Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Willow Hallgren, Adjunct Research Fellow, Centre for Planetary Health and Food Security, Griffith University

For three days this month, 7 billion tonnes of rain fell across Greenland — the largest amount since records began in 1950. It’s also the first time since then that rain, not snow, fell on Greenland’s highest peak.

This is alarming. Greenland’s ice sheet is the second largest on the planet (after Antarctica) and any rain falling on its surface accelerates melting. By August 15, the amount of ice lost was seven times greater than is normal for mid-August.

This is just the latest extreme climate event on the island, which sits in the North Atlantic Ocean. In a single day in July this year, the amount of ice that melted in Greenland would have covered the US state of Florida with 5 centimetres of water. And last October, research showed ice in Greenland is melting faster than at any other time in the past 12,000 years.

Melting in Greenland threatens to significantly hamper humanity’s efforts to mitigate climate change. That’s because, after a certain point, it may create catastrophic “feedback loops”. Let’s look at the issue in more detail.

Rising temperatures in the Arctic

Greenland’s vast ice sheet comprises almost 1.7 million square kilometres of glacial land ice. It covers most of the territory and contains enough ice to raise sea levels by more than 7 metres if melted.

The Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets lost a combined 6.4 trillion tonnes of ice between 1992 and 2017. Melting in Greenland has contributed to 60% (17.8 millimetres) of the Earth’s overall sea-level rise due to melting ice sheets, even though Greenland is much smaller than Antarctica.

This may be partly because half of Greenland’s melting is the result of rising air temperatures, which cause surface melting. In Antarctica, most ice loss is from ocean water melting glaciers that spill from land into the sea. And the rate of ice loss in both Greenland and Antarctica is accelerating — increasing sixfold since the 1990s.

Rain falling on ice exacerbates this process. So what’s behind the recent unprecedented weather?

Temperatures in the Arctic are rising twice as quickly as the rest of the planet for a number of reasons, including changes in cloud cover and water vapour, the reflectivity of the surface, and how weather systems transport energy from the tropics to the polar regions. This has made extreme weather events more common.

Read more:
Climate explained: why is the Arctic warming faster than other parts of the world?

In recent years in Greenland, rain has fallen further north, and more rain has fallen in winter. This is not normal for these regions, which usually get snow, not rain, in below-freezing temperatures.

This month’s rain is the result of warm, moist air flowing up from south-west of Greenland and remaining for several days. In the morning of August 14, temperatures at the 3,216-metre summit of Greenland’s ice sheet surpassed freezing point, peaking at 0.48℃. Rain fell on the summit for several hours that morning and on August 15.

This was particularly shocking given the above-freezing temperatures occurred so late in Greenland’s normally short summer. At this time of year, large areas of bare ice are exposed from a lack of snow, which leads to greater runoff of rainwater and meltwater into the oceans.

When melting is self-reinforcing

Rainfall makes the ice sheet more prone to surface melt since it exacerbates the so-called “ice-albedo positive feedback”. In other words, the melting reinforces itself.

When rain falls, its warmth can melt snow, exposing the underlying darker ice, which absorbs more sunlight. This increases temperatures at the surface, leading to more melting.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the only positive feedback loop destabilising the Greenland ice sheet.

The “positive melt-elevation feedback” is another, where the lower height of the ice sheet leads to faster melting because higher temperatures occur at lower altitudes.

Also worrying is when higher temperatures cause coastal glaciers to thin, allowing more ice to slip into the sea. This both speeds up the rate of glacier flow towards the sea and lowers the ice surface, exposing it to warmer air temperatures and, in turn, increasing melting.

What does this mean for the planet?

These positive feedbacks can lead to tipping points — abrupt and irreversible changes in the climate system after a certain threshold is reached. We are more likely to reach these tipping points as emissions increase and global temperatures rise.

While the science on tipping points is still emerging, the most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said they cannot be ruled out. The report identified likely tipping points such as widespread Arctic sea-ice melting and the thawing of methane-rich permafrost.

Read more:
‘Failure is not an option’: after a lost decade on climate action, the 2020s offer one last chance

Recent studies show what humanity may be up against. A study from May this year showed a substantial part of the Greenland ice sheet is either at, or about to reach, a tipping point where melting will accelerate, even if global warming is stopped. Scientists are concerned reaching this point may trigger a cascade effect, leading to other tipping points being reached.

Melted ice from both the Arctic Ocean and Greenland have caused an influx of freshwater into the North Atlantic Ocean. This has contributed to the slowing of a system of crucial ocean currents, which carry warm water from the tropics into the colder North Atlantic. This current, called the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), has slowed by 15% since the 1950s.

If the AMOC slows down any further, the consequences for the planet could be profound. It could destabilise the West African monsoon, cause more frequent drought in the Amazon rainforest and accelerate ice loss in Antarctica.

An existential threat

The rising likelihood of tipping points being reached beyond 1.5℃ of warming represents a potential, looming existential threat to human civilisation. However, even if we’ve already crossed some tipping points, as some scientists suggest, how fast the impacts unfold is still within our control.

If we limit global warming to 1.5℃ this century, we give ourselves longer to adapt to heating already locked into the Earth’s system. But the window is rapidly closing; estimates indicate we may reach the crucial 1.5℃ threshold as soon as the mid-2030s.

The message for humanity is urgent: hard science, not cloying political spin, needs to dictate climate action in the coming years. As with COVID-19, listening to the scientists gives us the best hope of saving the planet.

Read more:
When Greenland was green: rapid global warming 55 million years ago shows us what the future may hold

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

– ref. What Greenland’s record-breaking rain means for the planet – https://theconversation.com/what-greenlands-record-breaking-rain-means-for-the-planet-166567

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

The news that Craig Kelly, MP, serial purveyor of COVID misinformation, is to join Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party in order to fund his damaging ravings on a grander scale, confronts Australian democracy with a dilemma.

How is he to be prevented from adding to the harm he is already doing to the public welfare without trespassing unjustifiably on his right of free speech?

It is a classic example of how populists are exploiting the rights conferred by democracy to undermine democracy.

Kelly is frank about what he intends to do. Referring to his joining the UAP, he told The Sydney Morning Herald:

The crude reality is that I’ll have greater resources.

I have been screaming this stuff from the rooftops for a long time. It’s very hard to get this message through. We have a huge war chest, we can run television commercials, ads, we can finance a proper campaign that no other minor party or independent can.

He says that because these advertisements would be considered party-political advertisements, blocking them would be unconstitutional.

Whether or not he is right about that, it reveals his attitude: a preparedness to exploit a law protecting freedom of political speech so he can go on spreading COVID misinformation in pursuit of elected office.

The electoral and trade practices laws have no provisions to stop him. Section 329 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act is confined to the issue of whether a publication is likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of a vote. Sections 52 and 53 of the Trade Practices Act, which make false or misleading representations an offence, have nothing to say about political advertising.

Read more:
Why Clive Palmer’s lockdown ads can be rejected by newspapers on ethical grounds

However, there are two philosophical bases for arguing the electoral laws should be amended to thwart this kind of harmful exploitation.

One is John Stuart Mill’s harm principle, which says the prevention of harm to others is a legitimate constraint on individual freedom.

The other is from John Locke’s A Letter Concerning Toleration. Locke’s principle is that society is not obliged to tolerate actions or positions that undermine the civil order. Corrupting the electoral process as Kelly proposes – by misleading voters – falls well within that compass.

To borrow from Locke’s other great contribution to the development of modern democracy, his Second Treatise on Government, such actions or positions would breach the social contract. This contract is built on trust. Individuals submit themselves to the law on the condition that everyone else will do the same. Breaches of that trust are not to be tolerated.

This principle may be extended to other behaviours that breach the public trust: unethical conduct and anti-social conduct that might fall short of illegality but still do harm. Unethical conduct is embodied in Kelly’s stated intention to use Palmer’s millions to amplify his COVID misinformation, which would be to the detriment of public health.

In common with other mature democracies, Australia has predicated its laws on certain norms concerning truth, responsibility and the preservation of the social contract.

The problem is that in an age when populist politicians, social media and influential elements of mass media combine to spread harmful content, these norms – the guard rails of democracy – are being tested to breaking point.

In Washington on January 6 2021, when the mob invaded Congress, we saw what happens when the guard rails give way. For months leading up to and during the US presidential election, the then President Donald Trump and his mouthpiece, Fox News, abandoned the norm of truth-telling and persuaded a significant plurality of voters that the election was fraudulent.

This confronts democracies with a paradox. If they extend free speech even to those who use it to do serious harm, then tolerant societies become defenceless against the baneful effects of this behaviour.

