. But this doesn’t tell the whole story.

Another reason may be due to changes in the distribution and an increasing abundance of key prey such as humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and New Zealand fur seal (Arctocephalus forsteri) along parts of the coast.

For some sharks, weather conditions can also play a role. This is the case for bull sharks, which are commonly found in warm, shallow waters along coasts and rivers, such as in Sydney Harbour during summer and autumn when water temperatures are higher.

After flooding, there is a heightened risk of an unprovoked bite, as bull sharks prefer turbid water in the coastal zone. In other words, more rain generally means more bull shark activity.

Research in 2018 confirmed this. The authors found when total rainfall in a catchment near a beach was greater than or equal to 100 millimetres, the bull shark catch increased between one and eight days later.

And as we’re entering a summer with La Niña weather conditions — which means we’ll see increased rainfall — the risk of encountering a bull shark will be higher, particularly near river mouths.

Read more: La Niña will give us a wet summer. That’s great weather for mozzies

Shark deterrent technology

If you want to learn about safety and sharks, it’s a good idea to start at the Shark Smart websites for Queensland and NSW, which provide simple ways to reduce your personal risk.

This includes identifying times, locations and conditions to avoid, such as not swimming at dawn and dusk, and avoiding swimming with schools of baitfish or diving birds.

For those wanting greater peace of mind, personal electric shark deterrents are commercially available, with products suitable for divers, surfers and swimmers.

Sharks have a set of sense organs called ampullae of Lorenzini that can detect very weak electric currents in the water. Deterrent devices produce a electric current strong enough to elicit an avoidance response by the sharks without hurting them.

Read more: The shocking facts revealed: how sharks and other animals evolved electroreception to find their prey

No shark deterrent is 100% effective, but independent testing has demonstrated several can significantly reduce the risk of a bite. Still, results are variable.

For white sharks, one electric deterrent reduced the percentage of bait taken from 96% to 40%. And for bull sharks, researchers tested several different electric deterrents and found the best-performing device resulted in a 42.3% reduction in baits being consumed.

Electric devices aren’t the only type of deterrent. Chemical deterrents based on a necromone (dead shark smell!) have been effectively tested on Caribbean reef and blacknose sharks. They may not be effective against large species, such as tiger or white sharks though.

And research from earlier this year on reinforced neoprene wetsuits — fortified with composite fibres — shows promise for reducing the physical trauma of a shark bite, potentially reducing the chance of a fatality or serious injury.

Know your deterrent from snake oil

If you’re thinking of buying a deterrent, a challenge for consumers is that many on the market have little to no biological or ecological basis, and have not been independently tested, as CHOICE, Australia’s leading consumer advocacy group, pointed out in 2016.

A shark deterrent is a safety device and as such should be the subject of an Australian Standard – similar to the way a life jacket must follow a standard – to ensure claims are valid. Currently no specific Australian Standard exists for shark deterrents.

No one can legally make a seat belt in their garage and sell it as an effective safety device. The same should apply to shark deterrents.

Read more: Why do shark bites seem to be more deadly in Australia than elsewhere?

There is a risk a person may place themselves in a more dangerous situation than they otherwise would have on the false belief the deterrent they have purchased has some level of effectiveness.

If you are looking to purchase a shark deterrent, look for those that have been independently tested in the field and found to have an actual deterrent effect. Don’t just rely on anecdotes and “the vibe”. In any case, the most effective deterrent is to make informed choices when entering the water this summer.

And we should never lose sight that an unprovoked shark attack is traumatic for surviving victims, first responders, and friends and families who lose a loved one.

Read more: How will sharks respond to climate change? It might depend on where they grew up

– ref. Fatal shark attacks are at a record high. ‘Deterrent’ devices can help, but some may be nothing but snake oil – https://theconversation.com/fatal-shark-attacks-are-at-a-record-high-deterrent-devices-can-help-but-some-may-be-nothing-but-snake-oil-150845

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steven Freeland, Professor of International Law, Western Sydney University

In 2019, US President Donald Trump declared “space is the new war-fighting domain”. This followed the creation of the US Space Force and a commitment to “American dominance” in outer space.

Other space-faring nations, and those who fear the acceleration of an arms race in space, were greatly concerned. At the latest meeting of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, states noted with alarm that “preventing conflicts in outer space and preserving outer space for peaceful purposes” is more necessary than ever.

The election of Joe Biden as the next US president and Kamala Harris as vice-president suggests there is cause for hope. The future of space may look more like the recent launch of NASA’s SpaceX Crew-1 mission to the International Space Station.

Onboard were US and Japanese astronauts, who joined Russian and US crew already living aboard the ISS. As the Falcon 9 rocket soared into space, the collaborative, cooperative and commercial nature of space was once again clear for all to see.