It is akin to Karl Popper’s argument concerning what he called the tolerance paradox:

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

In common with other democracies, Australia places restrictions on free speech when it does unjustified harm. The defamation and contempt of court laws are just two examples among many.

There is no reason why this principle should not be extended to speech that causes provable harm to the public welfare in pursuit of election to parliament. Those harms could be defined and circumscribed in the Electoral Act without too much difficulty and would certainly include harms to public health.

Read more:
Right-wing shock jock stoush reveals the awful truth about COVID, politics and media ratings

There is precedent. In the aftermath of the Christchurch terrorism in March 2019, Parliament enacted the Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Act. Abhorrent violent material was confined in its definition to mean murder or attempted murder, a terrorist act, torture, rape or kidnapping. There are provisions to allow for the reporting of these acts.

At the same time, great care needs to be taken to avoid overreach, particularly in a society like Australia’s, which has no constitutional protection for free speech. That situation only sharpens the paradox.

As matters stand, Australia is leaving it to powerful foreign sources such as YouTube, unelected and unaccountable, to restrain the likes of Kelly, as when it recently suspended Sky News for spreading COVID misinformation.

Instead of confronting the paradox, the Australian parliament seems content to outsource to the global media platforms control over how our democratic freedoms are governed. Neither of the major parties has shown the slightest interest in engaging with this problem.

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

– ref. Craig Kelly’s move to Palmer’s United Australia Party shows the need for urgent electoral law reform – https://theconversation.com/craig-kellys-move-to-palmers-united-australia-party-shows-the-need-for-urgent-electoral-law-reform-166663

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Powles, Senior Lecturer in Security Studies, Massey University

By first denying and then granting visas to more than 100 Afghan contractors who guarded its embassy in Kabul, Australia has shone a light on the murky world of the private security industry.

According to the lawyer and former army officer representing the security guards, his clients had yet to receive the humanitarian visas and the about-face was merely an attempt by Australian officials “to look like they have done their job when they sat on their hands for so long”.

The Australian case mirrors the British government’s policy reversal concerning 125 Afghan security guards at its Kabul embassy.

They, too, were initially informed they were ineligible for emergency evacuation due to being employed by Canadian private security firm GardaWorld, only for the decision to be overruled late last week.

In both cases, these Afghan contractors have fallen into the shady legal gap between the private security company that employed them locally and the governments that contracted their employers.

As one GardaWorld employee said when he was told his contract would be terminated:

No one asked whether we are safe or not. No one asked whether our lives are in danger or not.

Privatising and outsourcing war

Afghanistan, famously known as “the graveyard of empires”, has been a gravy train for the global private security industry for the past two decades, as the war was increasingly privatised and outsourced.

Under the Trump administration, private security companies with Pentagon contracts numbered nearly 6,000, costing US$2.3 billion (A$3.1 billion) in 2019. When the US military withdrawal began, these private contractors dropped to about 1,400 by July.

Read more:
As the Taliban’s grip on Afghanistan tightens, New Zealand must commit to taking more refugees

Until now, however, private security firms were such a critical element of the war effort that their departure was considered a key factor in the collapse of the Afghan army.

The appeal of these private security contractors lies in their arms-length advantage — they are relatively disposable and carry little political cost. This allows the industry to operate opaquely, with little oversight and even less accountability.

In the case of the Australian embassy guards, it would appear their direct employers have done little to secure their safety. How, then, can these companies and the governments that employ them be held accountable?

Little binding protection

The Montreux Document on Private Military and Security Companies – which reflects inter-governmental consensus that international law applies to private security companies in war zones – requires private security companies “to respect and ensure the welfare of their personnel”. Unfortunately, this is not a binding agreement.

The International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers (ICoCA) – known as “the code” — lays out the responsibilities of private security under international law. It requires signatory companies to:

[…]provide a safe and healthy working environment, recognising the possible inherent dangers and limitations presented by the local environment [and to] ensure that reasonable precautions are taken to protect relevant staff in high-risk or life-threatening operations.

Read more:
The Taliban may have access to the biometric data of civilians who helped the U.S. military

Australia is a signatory to the ICoCA, as are private security companies Gardaworld, Hart International Australia and Hart Security Limited, all of which operate in Afghanistan and have at various times been contracted by the Australian government.

But again, like the Montreux Document, the ICoC is non-binding. However, ICoC Executive Director Jamie Williamson has said:

The situation in Afghanistan is shining a spotlight on the duty of care clients of private security companies have towards local staff and their families […] We expect to see both our government and corporate members ensure the safety and well-being of all private security personnel working on government and other contracts, whatever their nationality.

Still no guarantee of safety

This duty of care now appears to have been extended to those guards who worked for the Australian and British governments in Afghanistan — albeit at the last minute. As one contractor told Australian media, he and his colleagues first applied for protection visas in 2012.

But their safety remains uncertain. The visas do not guarantee safe passage to Kabul’s international airport where evacuation efforts are chaotic. In the past weekend alone, 14 civilians were killed trying to flee the Taliban takeover.

There are also concerns about safe passage through Taliban checkpoints not being properly coordinated by US and NATO
allies, leaving dangerous alternative routes the only option.

Read more:
Where do Afghanistan’s refugees go?

Sheltering until they can safely travel to the airport is also fraught. As one guard explained:

Every day there is news that the Taliban will start a search for each house […] looking for people who have served the army and those who have served the foreign army.

Australia has made a legal and moral commitment to provide refuge to these people. But with the Taliban’s so-called red line of August 31 looming, the window to evacuate them and their families is closing.

And while the global private security companies may have shut up shop in Afghanistan for now, the consequences and human costs associated with outsourcing war linger on.

Dr Anna Powles has consulted on security sector reform and private security sector governance with the United Nations Development Programme and co-leads a research project on private security companies in the Pacific.

– ref. The plight of Afghan security contractors highlights the legal and moral risks of outsourcing war – https://theconversation.com/the-plight-of-afghan-security-contractors-highlights-the-legal-and-moral-risks-of-outsourcing-war-166730

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Muhammad Nadeem Malik, Senior Lecturer, The University of Melbourne

Pakistan has long played a critical, yet confusing role in Afghanistan. It has been one of the strongest US allies in its “war on terror”, yet it has also covertly backed the Taliban in its fight against US-led forces for years.

The paradox remained visible after the Taliban swept into Kabul last week.

Pakistan’s official response by its foreign minister was hope for a peaceful settlement in Afghanistan through an inclusive, transition government following broad-based consultations with all ethnic groups and stakeholders.

Moreover, in a televised address, Pakistan’s army chief urged the Taliban leaders to fulfil their promise to the international community regarding respect for women’s rights and human rights

Both statements align with America’s aspirations. But in contrast, Prime Minister Imran Khan declared that Afghans had broken “the shackles of slavery”, which seems to mock the US establishment.

How regional powers are responding

Despite this mixed messaging from Pakistani leaders, a coordinated regional response to the Taliban takeover appears to be shaping up.

As western countries hold back from recognising the new government, the regional powers of Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan have kept their embassies open in Kabul and expressed their willingness to work with the Taliban.

According to a senior security journalist I spoke with in Pakistan, both Russia and Iran supported the Taliban fight against the US-sponsored Afghanistan government to contain the threat from the Islamic State.

Iran’s influence on the Taliban can be gauged by the fact the group’s leadership participated in the Shia’ Majlis (a religious council delivering sermons) in Kabul after its takeover, which is highly unusual for the extremist Sunni Taliban.

Moreover, Iran and Russia have been so involved in Afghanistan and the politics of the Taliban that when then-President Donald Trump cancelled a planned meeting with Taliban leaders in late 2019, the group reacted by going to both countries to get advice from their leaders on how to respond.

Overall, the strategies of these regional powers will greatly influence the politics in Afghanistan in the coming days — but it’s Pakistan that likely has the greatest sway over the Taliban leaders.

Read more:
Afghanistan: western powers must accept defeat and deal realistically with the Taliban

A brief history of Pakistan’s support for the Taliban

Pakistan has provided political and military support for different factions within Afghanistan since the early 1970s. During the 1980s, Pakistan was a major backer of the Afghan mujahideen (holy warriors) fighting against the Soviet invasion and hosted millions Afghan refugees fleeing the war.

Pakistan was also a major ally of the US at this time. The US channelled some US$2-3 billion (A$2.7-4.1 billion) worth of covert assistance through Pakistan to the mujahideen, training over 80,000 of the fighters.

Even after the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989, Pakistani military officers continued to provide training and guidance to the mujahideen and eventually to Taliban forces to combat their enemies.

In addition, senior members of Pakistan’s intelligence agency and army are accused of helping the Taliban plan major military operations against the government during the Afghan civil war in the 1990s. Pakistani support for the group attracted widespread international criticism, including from then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who called it “deeply distressing”.

Read more:
As Afghanistan falls, what does it mean for the Middle East?

Pakistan was then just one of three countries to officially recognise the new Taliban government when it took power in 1996.

General Hamid Gul, a former head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), acknowledged in 2014 that Pakistan even used US aid to continue funding the Taliban after the September 11 terror attacks.

He told a television audience,

When history is written, it will be stated that the ISI defeated the Soviet Union in Afghanistan with the help of America. Then there will be another sentence. The ISI, with the help of America, defeated America.

Pakistan is still likely to provide covert political and logistic support to the new Taliban leaders in Afghanistan today.

In the past, the Taliban leadership had three consultative councils, known as shuras, based in Pakistan. At least one of these shuras, based in Quetta, still probably seems to be operating from Pakistan.

The Taliban also operated in the country throughout the American occupation in Afghanistan, even though the Pakistan government denies supporting the group and denies the existence of the Quetta shura.

Given this history, it’s no wonder many people around the world are blaming Pakistan for the Taliban’s recent military success, reflected in the #SanctionPakistan campaign on Twitter.

Read more:
As the Taliban surges across Afghanistan, al-Qaeda is poised for a swift return

What does Pakistan stand to gain or lose?

Pakistan’s biggest gain is that India will lose its influence in Afghanistan, which was seen as a threat to Pakistan’s security. The Taliban takeover also allows Pakistan to boost its bilateral trade with Afghanistan and provides an unrestricted trade route to the countries of central Asia.

However, Pakistan can lose from the Taliban’s ascendancy, as well. If the Taliban fails to ensure stability, this can trigger another wave of refugees crossing the border. The Taliban’s takeover could also embolden domestic terror groups within Pakistan.

As a result, Taliban rule in Afghanistan could have adverse security repercussions for Pakistan, particularly with regard to the Pakistani Taliban (TTP). The TTP considers the takeover of Afghanistan by its Afghan counterparts a significant ideological victory.

The TTP has launched several violent attacks in Pakistan over the years, including an attack on a school in Peshawar in 2014 that killed more than 150 people, mostly children.

Some of the TTP’s leaders were also reportedly freed from prisons by Afghan Taliban fighters in recent days.

As a former member of Pakistan’s parliament told the Financial Times, “a stable Afghanistan will work in Pakistan’s favour”.

The key to creating peace and stability in Afghanistan will be Pakistan’s strategic cooperation with all of the regional powers, as well as the US. Such cooperation, however, may be a challenge to achieve, given the competing interests that have long torn this country apart.

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

– ref. How Pakistan stands to gain — or lose — from the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan – https://theconversation.com/how-pakistan-stands-to-gain-or-lose-from-the-talibans-victory-in-afghanistan-166414

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jamin Wood, PhD Candidate at the Australian Centre for Water and Environmental Biotechnology (formerly Advanced Water Management Centre), The University of Queensland

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released earlier this month sounded a “code red for humanity”. At such a crucial time, we should draw on all possible solutions to combating global warming.

About one-quarter of greenhouse gas emissions are associated with the manufacture of the products we use. While a small number of commercial uses for carbon dioxide exist — for instance in the beverage and chemical industries — the current demand isn’t enough to achieve meaningful carbon dioxide reduction.

As such, we need to find new ways to transform industrial manufacturing from being a carbon dioxide source to a carbon dioxide user.

The good news is that plastics, chemicals, cosmetics and many other products need a carbon source. If we could produce them using carbon dioxide instead of fossil hydrocarbons, we would be able to sequester billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases per year.

How, you may ask? Well, biology already has a solution.

Read more:
There aren’t enough trees in the world to offset society’s carbon emissions – and there never will be

Gas fermentation

You may have heard of microscopic organisms, or microbes — we use them to make beer, spirits and bread. But we can also use them to create biofuels such as ethanol.

They typically need sugar as an input, which competes with human food consumption. However, there are other microbes called “acetogens” which can use carbon dioxide as their input to make several chemicals including ethanol.

Acetogens are thought to be one of the first life-forms on Earth. The ancient Earth’s atmosphere was very different to the atmosphere today — there was no oxygen, yet plentiful carbon dioxide.

Acetogens were able to recycle this carbon using chemical energy sources, such as hydrogen, in a process called gas fermentation. Today, acetogens are found in many anaerobic environments, such as in animals’ guts.

Not being able to use oxygen makes acetogens less efficient at building biomass; they are slow growers. But interestingly, it makes them more efficient producers.

For example, a typical food crop’s energy efficiency (where sunlight is turned into a product) may be around 1%. On the other hand, if solar energy was used to provide renewable hydrogen for use in gas fermentation (via acetogens), this process would have an overall energy efficiency closer to 10-15%.

This means acetogens are potentially up to twice as efficient as most current industrial processes — which makes them a cheaper and more environmentally friendly option. That is, if we can bring the technology to scale.

Sustainable carbon recycling

Gas fermentation is scaling up in China, the United States and Europe. Industrial emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrogen are being recycled into ethanol to commercially produce aviation fuel from 2022, plastic bottles from 2024 and even polyester clothes.

In the future this could be expanded to produce chemicals needed to make rubber, plastics, paints and cosmetics, too.

But gas fermentation currently isn’t done commercially with carbon dioxide, despite this being a much larger emission source than carbon monoxide. In part this is because it poses an engineering and bioengineering challenge, but also because it’s expensive.

We recently published an economic assessment in Water Research to help chart a pathway towards widespread acetogen-carbon dioxide recycling.

We found economic barriers in producing some products, but not all. For instance, it is viable today to use carbon dioxide-acetogen fermentation to produce chemicals required to make perspex.

But unlike current commercial operations, this would be enabled by renewable hydrogen production. Increasing the availability of green hydrogen will greatly increase what we can do with gas fermentation.

Looking ahead

Australia has a competitive advantage and could be a leader in this technology. As host to the world’s largest green-hydrogen projects, we have the capacity to produce low-cost renewable hydrogen.

Underused renewable waste streams could also enable carbon recycling with acetogens. For instance, large amounts of biogas is produced at wastewater treatment plants and landfills. Currently it’s either burned as waste, or to generate heat and power.

Past research shows us biogas can be converted (or “reformed”) into renewable hydrogen and carbon in a carbon-neutral process.

And we found this carbon and hydrogen could then be used in gas fermentation to make carbon-neutral products. This would provide as much as 12 times more value than just burning biogas to generate heat and power.

The IPCC report shows carbon dioxide removal is required to limit global warming to less than 2℃.

Carbon capture and storage is on most governments’ agendas. But if we change our mindset from viewing carbon as a waste product, then we can change our economic incentive from carbon disposal to carbon reuse.

Carbon dioxide stored underground has no value. If we harness its full potential by using it to manufacture products, this could support myriad industries as they move to sustainable production.

Read more:
Our ability to manufacture minerals could transform the gem market, medical industries and even help suck carbon from the air

Jamin Wood receives funding from The Warwick and Nancy Olsen Scholarship and Research Training Program.

Bernardino Virdis receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Shihu Hu receives funding from Australian Research Council.

– ref. From jet fuel to clothes, microbes can help us recycle carbon dioxide into everyday products – https://theconversation.com/from-jet-fuel-to-clothes-microbes-can-help-us-recycle-carbon-dioxide-into-everyday-products-165242

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zuleyha Keskin, Associate Professor, Charles Sturt University

With the world still in shock over the Taliban’s lightning-fast takeover of Afghanistan, Afghan people, especially women, wonder what kind of life awaits the nation. When pressed about preserving the rights of women, a Taliban spokesperson said the Taliban would not discriminate against women and would give them their rights “within the bounds of shariah”.

These seemingly moderate messages from the Taliban give the impression they might have changed. But their track record in the 1990s, their interpretation of Islam, and the events that transpired in the past two decades give us a good idea of how they are likely to implement shariah.

What is shariah and how did it come about?

Shariah literally means “the way to a watering source” in Arabic. It came to denote a unique legal system based on the sources of Islam.

When Prophet Muhammad established the first Muslim community in Medina in 622, there was a need to have a legal system better than the crude customs of the tribal Arabian Peninsula. The revelations of the Quran and the Prophet’s own reforms set out the legal principles and practices that laid the foundations of shariah.

The legal approach of the Prophet was progressive and moderate for its time. Prophet Muhammad’s wife Ai’sha said whenever he was confronted with a matter regarding people, he would always choose the easier option for people and he never took revenge. This is an important point for the Taliban to keep in mind.