Read more: The US-Russian Space Station mission is a study in cooperation

Cooperation, not confrontation

The incoming Biden-Harris administration appears more interested in international cooperation, and much more cognisant of the challenges of climate change, pandemics and other global issues. A carefully calibrated space policy can do much to address “terrestrial” challenges, while still allowing for many positive space activities.

Since 1967, human activity in space has been guided by the universally accepted principles embedded in the Outer Space Treaty. This has ensured we have had no military conflict in space, and required the exploration and use of space “for the benefit and in the interests of all countries”.

Any alternative vision of the future of space is dreadful to consider. Rhetoric about the inevitability of “war in space” makes such conflict more likely and risks a “tragedy of the commons” in space.

Read more: The US plan for a Space Force risks escalating a ‘space arms race’

Any space war would have no clear winner. In a complex, globally shared arena such as space, it is important that states abide by accepted rules and established practices.

The US has great scientific and technological advantages and a robust and competitive commercial space sector. Instead of seeking dominance, it can better serve the world (and itself) by focusing its leadership on harnessing space for the benefit of all humankind.

In a promising sign, Biden and Harris’s NASA review team is composed of an outstanding group of space scientists as well as a former astronaut.

The current administration re-established the National Space Council, which is chaired by the vice president, and this has reinvigorated American investment and leadership in space exploration. This includes an ambitious plan to return to the Moon under the terms of the Artemis Accords.

Respect the rules

To ensure the fragile and shared domain of outer space does not become an arena for conflict, the rules that apply to any military uses of space need to be understood, respected and further developed. Failure to do so could lead to devastation, disruption and impact on civilian lives, particularly in the largest and most powerful countries like the US, whose economies and societies are heavily dependent on space infrastructure. Their access to space has given them the greatest competitive advantage, but they are therefore the most vulnerable if that access is compromised.

Space is a “congested, contested and competitive” area where scientific, commercial and economic interests converge, as well as military and national security concerns. In this sense space is like the radio frequency spectrum, which has been successfully regulated and managed for decades under international rules adopted through the International Telecommunication Union.

But space is also much more. As the recent Crew-1 mission demonstrated, there are significant benefits when nations come together and cooperate. Enlightened leadership, guided by commonly agreed laws and practices and a recognition that we share outer space as custodians for future generations, is the only realistic way forward.

– ref. ‘War in space’ would be a catastrophe. A return to rules-based cooperation is the only way to keep space peaceful – https://theconversation.com/war-in-space-would-be-a-catastrophe-a-return-to-rules-based-cooperation-is-the-only-way-to-keep-space-peaceful-150947

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

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has demanded China apologise for – and Twitter remove – a highly offensive tweet depicting an Australian soldier with a knife to the throat of a child.

Morrison described the tweet as disgusting and utterly outrageous. Australia has protested to the Chinese embassy in Canberra, and a protest is also being made by Australia’s embassy in Beijing.

“The Chinese government should be totally ashamed of this post. It diminishes them in the world’s eyes,” Morrison told a virtual news conference from The Lodge, where he is still in isolation after his trip to Japan.

“Australia is seeking an apology from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, from the Chinese Government, for this outrageous post. We are also seeking its removal immediately and have also contacted Twitter to take it down immediately.”

Following the recent release of the Brereton inquiry into alleged atrocities by some members of Australian special forces in Afghanistan, the tweet was posted by Lijian Zhao, spokesman and deputy director general of the information department in the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

It said: “Shocked by murder of Afghan civilians & prisoners by Australian soldiers. We strongly condemn such acts, &call for holding them accountable”.

A line in the illustration said: “Don’t be afraid, we are coming to bring you peace!”

Morrison said the repugnant post of a falsified image of an Australian soldier threatening a young child had come from an official Chinese government Twitter account.

It was “truly repugnant” and “deeply offensive” to every Australian.

“[To] every Australian who has served in that uniform. Every Australian who serves in that uniform today. Everyone who has pulled on that uniform and served with Australians overseas from whatever nation,” he said.

“It is a false image and a terrible slur on our great defence forces and the men and women who’ve served in that uniform for over 100 years.”

Read more: Biden win offers Morrison the chance to reshape Australia’s ailing relationship with China

Morrison said while there undoubtedly tensions between China and Australia, “this is not how you deal with them”.

Rather, the way was to engage directly in dialogue between ministers and leaders.

“And despite this terribly offensive post today, I would ask again and call on China to re-engage in that dialogue.

“This is how countries must deal with each other to ensure that we can deal with any issues in our relationship, consistent with our national interests and respect for each other’s sovereignty. Not engaging in this sort of deplorable behaviour.”

Morrison said he hoped “this rather awful event” might lead to a “reset” in the relationship, allowing a dialogue to be restarted where there could be sensible talk about issues — “because this type of behaviour is not on”.

Morrison sought to put the situation in a wider international context.

“It’s not just about Australia. Countries around the world are watching this. They see how Australia is seeking to resolve these issues and they’re seeing these responses.

“This impacts not just on the relationship here, but with so many other sovereign nations, not only in our own region, but like-minded countries around the world who have expressed similar sentiments to Australia about many issues. And so it is important that these things end and the dialogue starts.”

When he was asked why he didn’t write to Chinese President Xi Jinping directly, Morrison said, “You assume that there hasn’t been such interactions. We’ve constantly sought that engagement. This is not new.”

Asked about the controversial issue of revoking the Meritorious Unit Citation for Special Operations Task Groups who served in Afghanistan between 2007 and 2013, which was recommended by the Brereton report, Morrison said no decision had been made.

This is despite the chief of the Defence Force, Angus Campbell, saying when releasing the Brereton report that he would write to the governor-general asking for the revocation.

“No decisions have been made on that and were decisions to be made on that, that would only be following a further process. And that is where that matter rests right now,” Morrison told his news conference.

Opposition leader Anthony Albanese said he stood with Morrison in his condemnation of the China tweet. He said the opposition would not be asking about it in question time — the matter was above politics.

The latest deepening of tensions in the bilateral relationship comes days after the Chinese imposed punitive tariffs on Australian wine.

Read more: It’s hard to tell why China is targeting Australian wine. There are two possibilities

– ref. Australia demands apology from China over ‘repugnant’ slur on Twitter – https://theconversation.com/australia-demands-apology-from-china-over-repugnant-slur-on-twitter-151099

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona McGaughey, Senior Lecturer in International Human Rights Law, University of Western Australia

From “fast fashion” to tinned tuna to the components in your mobile phone, what guarantee do you have the goods you buy are slave-free?

The Australian government has taken a step forward by just publishing the first batch of statements from Australian companies outlining their efforts to ensure their supply chains do not involve modern slavery.

The reports are the first substantial fruits of Australia’s Modern Slavery Act, passed in December 2018, requiring all businesses with an annual turnover of A$100 million to publish “modern slavery statements” each year.

Businesses must report on the risks of modern slavery in their operations and supply chains, and on the actions they have taken to address these.

There are 121 statements in the repository so far. This includes 19 that are voluntary statements from businesses not required do so, but which have done so anyway to demonstrate their commitment to tackling modern slavery.

With the deadline for submitting reports extended due to COVID-19, the remainder will come by December 31 or March 31 next year (depending on the company’s financial year).

The repository is a world first. Although there are repositories of statements made under similar laws such as the UK Modern Slavery Act and the French Duty of Vigilance Act, these were established by non-government organisations (NGOs) in the absence of a government repository.

What’s in the repository so far?

Among those to have their statements published in this first tranche are major companies such as Coles Group and Wesfarmers (which owns Bunnings, Kmart and Officeworks).

Coles’ statement reports on “risks or indicators” of modern slavery, based on each country in its supply chain. For example, for China it identifies risks of forced or bonded labour, deceptive recruitment, exploitation of migrant workers, child labour, underpayment of wages and excessive working hours.

Wesfarmers’ statement is relatively detailed and transparent and reports “critical breaches” including allegations of excessive overtime, transparency (record keeping and documentation), safety (building and fire safety) and unauthorised subcontracting and bribery.

Don’t expect to see widespread disclosures of modern slavery in any statements. The Modern Slavery Act requires reporting on risks and the actions to address these. So the content of the statements tends to cover risk assessment, policies, training and, to a lesser extent, remedies.

Read more: Four Corners’ forced labour exposé shows why you might be wearing slave-made clothes

Most of the reports so far come from companies headquartered in Australia. Japan, the United States and the United Kingdom are home to six reporting entities each. Four are based in New Zealand.

The statements submitted vary widely in the length and level of detail provided. The 16 statements in the industry category “mining, metals, chemicals and resources” range from three pages to 22 pages. Unsurprisingly, the longer – and glossier – statements come from the larger companies who often find their social and environmental practices under scrutiny, such as Santos, South 32 and BHP.

Why the repository is important

Internationally, a key criticism of business reporting laws such as Australia’s Modern Slavery Act is the lack of penalties for non-compliance. Critics argue that non-compliance with a range of other corporate laws, from Occupational Health and Safety to tax laws, result in penalties. The Law Council and others have called for penalties.

Others disagree and suggest the Modern Slavery Act has been introduced with significant good will on the part of businesses and that reputational risks from poor (or no) reporting are sufficient to keep businesses on track.

Of course, both a carrot and a stick approach could work. Issuing a fine also carries reputational risk, for example. Another way of driving compliance is to limit government tenders to those businesses complying with the Modern Slavery Act, such as is included in the WA Government’s proposed “procurement debarment regime”.