When Islam grew rapidly from Spain to India by the end of the seventh century, the need for a common legal system became paramount. Instead of replicating the Roman and Persian legal systems, caliphs and Muslim scholars built a complex and detailed legal system on the foundation laid by the Quran and Prophet Muhammad.

Scholars identified higher objectives of the law. In the 14th century, influential Muslim jurist Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi identified the highest objective of law as:

to promote good and to benefit human beings and to protect them from evil, from harm and from subsequent suffering.

Muslim jurists deduced five basic human rights for Islamic law to guarantee – the right to life, property, freedom of religion, freedom of mind (including speech) and to raise a family. Caliphs and sultans could not violate these individual rights.

Legal pluralism was also practised in the Muslim world. Many schools of law were established, having developed over centuries, and implemented in much of the Muslim world. Five such schools survived – Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali and Jafari. The last is for Shiite Muslims, and the others for Sunnis.

Shariah became the most sophisticated and developed legal system in the world from the eighth to the 17th century. It served as the common legal code across the vast Muslim lands and populations characterised by racial, cultural, religious and geographic diversity.

Read more:
The Taliban wants the world’s trust. To achieve this, it will need to make some difficult choices

Why does shariah appear backwards today?

Why, then, does Islamic law appear to have a medieval flavour and appear backwards when it is implemented in modern times? There are five main reasons.

First, from the 11th century onwards, Muslim scholars declared the closure of the gate of ijtihad (legislation) and discouraged new legal interpretation. The 11th through to the 14th centuries was the era of the Crusades, Mongol invasion of Muslim heartlands and the plague. It was not the time to make new interpretations with so many crises taking place. Anyway, scholars reasoned, Islamic law was quite developed.

Second, European colonisation of the majority of the Muslim world from the 19th century onward collapsed the political, legal and religious institutions. Busy with independence movements and dealing with the onslaught of modernity on conservative society, Muslim leaders and scholars had no time to develop Islamic law.

Third, when Muslim nations gained their freedom, mostly after the second world war, they began nation-building. The political leadership were mainly secular modernists who wanted to westernise and modernise their nations. There was no place for Shariah in their vision. The new Republic of Turkey, for example, implemented direct translations of Swiss civil codes instead of Shariah.

Fourth, the historical role of Muslim scholarship has shifted. Newly established secular nation states nationalised rich endowments that belonged to religious institutions. Muslim scholars were persecuted for fear of dissent and opposition. Islamic scholarship was reduced to a small, underfunded university faculty. Talented Muslims chose professions other than Islamic law.

The result is a major loss in the quality of scholarship and a gap of at least 150 years with no practical development in Islamic law.

The last attempt to align Islamic law with a modern legislative framework was made by the Ottoman Empire in its Majalla civil code project. Completed in 1876, Majalla consisted of 16 volumes and 1,851 articles. Since then, the world has changed dramatically without an adequate theoretical and practical response from Islamic law.

A fifth factor is the influence of puritanical Salafism among jihadist groups such as Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and Islamic State. These groups often ignored the vast Shariah legal literature, scholarship and historical experience. They cherry-picked and implemented certain Quranic verses and prophetic traditions as Islamic law.

So, Islamic law appears relatively underdeveloped when compared to other legal systems. It simply did not have a chance to develop in the modern era.

Contemporary Muslim views on shariah

Muslims have differing views on the contemporary application of shariah law.

One view held by secular and modernist Muslims is that shariah was more suited to classical agrarian societies. Given the world and Muslim societies have changed dramatically, shariah is no longer applicable.

The opposite view is held by ultra-conservative Muslims and Islamists. They insist shariah is complete and perfect as it is, and modern societies should be changing to conform with shariah.

A third group, holding perhaps the majority view, believes Shariah is applicable at all times. The key is to know how to apply it correctly, given the changes in time and place.

The third view considers the complexity of the world and proposes committees made up of Islamic scholars alongside scientists and sociologists to fully examine Islamic law. Using the principles and methodology of Shariah, old legal rulings could be evaluated and, if there are grounds, modified. New issues not found in classical Islamic law would also be responded to.

Read more:
Owning up: Australia must admit its involvement in Afghanistan has been an abject failure

Taliban’s idea of shariah and Women

Almost certainly, the Taliban holds the second view – society has to change in line with the shariah. This means a move away from the liberalism Afghans grew accustomed to in the past two decades.

The next important question is whether the Taliban will follow the puritanical Salafism or a more traditional Islamic legal school?

In the 1990s, with its support of Al-Qaeda and use of harsh punishments, the Taliban appeared to follow puritanical Salafism. Their fall in 2001, Islamic State’s demise in 2019, and regression of Al-Qaeda after Osama bin Laden’s death would suggest they have learned a lesson or two.

Muslims of the subcontinent and central Asia traditionally follow the Hanafi legal school, which is one of the more liberal of the four Sunni Islamic legal schools. Even if this legal school is implemented, its most recent form is the 150-year-old Ottoman Majalla legal code. It will be curious to see if Taliban will consider Majalla at all.

An important consideration is the degree of change the world and Afghanistan have gone through since the first Taliban rule. The Taliban were isolated when they first came to power. But now all of their officers have smartphones connected to the internet and social media. Most importantly, they are using them effectively. Online access to the world would certainly have a moderating effect.

In the first Taliban rule, women had almost no rights. Women had to cover their body and face with the burqa, and they could not get education or work. They could only travel with a male chaperone.

The Taliban today claims to be more inclusive and tolerant of women. While wearing the burqa may not be imposed, women (and men) will be required to cover the rest of their bodies, much like in Iran.

Girls would be allowed to receive an education in girls-only schools staffed by female teachers and administrators. Women would be able to work in a narrow list of professions where there will be limited or no mixing of genders.

In short, life for women in Afghanistan will be better than during the first Taliban rule, but worse than the liberal rights they enjoyed in the past two decades.

Zuleyha Keskin is affiliated with ISRA Academy

Mehmet Ozalp is affiliated with ISRA Academy.

– ref. Explainer: what is shariah law and what version of it is the Taliban likely to implement? – https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-shariah-law-and-what-version-of-it-is-the-taliban-likely-to-implement-166490

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Wood, Associate Professor, Discipline of Childhood and Adolescent Health, University of Sydney

In July Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) provisionally approved the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for kids aged 12-15.

The Australian Technical Advisory group on Immunisation (ATAGI) subsequently recommended kids in this age group with underlying chronic medical conditions, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and kids living in remote communities should be prioritised.

We’re expecting advice from ATAGI as to whether the rollout should be extended to all 12 to 15-year-olds, as countries like the United States and Canada have done.

But where does that leave children under 12? We know they’re making up a large proportion of new infections in Australia’s current outbreaks, which was not the case last year.

Do they need to be vaccinated? What are the benefits of vaccinating children, both for the child and the community? And how will we know the vaccines are safe and effective for young children?

COVID in kids

Throughout the pandemic, fortunately, we’ve seen children are very unlikely to get severely unwell or die from COVID-19.

Australian data from January 1 to August 1 this year show 2.5% of children aged up to nine and 2.9% children and teenagers aged 10-19 who contracted COVID were hospitalised. This is compared to 7.7% of young adults aged 20-29, with the rates continuing to increase with age.

Cases are on the rise among children in New South Wales, but to date this hasn’t been accompanied by a large increase in paediatric hospitalisations.

Recent data show increased rates of hospitalisation among children in the US with COVID-19 compared to last year, alongside rising infections with the Delta variant.

But even though the rate has gone up, it remains low. In children and adolescents aged 17 and under the rate is 0.38 per 100,000 people, well below the rate in adults aged 60 to 69 (5.63 per 100,000) and those over 70 (8.07 per 100,000).

However, some kids who have chronic medical conditions are at a higher risk of getting really sick from COVID, which is why ATAGI has listed them as a priority group.

Read more:
Should we vaccinate children against COVID-19? We asked 5 experts

One of the complications of COVID-19 is long COVID where a person experiences lasting symptoms such as breathlessness, anxiety and “brain fog” (reductions in attention and concentration).

Reassuringly, a recent study found only a small proportion of children had symptoms beyond four weeks after their initial COVID infection, and almost all children had recovered by eight weeks.

So what are the benefits of vaccinating kids?

While the Delta variant is more infectious than other strains of the coronavirus, and more kids are becoming infected, there’s not a scientific consensus at this stage that it’s causing more severe disease in children.

That said, a small minority will get sicker than others and need hospital care.

If vaccines are found to be safe and effective for younger children there would be benefit in protecting the individual child.

What about collective benefits? Will vaccinating young children reduce transmission in the community and improve our herd protection?