A three-year review of the Modern Slavery Act should take place in 2021. It is likely the question of enforcement and penalties will be raised again.

What this mean for consumers

In the lead-up to Christmas, a key question for consumers is how the repository can help inform ethical purchasing.

The repository is not designed for this purpose and doesn’t offer “performance scorecards”, for example.

Scrutiny of the statements is an important informal regulatory measure. But it is likely to be carried out by academics and non-government organisations, rather than individual consumers. This is the government’s expectation. But a shortcoming of this approach is that the non-government sector is chronically underfunded in Australia, particularly for advocacy work.

Consumers can already access ethical purchasing information, such as Oxfam’s report published last week on the manufacturing practices behind leading clothing brands in Australia.

Highlighting concerns from garment factories in Bangladesh, the report examined well-known stores including Best & Less, Big W, Cotton On, H&M, Zara, Kmart, Myer, Target, Rockmans, Rivers, Noni B, Just Jeans and Portmans. The repository could be further developed to inform reports and scorecards that would be more accessible to consumers.

Read more: At last, Australia has a Modern Slavery Act. Here’s what you’ll need to know

A societal shift in corporate accountability?

The Modern Slavery Act is just one of a number of recent developments that signal a move towards strengthening corporate accountability. These include the Banking Royal Commission and the Australian Law Reform Commission report on Corporate Criminal Responsibility.

These developments, together with the modern slavery reporting regime can be used to drive better human rights standards among Australian businesses.

– ref. Australia’s world-first repository of ‘modern slavery statements’ a step in the right direction – https://theconversation.com/australias-world-first-repository-of-modern-slavery-statements-a-step-in-the-right-direction-151029

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olga Kokshagina, Researcher – Innovation & Entrepreneurship, RMIT University

How well we distribute and administer a COVID-19 vaccine will have massive health, social and economic ramifications. So attention is turning to vaccine supply chains and logistics.

Designing how best to vaccinate billions of people worldwide is complex. This is particularly so for large countries, such as Australia, where distributing vaccine to rural and remote areas is needed.

Despite numerous past pandemics and epidemics, very few studies globally have tackled the problem of designing and building an efficient vaccine distribution network. Existing studies have also not fully considered all factors affecting vaccine distribution.

So our team designed a mathematical model to test different scenarios for COVID-19 vaccine distribution, which we have submitted for publication.

What we took into account

Our model looked at different ways to distribute COVID vaccine to 6.9 million Victorians, based on the number of residents predicted in 2021.

We modelled this using distribution via the state’s 325 medical centres, which can be everything from big city hospitals to small medical centres in regional areas.

We assumed most vaccine distribution would be by road and enough refrigerated vehicles would be available.

We also factored into our model that certain sections of the community are at increased risk of exposure (for instance, city dwellers) and others are more susceptible to infection (for instance, aged-care residents and health-care workers). These people are not uniformly distributed around the state, affecting vaccine distribution logistics.

We then tested different scenarios to see how long vaccination would take.

Our research shows we need three key factors for success.

Read more: Scientific modelling is steering our response to coronavirus. But what is scientific modelling?

1. Medical centres need to be big enough

We calculated that if the capacity of the 325 medical centres is large enough, and if enough vaccine is available, the entire population of Victoria can be vaccinated within 60 days.

By capacity we mean the maximum number of vaccine doses each medical centre can administer. And this capacity depends on a range of factors including centres’ physical size, and having enough staff to administer vaccines.

This time frame or “target horizon” is the total number of days to vaccinate the population of Victoria. Although we have calculated this is possible within 60 days, the state or federal government will actually set this target.

Read more: Creating a COVID-19 vaccine is only the first step. It’ll take years to manufacture and distribute

To vaccinate all Victorians in 60 days, we calculated we would need a minimum of roughly 9,500 vaccine packs with 12 vaccines per pack, every day. This assumes one shot per person and adequate vaccines are available. A limited supply or a disruption to supplies might increase the administration period beyond 60 days.

If medical centres run at reduced capacity or existing capacity is not enough, this also increases the time taken to vaccinate. Conversely, if the aim is to vaccinate Victorians in under 60 days, our model suggests we need to boost our capacity to vaccinate.

This could be by using mobile vaccination units or hiring extra staff.

2. Vaccines need to be shipped between medical centres

We also show the importance of transporting vaccines between medical centres, known as transhipment. This allows medical centres short on vaccine to obtain doses from the nearest medical centres with extra supply.

Transhipment is also crucial when it comes to vaccinating the most vulnerable people. That’s because we can transfer vaccines from medical centres serving less-vulnerable populations to those with more residents in higher priority groups. Transhipment also allows us to transfer vaccines from areas with less exposure to areas of higher exposure. And it allows vaccines to reach remote areas.

However, transhipment places extra burden on road transport networks.

3. Vaccine packs need to be the right size

We also show it is important to get the vaccine pack size right. This seemingly minor detail had a significant effect on the overall period of vaccine administration.

We considered pack sizes that contain 5, 12, 20, 30 and 50 vaccines. Larger pack size significantly increases the need for transhipment between medical centres. That’s because larger packs would need to be broken up into smaller portions, then distributed to multiple medical centres.

We suggest governmental agencies carefully evaluate vaccine pack size when contracting and negotiating with vaccine manufacturers.

Read more: Keeping coronavirus vaccines at subzero temperatures during distribution will be hard, but likely key to ending pandemic

This is relevant to all Australia

While we used Victoria as a case study, we can apply our model to other states and territories.

In particular, the importance of pack size, transhipment between medical centres, and considering extra capacity to vaccinate in a shorter amount of time will apply in every context.

Certainly, the results for other states and territories will depend on their number of available medical centres, population size and population distribution.

Our model helps decision makers strike a balance between the cost of building extra capacity to try to achieve population vaccination in a given time scale or accepting a less costly approach that takes more time.

– ref. We modelled how a COVID vaccine roll-out would work. Here’s what we found – https://theconversation.com/we-modelled-how-a-covid-vaccine-roll-out-would-work-heres-what-we-found-150544

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Huw Griffiths, Senior Lecturer in English Literature, University of Sydney

Review: Sydney Theatre Company’s The Picture of Dorian Gray, directed by Kip Williams

Australian theatres are slowly coming back to life. And, with Kip Williams’ exuberantly inventive adaptation of Oscar Wilde’s 1890 novel, The Picture of Dorian Gray, the STC is giving us everything we have missed from live performance. This is despite much of the show consisting of a complex interplay between live action and video.

The strength of the show lies in the brilliant combination of Williams’ confident direction and an extraordinary performance from Eryn Jean Norvill, who is emerging as one of the best actors of her generation.

Here, she takes on every single role in the play — 26 characters in all. Sometimes she switches personas live on stage and, at others, she interacts with video representations of the other characters.

These exchanges between multiple different Norvills often display an exquisitely-timed comic effect; the show is genuinely hilarious at times. But it also allows, at other times, for a genuinely chilling terror.

Conception and performance offer more, however, than a display of technical brilliance. Both serve to translate some of the trickier aspects of this confounding, but magnificent, novel to the stage.

Read more: A litany of losses: a new project maps our abandoned arts events of 2020

A Wilde milestone

Dorian Gray marked a turning point in Wilde’s short writing career. Published before he started writing plays, it is the culmination of a period in which he was known mainly for his prose: essay-writing, journalism, and short fiction, including magical fairy stories.

Even though we see hints of his dramatic dialogue, particularly in the paradoxical aphorisms of Lord Henry Wootton, the novel really has as much in common with Wilde’s short story The Selfish Giant as it does The Importance of Being Earnest’s farce. It is fable-like, as in love with its own charm and beauty as Dorian himself.

Wilde described the novel as a reaction, “against the crude brutality of plain realism”. The STC production picks up on this quality; we see the story being woven together before us.

More significantly, the use of a single actor underlines and accentuates a signature Wildean idea: the self as a performance, as inauthentic even.

Just as Norvill shifts between all of the characters on stage, so Wilde saw different elements of himself refracted through the three main characters of his book: “Basil Hallward [the artist] is what I think I am”, he wrote. “Lord Henry [Dorian’s seducer into a life of pleasure] what the world thinks me”, and “Dorian what I would like to be — in other ages, perhaps”.

The Picture of Dorian Gray pursued Wilde throughout his life, questioning the limits of art and life in increasingly perilous ways.

The first edition was published in Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine in 1890 and was already a much-censored version of the original typescript Wilde had sent to the editors. It caused a scandal and Wilde amended it still further for its publication as a novel in 1891, reducing the homoeroticism, particularly in Hallward’s obsession with Dorian, and emphasising the moral of the story.

Read more: Oscar Wilde would have been on Grindr – but he preferred a more clandestine connection

Art, still on trial

Wilde’s trials, which began with him pursuing a case of libel against his lover’s father and ended with a conviction against him for gross indecency, were haunted by the book.

In his first trial, trying to prove that accusations of sodomy against him were untrue, evidence was produced from the original publication of the novel. In lines suppressed in the 1891 version, Hallward declares, “I have worshipped you with far more romance of feeling than a man should ever give to a friend”.

In a later trial, where Wilde was attempting to save himself from imprisonment, he defended himself in terms that also came from the censored version of the book, where he described male same-sex attraction as, “such love as Michael Angelo had known, and Montaigne, and Winckelmann, and Shakespeare himself”. Resisting the prosaic truths of the trial, Wilde claimed the role-playing of art.