Recent modelling from the Doherty Institute doesn’t appear to consider whether vaccinating children under 12 would or wouldn’t contribute to reducing community transmission.

Other modelling has suggested vaccinating younger children and adolescents will be important if Australia is to reach the elusive “herd immunity”.

Trials are under way

Clinical trials of the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna in children aged 12 and up have shown good results (though at this stage Moderna is only approved in Australia for adults).

Before we move to vaccinating children under 12 we’ll need safety and efficacy data from trials in this age group.

It’s important to conduct clinical trials specifically in children because their immune systems are different. For example, children may experience different side effects following vaccination, and may need a smaller dose.

Read more:
How to prepare your child for a COVID test

Trials of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in younger children are under way. The Moderna trial KidCOVE is currently recruiting in the US. So far close to 7,000 kids are enrolled.

Meanwhile, Pfizer is aiming to enrol 4,500 children under 12 across the US and other countries.

The studies are divided into children aged six to 11, aged two to five, and six months to less than two years old. They are aiming to assess safety and immune responses after two vaccinations with three different dose sizes.

For Pfizer, the three doses being trialled are 10 micrograms, 20 micrograms, and 30 micrograms (the latter is the dose given to older teens and adults).

A trial of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6-17 commenced in March 2021 in the United Kingdom. However this trial was paused as a precautionary measure following reports of blood clots in adults who received this vaccine.

What now?

You may be wondering when children under 12 will be able to be vaccinated. The short answer is we don’t know for sure.

We need strong safety and efficacy data from the clinical trials before considering vaccinating young children. Currently, it’s anticipated the first data on children younger than 12 may be available for review later this year.

For now though, it’s reassuring to know children still appear less likely to end up in hospital with COVID compared to adults.

Read more:
Is it more infectious? Is it spreading in schools? This is what we know about the Delta variant and kids

Further, it seems many of the cases we’re seeing in children are due to transmission in the household, often from an infected adult to the child.

So the best way to protect younger kids for now is to ensure as many adults as possible are fully vaccinated.

High vaccine coverage in the community will also benefit children by reducing the need for lockdowns and school closures, which we know can have negative effects on their education, socialisation and mental health.

Nicholas Wood receives funding from the NHMRC for a Career Development Fellowship. He holds a Churchill Fellowship

– ref. Under-12s are increasingly catching COVID-19. How sick are they getting and when will we be able to vaccinate them? – https://theconversation.com/under-12s-are-increasingly-catching-covid-19-how-sick-are-they-getting-and-when-will-we-be-able-to-vaccinate-them-165948

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Martin, Research Scientist, Taronga Conservation Society Australia & Adjunct lecturer, University of Sydney

Am I not pretty enough? This article is part of The Conversation’s new series introducing you to unloved animals that need our help.

A whopping 191 different bat species live in the Pacific Islands across Micronesia, Melanesia, and Polynesia — but these are, collectively, the most imperilled in the world. In fact, five of the nine bat species that have gone extinct in the last 160 years have come from this region.

For too long, the conservation of Pacific Island bats has been largely overlooked in science. Of the 191 existing species, 25% are threatened with extinction, and we lack information to assess the status of a further 15%.

Just as these bats are rare and far-flung across the Pacific islands, so is the expertise and research needed to conserve them along with the vital ecosystem services they provide, such as pollination, seed dispersal, and insect control.

The first-ever Pacific Islands Bat Forum, held earlier this month, sought to change this, bringing together a new network of researchers, conservationists, and community members — 380 people from 40 countries and territories — dedicated to their survival.

So, why should we care about these bats anyway?

Conserving Pacific Island bats is paramount for preserving the region’s diverse human cultures and for safeguarding the healthy functioning of island ecosystems.

In many Pacific Island nations, bats have great cultural significance as totems, food, and traditional currency.

Bats are the largest land animals on many of the Pacific islands, and are vital “keystone species”, maintaining the structure of ecological communities.

Yet, Pacific Island bats are increasingly under threat, including from intensifying land use (farming, housing, roads) invasive species (rats, cats, snakes, ants), and human harvesting. They’re also vulnerable to climate change, which heightens sea levels and increases the intensity of cyclones and heatwaves.

So let’s meet four fascinating — but threatened — Pacific Island bats that deserve more attention.

1. Pacific sheath-tailed bat

Conservation status: endangered

Distribution: American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Samoa, Tonga

The Pacific sheath-tailed bat (Emballonura semicaudata) weighs just five-grams and has a weak, fluttering flight. Yet somehow, it has colonised some of the smaller and more isolated islands across the Pacific, from Samoa to Palau. That’s across 6,000 kilometres of ocean!

Over the past decade, this insect-eating, cave-roosting bat has disappeared from around 50% of islands where it has been recorded. The reasons for this are unclear. Disturbance of cave roosts, introduced species such as lantana and goats, and increasing use of pesticides, may all have played a part.

Unfortunately, the Pacific sheath-tailed bat is now presumed extinct in many former parts of its range, including American Samoa, Tonga, and several islands of the Northern Mariana Islands. This leaves Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and Fiji as remaining strongholds for the species, though data is limited.

2. Montane monkey-faced bat

Conservation status: critically endangered

Distribution: Solomon Islands

There are six species of monkey-faced bat — all are threatened, and all are limited to islands across the Solomon Islands, Bougainville, and Fiji.

The montane monkey-faced bat (Pteralopex pulchra) is one species, and weighs around 280 grams, eats fruit and nectar, and has incredibly robust teeth. But perhaps most startling is its ruby-red eyes and wing membranes that are marbled with white and black.

The montane monkey-faced bat has been recorded only once by scientists on a single mountain (Mt Makarakomburu) above the altitude of 1,250 metres, on Guadalcanal Island. This tiny range makes it vulnerable to rare, extreme events such as cyclones, which could wipe out a whole population in one swoop. And being limited to mountain-top cloud forests could place it at greater risk from climate change.

It’s an extreme example of both the endemism (species living in a small, defined area) and inadequacies of scientific knowledge that challenge Pacific island bat conservation.

3. Ornate flying-fox

Conservation status: vulnerable

Distribution: New Caledonia

Like many fruit bats across the Pacific, New Caledonia’s endemic ornate flying-fox (Pteropus ornatus) is an emblematic species. Flying-foxes are hunted for bush meat, used as part of cultural practices by the Kanaks (Melanesian first settlers), are totems for some clans, and feature as a side dish during the “New Yam celebration” each year. Their bones and hair are also used to make traditional money.

Because they’re so highly prized, flying-foxes can be subject to illegal trafficking. Despite the Northern and Southern Provinces of New Caledonia having regulated hunting, flying-fox populations continue to decline. Recent studies predict 80% of the population will be gone in the next 30 years if hunting continues at current levels.

On a positive note, earlier this year the Northern Province launched a conservation management program to protect flying-fox populations while incorporating cultural values and practices.

4. Fijian free-tailed bat

Conservation status: endangered

Distribution: Fiji, Vanuatu

In many ways, the Fijian free-tailed bat (Chaerephon bregullae) has become the face of proactive bat conservation in the Pacific Islands. This insect-eating bat requires caves to roost during the day and is threatened when these caves are disturbed by humans as it interrupts their daytime roosting. The loss of foraging habitat is another major threat.

The only known colony of reproducing females lives in Nakanacagi Cave in Fiji, with around 7,000 bats. In 2014, an international consortium with Fijian conservationists and community members came together to protect Nakanacagi Cave. As a result, it became recognised as a protected area in 2018.

But this species shares many characteristics with three of the nine bat species that have gone extinct globally. This includes being a habitat specialist, its unknown cause of decline, and its potential exposure to chemicals through insect foraging. It’s important we continue to pay close attention to its well-being.

Where do we go from here?

The perspectives of local knowledge from individual islands aren’t always captured in global scientific assessments of wildlife.

In many Pacific Islands, bats aren’t protected by national laws. Instead, in many countries, most land is under customary ownership, which means it’s owned by Indigenous peoples. This includes land in Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu. Consequently, community landowners have the power to enact their own conservation actions.

The emerging Pacific Bat Network, inspired by the recent forum, aims to foster collaborative relationships between scientific conservationists and local leaders for species protection, while respecting cultural practices.

As the Baru Conservation Alliance — a locally-led, not-for-profit group from Malaita, Solomon Islands — put it in their talk at the forum:

conservation is not a new thing for Kwaio.

Now the forum has ended, the diverse network of people passionate about bat conservation is primed to work together to strengthen the conservation of these unique and treasured bats of the Pacific.