Read more: Friday essay: the myth of the ancient Greek ‘gay utopia’

This 2020 STC production might not have the same radical edge as the 1890s novel. Same-sex desire no longer offers the same challenge to society as it did in late Victorian England. References to selfie culture instead provide some elements of contemporary satire.

However, as we emerge from our zoom-framed isolation, this show — like the often underrated novel upon which it is based — offers a smart reflection on the complex relationships between public image and private passion, between art and life, between representation and reality.

Its shrewd examinations of both the liberation and the limitations of art constitute an enormously impressive response to the challenges of theatre-making in the 2020s.

The Picture of Dorian Gray runs until December 19 at the Roslyn Packer Theatre, Sydney

– ref. The Picture of Dorian Grey review: Eryn Jean Norvill stuns in all 26 roles – https://theconversation.com/the-picture-of-dorian-grey-review-eryn-jean-norvill-stuns-in-all-26-roles-150165

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mubashar Hasan, Adjunct Research Fellow, Humanitarian and Development Research Initiative, Western Sydney University

Australian academic Kylie-Moore Gilbert is finally free and back home. The Melbourne university academic was unjustly deprived of her liberties for 804 days for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. She was arbitrarily imprisoned on cooked-up espionage charges while visiting Iran for a conference.

While we are celebrating Moore-Gilbert’s freedom here in Australia, let us not forget we are living in a world where a disturbing pattern of rising and often violent attacks on higher education communities, both academics and students, is taking shape. A harsh fact remains: nobody will face justice for unjustly imprisoning and traumatising Moore-Gilbert.

Read more: Kylie Moore-Gilbert has been released. But will a prisoner swap with Australia encourage more hostage-taking by Iran?

Academic freedom is under attack

The recently released Free to Think 2020 report of a New York University-based advocacy group for defending academic freedom, Scholars at Risk, shines a light on these attacks on higher education institutions. It reports:

State authorities around the world used detentions, prosecutions, and other coercive legal measures to punish and restrict hundreds of scholars’ and students’ research, teaching, and extramural expression and associations. These actions were frequently carried out under laws or on grounds ostensibly related to national security, terrorism, sedition, and defamation.

In just one year (September 1 2019 to August 31 2020), Scholars at Risk documented 341 attacks arising from 259 verified incidents in 58 countries. It reports 124 higher education community members (both students and scholars) were killed, faced violent bodily harm or were forcefully disappeared. Another 96 were imprisoned.

Freedom to Think reports covering the past four years (September 1 2016 to August 31 2020) worldwide show 395 higher education community members were killed, faced violent bodily harm or forcefully disappeared. During this period, 393 were sent to jail and 260 were prosecuted for rightfully exercising their academic freedom.

These are just the confirmed figures. Many such cases go unreported or undocumented.

In the past year, the Free to Think report notes that scholars and students in Spain, Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Egypt, Russia and Zimbabwe were arrested and/or imprisoned in connection with explicitly academic work, as well as nonviolent expression and activism.

In Hungary, the Central European University was forced out of the country altogether. In Turkey, Istanbul Sehir University was shut down. And in Romania and Poland calls to cut funding for gender studies and “LGBT ideology” have received strong political backing.

This is the nature of a time when freedom is in retreat. According to a 2019 report by Reporters Without Borders, 76% of the world’s people live in places where the press is not free.

Acknowledging this pattern, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said after Moore-Gilbert’s release:

[W]e live in an uncertain world and we live in a world where there are regimes that don’t act in relation to people’s liberties and rights and with the freedoms that we enjoy here in Australia and that is just a sad reality of the world which we live in. And Australia has to deal in that world […].

Australia has a role to play

So should Australia be worried about this world where attacks on higher education institutions are on the rise? The simple answer is yes. And Australia should be a strong and active international defender of academic freedom.

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

The government should spell out its commitment to academic freedom in its foreign policy, research grants, development assistance and travel advice. Australia is a global force; it invests millions of dollars in providing development assistance to many countries where academic freedom is under threat.

Our country has opportunities to directly influence key actors in these countries. Australia offers training, short courses and scholarships to foreign bureaucrats, military professionals, pro-regime academics and security forces of non-democratic countries. Despite their Australian training and experience of our free, law-abiding and democratic society, many of these actors actively suppress academic freedom in their home countries.

Similarly, Australian academics and their research are not isolated from these issues. They study many of these problematic countries, visit them for fieldwork, form cross-country research collaborations and exchange knowledge. Their work contributes to Australian understanding and helps shape foreign policy.

In the wake of the release of Kylie Moore-Gilbert, I hope the Australian higher education community will remain passionate about academic freedom abroad and engage in more research and discussion of the global decline in academic freedom. The pursuit of truth and expansion of knowledge are not confined within geographic boundaries. These issues affect us all.