John Martin receives funding from the Australian Research Council. PacBat consists of a core, but growing, group of conservationists, the authors of this article acknowledge the valuable contribution of each of you.

david.waldien@cnu.edu receives funding from private foundations including The Waterloo Foundation, The Christensen Fund, The Woodtiger Fund, and National Geographic. I am affiliated with the Harrison Institute, Lubee Bat Conservancy, and the IUCN Species Survival Commission – Bat Specialist Group. I have active collaborations with the PacBat network.

Justin Welbergen is President of the Australasian Bat Society, a not-for-profit organisation that aims to promote the conservation of bats. He receives funding from the Australian Research Council (DP170104272, LP200100331).

Nicola Hanrahan is an executive committee member of the Australasian Bat Society

Tigga Kingston receives funding from the US National Science Foundation, Award Number 2020595 “AccelNet: Global Union of Bat Diversity Networks (GBatNet): Bats as a model for understanding global vertebrate diversification and sustainability”. She is co-Chair of the IUCN SSC Bat Specialist Group, with responsibility for the Old World.

Tyrone Lavery receives funding from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund

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

– ref. Pacific Island bats are utterly fascinating, yet under threat and overlooked. Meet 4 species – https://theconversation.com/pacific-island-bats-are-utterly-fascinating-yet-under-threat-and-overlooked-meet-4-species-165765

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Media, Queensland University of Technology

Almost everyone can agree communication is important. There is much less agreement about what, exactly, communication is or how best to develop skills in it.

Communication today is more multi-modal than ever, but we still tend to give and receive the most training in writing. Our national survey of introductory communications courses in 2020, just published in the journal Communication Research and Practice, found more than 70% of assignments in the sample evaluated only a single communication mode. Perhaps unsurprisingly, 85.7% of these were in written form.

Read more:
5 tips on writing better university assignments

Less than a third of the assessment pieces were multi-modal. And only 11% enabled students to practise their spoken, written and visual communication skills in an integrated way.

While writing is certainly a critical communication skill, it’s not the only one. We make and receive messages in spoken or visual form every day. We sometimes seem to believe just by using these modes we’ll naturally get better at them over time.

Sadly, anyone who’s sat through a typical PowerPoint presentation or unending Zoom meetings knows even senior professionals and heads of government often are unaware of or ignore best practices for crafting an effective message in written, spoken or visual form.

And with these three modes being increasingly bundled together, it’s time to stop studying them in isolation. We need to start learning how to thoughtfully integrate them.

Read more:
In a world of digital bystanders the challenge is for all of us to design engaging online education

A growing field but writing dominates

Universities are a prime training ground for students to learn what communication is. It’s here they should be able to hone communication skills in all its forms before entering the workforce. Despite this, universities have a long history of privileging the written word over other communication types.

English departments, for example, have existed for more than 250 years but not until 1974 did Australia’s first communication degree enter the scene. Interest in communication has grown since then – 86% of Australian universities now offer a degree in this field.

However, the ways communication is defined and taught vary widely across the country. In part, this reflects the diversity of where communication degrees are housed. They can be found everywhere from faculties of arts to education, social science, law, business and even health.

Our survey of first-year undergraduate courses found class sizes ranged from as few as 16 students to as many as 1,000 or more. The average was 343.

Such large classes make it hard to achieve consistency across the large teaching teams required to staff these units.

The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced new challenges and increased existing ones related to catering to students from potentially many time zones. In our survey, 20% of universities did not provide synchronous tutorials, where students and teaching staff meet in real time.

Asynchronous learning opportunities, where learners and teachers aren’t meeting in real time, can be convenient for students. However, they don’t allow them to hone the dynamics of real-time conversation and communication.

When assessment tasks are pre-recorded or pre-prepared, are we modelling real-world communication to our students?

Read more:
Digital learning is real-world learning. That’s why blended on-campus and online study is best

The challenges of holistic communications teaching

Another challenge relates to the background and skills of the teaching team. More than half the universities surveyed had only a single lecturer for the unit. Expecting one person to be able to adequately support the very different modes of written, spoken and visual communication is unrealistic.

A co-taught lecturing approach might better position these programs to define and teach communication more holistically. Our survey found the most popular way to support learning was through student group work. This team-based approach mirrors how much of the professional workforce operates and deserves a closer look.

Shrinking university budgets and reduced teaching teams mean much of the work of providing feedback in large units is relegated to group work and peer critique. This can be valuable but shouldn’t substitute for expert feedback.

Encouragingly, unit co-ordinators surveyed are keen to experiment with more innovative assessment types and to consider communication more holistically.

Read more:
What is the point of assessment in higher education anyway?

To achieve these goals, significant barriers need to be navigated. These include:

1) the length of the semester or degree program, as only so much can fit into a few months and Australia’s degrees are shorter than those in the United States

2) the disciplinary background of the teaching team

3) workload and marking considerations

4) university bureaucracy, as universities sometimes require a year or more to make changes to how classes are taught, which doesn’t encourage innovation and allow co-ordinators to be nimble.

In this age of lockdowns and remote working, being able to present a message in written, spoken and visual forms is more critical than ever. We need holistic training in all three modes so we can become more effective, empowered and responsible communicators.

T.J. Thomson receives funding from Australian Research Council through Discovery project DP210100859: Amplifying Voices from the Royal Commission into Aged Care and from the Australian Academy of the Humanities.

Glen Thomas and Lesley Irvine do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Communication is changing — and most universities haven’t kept up – https://theconversation.com/communication-is-changing-and-most-universities-havent-kept-up-165754

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Taylor, Senior Teaching Fellow, Bond University

Based on the autobiographical books of notorious stand-over man and self-made celebrity Mark Brandon “Chopper” Read, Andrew Dominik’s outlandish biopic Chopper detonated on Australian screens in 2000.

The film was an audacious combination of hard-hitting crime and oddball charm, perhaps reflecting Australian cinematic culture at the time.

In 1992, Romper Stomper’s ugly portrayal of neo-Nazi violence was so incendiary critic David Stratton famously refused to rate it. Later, the emotionally eviscerating The Boys (1998) forced Australians to recall the horrific murder of Anita Cobby.

Meanwhile, films like The Adventures of Priscilla Queen of the Desert (1994), Muriel’s Wedding (1994) and The Castle (1997) treated Aussie quirk as endearing. Chopper’s eccentric mood was one of reckless abandon, courting an uncomfortable laughter with its sheer audacity.

An unhinged performance

Opening with Read incarcerated in Melbourne’s Pentridge Prison in 1978, Dominik’s film charts Chopper’s select exploits over two decades. These include the senseless murder of a fellow inmate and his decision to mutilate his own ears as a ploy to be transferred to a new jail, away from prisoners bent on retaliation.

In 1986, out of jail, Read is a paranoid menace reigniting old hostilities with Melbourne’s criminal underworld, while moonlighting as an unreliable police informant.

Finally, in 1991, we see him back behind bars, lapping up the fleeting spoils of his celebrity status.

Chopper’s success is in no small part dependent on Eric Bana’s unhinged performance as the feckless thug. Bana balances hard man and funny man, this harsh exterior occasionally betrayed by moments of insecurity.

Everything about Bana’s performance is captivating. His high nasal inflection of voice is utterly incongruous with the tough guy facade. He can radically shift the tone of a scene with a flash of his eyes.

With this performance, Chopper catapulted Bana’s career from TV sketch comic to an international acclaimed actor.

A bizarre national curiosity

The film is quick to acknowledge its undoubtedly embellished source material. A title card declares “narrative liberties have been taken.” As Read quips:

You know me! Never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn!

Such nods permit mischievous flourishes of style. We see the murder of “Sammy the Turk” from several, sometimes contradictory, perspectives. The most ostentatious of these has characters take turns describing their role in the incident straight to camera in rhyming verse.

Chopper also taps into Australia’s long-standing fascination with anti-authoritarian figures. Our first feature film was The Story of the Kelly Gang (1906), controversial even on its release for presenting a bushranger as sympathetic figure.

Read more:
True History of the Kelly Gang review: an unheroic portrait of a violent, unhinged, colonial punk

Chopper does not so much glorify Read as present him as a bizarre national curiosity. His iconic handlebar moustache and innumerable tattoos draw attention away from his earless profile.

The film’s humour simultaneously heightens and undermines the cruelty it depicts. Viewers are repeatedly stranded in the farcical chasm between the severity of Read’s actions and his disproportionate response.

But Dominik’s film undoubtedly spurred Read’s notoriety on-and-off-screen. In 2018, the miniseries Underbelly Files: Chopper saw the role reprised by Aaron Jeffery to mixed reviews.

In the wake of Chopper, Read continued to court controversy until his death from liver cancer in 2013. From a comedic speaking tour to his foray into children’s literature, Read was a perennial iconoclast.

Absurdity meets reality

On its cinematic re-release two decades on, Chopper retains its shock-factor. The film is aggressively self-aware in its provocations, goading its audience with a conspiratorial wink.

At every turn, Chopper shows up the gulf between deadpan absurdity and brutal reality, daring you to laugh at things you know you shouldn’t.

This dynamic is revealed early when Read stabs a fellow inmate in a graphically depicted unprovoked attack. While his victim bleeds , Read calmly informs responding guards “Keithy seems to have done himself a mischief” — a wry one-liner that has since entered the Australian vernacular.

Read is at his most ludicrous during interactions with underworld figure Neville Bartos (Vince Colosimo). When detectives ask Read about a bungled stick-up that ended with a frenzied trip to the hospital, the crim’s denials highlight his own cockeyed logic:

Why would I shoot a bloke – BANG – and then put him in the bloody car and whizz him off to the hospital at a hundred miles an hour? It defeats the purpose of having shot him in the first place.

Likewise, Read’s boasting to a news reporter that he is a bestselling author despite being “semi-bloody-illiterate” retains its humour.

Yet, while some of the film’s absurdities will still turn an uneasy grin, at other times its wilful envelope-pushing is tougher to stomach.

Confronting girlfriend Tanya (Kate Beahan) at her mother’s home over alleged infidelity, Read savagely beats her before headbutting the older woman. This brutality is offset with another preposterous remark (“Have a look what you’ve gone and done. Your mum’s upset!”) soliciting the audience for more uncomfortable amusement.

Given the shift in the public conversation about domestic abuse over the last decade, viewers may have a different response than they did 20 years ago.

Will today’s audiences still embrace Chopper? I suspect most will, even if some of its excesses are freshly abrasive. Others will still be put off by its graphic violence and caustic humour.

Chopper won’t please everyone. But, as our titular character opines, “even Beethoven had his critics”.

Chopper is in select cinemas from August 26.

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

– ref. Chopper is a knowing wink at the audience. Will audiences 20 years later still wink back? – https://theconversation.com/chopper-is-a-knowing-wink-at-the-audience-will-audiences-20-years-later-still-wink-back-165748

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

With the government’s announcement last week that 12–to-15-year-olds can now receive the Pfizer vaccine for COVID-19, New Zealand has joined a growing list of countries expanding their vaccination rollouts.

A Ministry of Health survey in June found 58% of caregivers were likely to allow their 12–to-15-year-old children to be vaccinated, up from 55% in May.

The survey also found the number of parents who had decided not to vaccinate their children had increased slightly. Parents’ key concerns were the vaccine’s safety in children and its long-term effects.

So, while the Pfizer vaccine has been given provisional approval by Medsafe, the rollout still raises the important issue of what New Zealand law says about children’s consent to medical treatment.

Who can give consent?

The Care of Children Act provides that a child over the age of 16 can give or refuse consent to medical treatment.

However, this does not mean all children under the age of 16 cannot consent to medical treatment. Key to this is how competent a child is to make such a decision.

Read more:
Should we vaccinate children against COVID-19? We asked 5 experts

There is no defined age at which any person may be regarded as competent, but the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights (which originates from the Health and Disability Commissioner Act) provides some guidance.

This states that everyone – adult or child – is presumed to be competent to make such decisions unless there are reasonable grounds for thinking otherwise.

Are children competent to consent?

When it comes to the Care of Children Act, the view of the New Zealand courts follows a British case in which the House of Lords decided a child under 16 was legally competent to consent to medical examination and treatment — if they had sufficient maturity and intelligence to understand the nature and implications of that treatment.

Similarly, under the New Zealand code, if a health professional is satisfied the young person fully understands what is involved with the treatment, then the young person can consent.

Read more:
High priority: why we must vaccinate children aged 12 and over now

When it comes to consenting to vaccination, a health professional must be satisfied the child understands why it is necessary and the reasons for it. They must also be satisfied the child understands the risks, benefits and outcomes involved.

Equally, everyone can refuse medical treatment under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, including children.

However, the courts have also decided this applies only to those who are competent and who fully understand what is involved in making the decision.

The courts only tend to override the views of the child in serious, usually life-threatening, situations.

Respecting the rights of children

More broadly, vaccination or immunisation is part of the general human right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment. This right must be balanced with the state’s obligation to prevent and control disease.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child contains important provisions concerning consent to medical treatment, including:

• the child’s best interests should be a primary consideration in all decisions, and in the resolution of conflicts between parents and health workers

• the child’s right to freely express their views is protected, and the child’s views are also central in determining what is in their best interests (two principles reflected in the Care of Children Act)

• every child has the right to life, countries must do all they can to ensure the survival and development of the child, and this should be part of any assessment of what is in the child’s best interests.

These provisions also occupy a special status within the convention as guiding principles. Adhering to these principles can also help prevent violations of other rights, such as the child’s right to health.

Striking a balance

The convention also seeks to balance parental rights and responsibilities in guiding children with their own developing ability to make important decisions about their health and well-being.

It is essential, therefore, that children, parents and health workers have adequate guidance on who can give consent and what rights everyone has.

Read more:
Long COVID in children: what parents and teachers need to know

Concerns about vaccination safety are natural, and access to reliable information about the vaccine is important for children and their parents. It’s particularly important to be transparent about possible side effects — of the vaccine, but also of COVID-19 itself.

Respecting the overall right of children to participate in making decisions that affect them is the best way to navigate these complex situations.

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

– ref. What rights do NZ children and their parents have when giving consent to be vaccinated? – https://theconversation.com/what-rights-do-nz-children-and-their-parents-have-when-giving-consent-to-be-vaccinated-166495

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

Scott Morrison has taken to likening Australia’s coming out of COVID to the Croods, a family in a children’s film, emerging from a cave. That’s when he is not urging us to focus on the light at the end of the tunnel.

Anthony Albanese’s riposte is that Scott is “not the light at the end [of the tunnel], he’s the gaslight on the hill”.

The country is probably unlucky it’s grappling with the pandemic’s third wave as a federal election looms early next year. That puts a thick patina of politics on this national crisis.

Trite comparisons, slogans, personal jibes abound, and political considerations inevitably feed into the government’s desperation to lift the pall COVID’s lockdowns and border closures are imposing on the economy and our lives.

Morrison sees the Doherty Institute modelling – with its 70% and 80% vaccination gateways – as the nation’s and his government’s way out. But, leaving aside any criticism of the modelling, there are two big problems for the PM on the road ahead.

The most talked about is the recalcitrant states. Despite his four-stage plan, Morrison can’t guarantee when the whole country might be open because that will be decided by the states.

The premiers of Western Australia and Queensland will open their borders or keep them closed according to their calculations of their states’ interests.

There’ll be some short term politics in their decisions, but that should be limited because both have recently had elections, which they won well. They don’t have to give nearly as much thought to their own political fortunes as Morrison does to his. Some observers think these Labor premiers will have an eye to what might help Anthony Albanese, but this is likely to be minor, given the stakes.

The situation of states that are basically COVID free was summed up on Monday by Perth radio interviewer Oliver Peterson when he spoke to Morrison. “Can you see the conundrum here, … [at] 70 %, WA has to go backwards in putting restrictions like the two square metre rule, caps on venues and stadiums? Right now we’re living in a restriction-free life”.

Precisely. If, as things go forward to the required vaccination rates, Mark McGowan were to open his border as early as Morrison would like, he would be accepting that COVID would break out in his state. That would bring health and economic uncertainties he would have to manage.

That isn’t to argue WA should delay, or to maintain COVID zero can be maintained in a state forever. Rather, it’s to say that one can understand McGowan’s caution, when facing a decision that could involve a trade off between the interests of his population and wider Australian interests.

Recalcitrant states, however, might be the lesser of the problems facing Morrison in coming months. We know all about Doherty’s existing modelling on vaccine targets. Attention must now move to the next stage of modelling.

The institute said in its Monday’s statement: “The team of modellers from across Australia led by the Doherty Institute is now working through the implementation issues specific to the states and territories, specific populations and high risk settings.”

When we reach the vaccination targets, we are looking at what we might dub “pinch points”, and if they are not properly prepared for, the situation could be ugly.

We know when things are opened (even with some restrictions maintained and safeguards imposed) cases will increase and spread, and fast. While hospitalisations and deaths will be contained by most people having been vaccinated, there will still be severe pressure on the health system in particular.

The Australian Medical Association on Tuesday drew attention to this threat, issuing an ABC interview by its vice president Chris Moy.

Moy said: “Focusing on the Doherty numbers – great – but you’ve got to look at what’s really going to be the reality, which is the health system is going to have to bear this burden.