– ref. Kylie Moore-Gilbert is one of hundreds of victims of state attacks on academic freedom – https://theconversation.com/kylie-moore-gilbert-is-one-of-hundreds-of-victims-of-state-attacks-on-academic-freedom-151088

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

This week’s Newspoll will presumably be the final one for 2020. It gives the Coalition a 51-49% two-party-preferred lead, unchanged from three weeks ago. Primary votes were 43% Coalition (steady), 36% Labor (up one), 11% Greens (steady) and 2% One Nation (down one).

This is One Nation’s worst result in a federal Newspoll since before the 2019 federal election. It comes after the party slumped by 6.6 percentage points at the recent Queensland state election.

Newspoll figures are from The Poll Bludger. This poll was conducted November 25-28 from a sample of 1,511 people.

Two-thirds of respondents said they were satisfied with Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s performance (up two points) and 30% were dissatisfied (down two), for a net approval of +36. Morrison’s approval rating has consistently been over 60% since April, following the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in Australia.

Labor leader Anthony Albanese recorded a net approval of +3, down one point. Morrison led as better PM by 60-28% (58-29% previously).

Read more: Why good leaders need to hold the hose: how history might read Morrison’s coronavirus leadership

Coronavirus may be the only important issue for many voters at the moment, and Morrison is perceived to have handled that well. In normal times, issues less favourable to the Coalition would likely have gained traction, undermining Morrison’s ratings, but these times are not normal.

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian has enjoyed a similar polling boost in her state as well, due to her handling of the pandemic.

In a NSW YouGov poll taken after revelations of her affair with former Liberal MP Daryl Maguire, she still had a 68-26% approval rating.

LNP easily retains Groom at federal byelection

There was very little media attention on Saturday’s byelection for the safe Coalition seat of Groom in Queensland.

Only four candidates ran, representing the Coalition, Labor, Sustainable Australia and the Liberal Democrats.

The LNP won by 66.6-33.4%, a 3.9% swing to Labor since the 2019 federal election.

Read more: Final 2019 election results: education divide explains the Coalition’s upset victory

Primary votes were 59.0% for the LNP (up 5.6%), 27.8% for Labor (up 9.1%), 8.0% for Sustainable Australia and 5.3% for the Liberal Democrats. The major parties benefited from the absence of One Nation and the Greens, which respectively won 13.1% and 8.0% in 2019.

Analyst Kevin Bonham says the average swing against a government at byelections in its own seats is 6%, so this is not a great result for Labor.

Furthermore, there was a 5.2% swing to the Coalition in Groom in the 2019 election, as it romped to a 58.4-41.6% drubbing of Labor in Queensland.

If federal Labor had recovered support in Queensland since then, a much bigger swing would have been expected.

While Labor easily won the recent Queensland state election, state and federal voting can be very different.

Biden’s popular vote lead stretches

In the Cook Political Report tracker of the national popular vote in the US presidential election, President-elect Joe Biden leads incumbent Donald Trump by 51.1-47.1%.

Biden’s four-point lead is up from 3.1 percentage points on November 8 when the states of Pennsylvania and Nevada were called for him, making him the presumptive winner. Many mail votes are still be counted in New York, which will heavily favour Biden as well.

Biden’s popular vote margin now exceeds Barack Obama’s margin of 3.9 percentage points in 2012. But Obama won the “tipping-point” state that put him over the magic 270 electoral college votes by 5.4 points, while Biden won his tipping-point state (Wisconsin) by just 0.6 percentage points.

Trump performed 3.4 percentage points better in the tipping-point state in 2020 than in the national popular vote and this difference will increase further as more New York votes are counted. In the 2016 election, the difference was 2.9 points.

Read more: What’s behind Trump’s refusal to concede? For Republicans, the end game is Georgia and control of the Senate

In the House of Representatives, the Democrats lead the Republicans 222-206 in seats, with seven races uncalled.

Republicans lead in all seven of these uncalled races. If they hold their leads, Democrats will win the House by just 222-213. That’s a net gain of 13 seats for Republicans from the 2018 midterm election.

– ref. Morrison remains very popular in Newspoll as the Coalition easily retains Groom in byelection – https://theconversation.com/morrison-remains-very-popular-in-newspoll-as-the-coalition-easily-retains-groom-in-byelection-151094

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grant Duncan, Associate Professor, School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University

The recurring metaphor of New Zealand as “experiment” or “social laboratory” might go back to the 1890s, but it continues to resonate in the 21st century.

Australian political journalist Laura Tingle has revived the venerable idea in the latest edition of the Quarterly Essay, The High Road: What Australia can learn from New Zealand.

Her comparative historical narrative reveals uncanny parallels between the two countries — and significant divergences — with special attention to the recent history of neoliberal reforms, beginning in the 1980s, and then through to the post-global financial crisis and COVID-19 eras.

Time and perspective make all the difference, of course.

In the 1990s, for instance, when New Zealand was the global poster child for neoliberalism, Australia’s business lobbyists might have asked: why don’t we adopt the New Zealand model? Nowadays, the Australian left might look wistfully across the Tasman and ask a similar question — for radically different reasons.

What Australians think they can learn from New Zealand, then, depends on the interests and values they stand for — and on the spin they put into retelling the histories of both countries.

Good and bad lessons

Although long, Tingle’s essay could hardly do justice to the sweep of history it covers. It’s a commendable effort all the same, with only a few inaccuracies. For example, she writes “there wasn’t any official British administrative presence in New Zealand […] until 1839”, overlooking the arrival of James Busby in 1833 as first British Resident.

But overall, Tingle’s trans-Tasman comparative political economy hits the right spots.

Read more: With a mandate to govern New Zealand alone, Labour must now decide what it really stands for

She argues: “[T]he extent and speed of change in New Zealand [in the late 1980s and early 1990s], and the havoc it wreaked, would be impossible to defend from an Australian perspective.”

And, indeed, New Zealand’s “radical industrial relations change [from 1991] has not provided any panacea” for its persistently low levels of productivity — nor for a widening income gap with Australia.

In contrast, New Zealand’s Treaty of Waitangi (1840) recognises Indigenous rights and provides constitutional backing for reconciliation and reparations. Its relevance has only grown, putting New Zealand well ahead of Australia in this respect, albeit with much work still to do.

Growing apart

At the turn of the 20th century, New Zealanders politely declined to join Australians in federation. The invitation is still open, in principle, but unlikely ever to be taken up. Neither side has any interest in completing that job.

As both countries matured after the world wars, they tended to ignore one another, looking more to the UK, Europe and US as leaders and exemplars. This is despite the Closer Economic Relations CER agreement (1983) and the many parallels in their political histories that Tingle points out.

Read more: ‘Courageous’ investment means innovation stays in NZ, not sold off overseas

Regrettably, the two countries have continued to grow apart. The post-1984 nuclear-free policy led to New Zealand being kicked out of the ANZUS Treaty. Then, as immigration and security became serious issues, the then Australian prime minister, John Howard, unilaterally withdrew the (once reciprocal) social rights of Kiwis in Australia (an event Tingle omits to mention).

There was an accusation that New Zealanders were bludging off Australians in terms of both incomes and regional defence. Nowadays Australia deports its unwanted Kiwis with alacrity, which Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern pointedly described as “corrosive to our relationship”.

Trust in government

Given that diplomatic corrosion, Australia probably won’t learn much from New Zealand. Nevertheless, the shared trauma of a global pandemic could bring the two countries closer again, especially once travel restrictions ease.

Many Australians see the conduct of politics in New Zealand as more civil and mature. Ardern certainly burnishes that reputation, even though there is scepticism at home about her government’s actual performance.

Tingle rightly points out that New Zealand’s proportional representation electoral system encourages competition for that notional median voter. Hence there is convergence between major political parties, rather than polarisation. Kiwi politicians never know when they might need their opponents’ support.

Read more: Who are Donald Trump’s supporters in New Zealand and what do we know about them?

Perhaps related to this, international comparative data indicate that people’s “dissatisfaction with democracy” has grown alarmingly in Australia, the UK and the US — but not in New Zealand.

Keeping dialogue open

Being a small unitary state with a unicameral legislature, change is institutionally easier and swifter in Wellington than in Canberra. Because of this, New Zealand occasionally does something that makes Australians stop and think.

For instance, Australia was once on the verge of adopting New Zealand’s universal no-fault model of accident compensation. That fell through with the dismissal of the Whitlam government. But Australia’s federal constitution would have made implementation more complicated.

Whether New Zealand is ever an example worth following is up to your political judgment. But Tingle’s essay is an important contribution to a maturing cross-Tasman dialogue that looks far beyond ANZAC jingoism and sporting rivalries.

Still, both countries are divided over how to understand their own histories, let alone learn one another’s. And there will always be argument about whether and why Australia could learn anything at all from New Zealand, or vice versa.

Tingle suggests paying closer attention to New Zealand — in the sense of it still being an experiment or a laboratory — and that seems to be all.

If the Australian government were to reconsider its “corrosive” approach to the relationship, however, we might begin to see a more constructive sharing of ideas in both directions.

– ref. What Australia can learn from New Zealand: a new perspective on that tricky trans-Tasman relationship – https://theconversation.com/what-australia-can-learn-from-new-zealand-a-new-perspective-on-that-tricky-trans-tasman-relationship-151017