“Remember, next year we’re still going to be vaccinating, potentially with booster shots as well. So it’s a real perfect storm: while having to cope with what we look after now, plus COVID, plus delayed [health] care, plus having to vaccinate next year. It’s going to be a big year in health and not a smaller year,” Moy said.

“We’re a fairly long way from being able to be ready for a very large influx of infectious patients who have to be cared for, for a long period of time, and that planning needs to happen now.”

Morrison wants the country open and the economy humming by election time, with COVID off the front pages. He and Health Minister Greg Hunt are confident the hospital situation will be in hand. But, ahead of its start, they were confident about the vaccine program too.

If the “pinch point” of escalating cases – and don’t believe Morrison’s hope there wouldn’t be attention on case numbers anymore – and overloaded hospitals coincided with the approaching election, that could be a political as well as an actual nightmare.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Achieving vaccine targets could be followed by a (pre-election) health ‘pinch point’ – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-achieving-vaccine-targets-could-be-followed-by-a-pre-election-health-pinch-point-166678

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan now includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation politics team.

In this episode, politics + society editor Amanda Dunn and Michelle discuss the frictions as vaccination rates rise and the debate turns to lifting lockdowns and border restrictions. They also canvass the Morrison government’s modest promise on Afghan refugees, and crossbencher Craig Kelly’s announcement he’ll lead Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party at the election.

Additional audio

Gaena, Blue Dot Sessions, from Free Music Archive.

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

– ref. Podcast with Michelle Grattan: The battle to exit COVID – https://theconversation.com/podcast-with-michelle-grattan-the-battle-to-exit-covid-166679

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wendy Steele, Associate Professor, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University

Across the world, people worried about the impacts of climate change are seeking creative and meaningful ways to transform their urban environments. One such approach is known as “quiet activism”.

“Quiet activism” refers to the extraordinary measures taken by ordinary people as part of their everyday lives, to address the climate emergency at the local level.

In the absence of national leadership, local communities are forging new responses to the climate crisis in places where they live, work and play.

As we outline in a book released this month, these responses work best when they are collaborative, ongoing and tailored to local circumstances.

Here are three examples that show how it can be done.

Read more:
Disaster season is here — do you have a Resilience Action Plan? Here’s how the small town of Tarnagulla built theirs

Climate for Change: a Tupperware party but make it climate

Climate for Change is a democratic project in citizen-led climate education and participation.

This group has engaged thousands of Australians about the need for climate action — not through public lectures or rallies, but via kitchen table-style local gatherings with family and friends.

As they put it:

We’ve taken the party-plan model made famous by Tupperware and adapted it to allow meaningful discussions about climate change to happen at scale.

Their website quotes “Jarrod”, who hosted one such party, saying:

I’ve been truly surprised by the lasting impact of my conversation amongst friends who were previously silent on the issue – we are still talking about it nine months on.

Climate for Change has published a “climate conversation guide” to help people tackle tricky talks with friends and family about climate change.

It has also produced a resource on how to engage your local MP on climate change.

EnviroHouse: hands-on community education

EnviroHouse is a not-for-profit organisation based in Western Australia committed to local-scale climate action through hands-on community education and engagement projects, such as:

• facilitating workshops on energy efficiency

• visiting schools on request to provide sustainability services

• collecting seeds to grow thousands of she-oaks, paperbarks and rushes along the eroded Maylands foreshore in Perth

• teaching workshops on composting, worm farming and bokashi techniques to community members

• giving talks on sustainable living

• running a home and workplace energy and water auditing program.

Climarte: arts for a safe climate

Climarte is a group that

collaborates with a wide range of artists, art professionals, and scientists to produce compelling programs for change. Through festivals, events and interventions, we invite those who live, work and play in the arts to join us.

This group aims to create a space which brings together artists and the public to work, think and talk through the implications of climate change.

Why quiet?

Quiet activism raises questions around what it means to be an activist, or to “do activism”.

While loud, attention-grabbing and disruptive protests are important, local-scale activities are also challenging the “business as usual” model. These quiet approaches highlight how ordinary citizens can take action every day to generate transformative change.

There is a tendency within climate activism to dismiss “quiet” activities as merely a precursor to bigger, more effective (that is, “louder”) political action.

Everyday local-scale activities are sometimes seen as disempowering or conservative; they’re sometimes cast as privileging individual roles and responsibility over collective action.

However, a growing range of voices draws attention to the transformative potential of small, purposeful everyday action.

UK-based researcher Laura Pottinger emphasises that these everyday practices are acts of care and kindness to community — both human and non-human.

Her interest is a “dirt under the fingernails” kind of activism, which gains strength from a quiet commitment to practical action.

Climate action, here and how

The climate crisis has arrived and urgent action is required.

By creatively participating in local climate action, we can collectively reimagine our experience of, and responses to, the climate emergency.

In doing so, we lay the foundation for new possibilities.

Quiet activism is not a panacea. Like any other form of activism, it can be ineffective or, worse, damaging. Without an ethical framework, it risks enabling only short-lived action, or leading to only small pockets of localised activity.

But when done ethically and sustainably — with long-term impact in mind — quiet activism can make a profound difference to lives and communities.

Read more:
From veggie gardening to op-shopping, migrants are the quiet environmentalists

Wendy Steele receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC)

Diana MacCallum receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Donna Houston receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Jason Byrne undertakes research in partnership with the Southern Tasmanian Councils Authority, Local Government Association of Tasmania and Tasmanian Climate Change Office. Jason has previously received research funding from the Australian Research Council. He is a member of the Planning Institute of Australia, and sits on the Tasmanian Divisional Committee.

Jean Hillier has received funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) for the project ‘Enabling Social Innovation for Local Climate Adaptability’ (DP150100299) undertaken with the co-authors of this article.

– ref. Ordinary people, extraordinary change: addressing the climate emergency through ‘quiet activism’ – https://theconversation.com/ordinary-people-extraordinary-change-addressing-the-climate-emergency-through-quiet-activism-160548

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Have you heard about the latest wage figures? I hope not. They’re meaningless.

What the widely quoted measure of average weekly earnings purports to show is that wages grew a mere 0.1% over the year to May. It’s not true. It’s not what happened. For most of us, wages grew by much more.

That’s not to say wage growth has been high — the best estimate is that private sector wages have climbed 1.9% over the past year and public sector wages a record low 1.3% — but both are still well above nothing, and generally well above our near-record low rates of consumer price inflation.

A check-in with reality would tell you that mid last year the Fair Work Commission lifted award wages 1.75%. Mid this year it lifted them 2.5%.

So how could it be that the official figures, published by a trusted organisation, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, show average earnings static, climbing just 0.1%?

The first thing to say is that the bureau is probably embarrassed by the figures.

They are “not designed to produce movement in earnings data” it says on its website, before acknowledging that’s exactly what they are used for.

‘Not designed’ to measure wage growth

Australia’s pensions are adjusted twice a year in accordance with a formula that includes average weekly earnings.

The figure is built into private contracts and contracts for student loans and child support. If it wasn’t published, a lot of contracts wouldn’t work.

To create it, the bureau surveys about 5,130 employers every six months, asks what they are paying their workers, and uses the answers to calculate an average female wage, an average male wage, an average part-time wage, an average full-time wage, and a lot of other averages besides.

The ‘average wage’ isn’t typical

One problem is that averages are not representative. The survey suggests the average full-time wage is A$90,330, whereas in reality six in ten earn less.

The mid-way (median) full-time worker earns $10,000 less. The average is boosted by a few enormously high earners and can’t be taken seriously.

An entirely separate problem arises when you try to use averages to calculate growth. The average is only an average of what’s averaged, and that can change.

When low-wage workers lose jobs…

Here’s an example. What would happen if a recession caused everyone working only four hours per week to lose two hours? It would push their earnings down and push down average weekly earnings, which would be about right.

But what if each of those people lost a further two hours, taking their hours down to zero. Their low hours would no longer be included in the total to be averaged, and (without them in it) average earnings would climb.

…the average wage goes up

That’s what happened a bit over a year ago. The bureau says COVID restrictions “led to a large decrease in the number of jobs, people employed and hours worked, with lower-paid jobs and industries particularly impacted, including jobs in accommodation and food services, arts and recreation services”.

The loss of those lower-paid and low hours jobs in catering, the arts and other industries “had the effect of increasing the value of average weekly earnings”.

Layoffs pushed the average wage up.

Fortunately, the bureau says by November many of the low-wage workers laid off got some hours back, depressing growth in the average wage (but not growth in any actual wages) resulting in recorded growth of just 0.1% in the year to May.

Many have probably since lost hours with this year’s renewed lockdowns, pushing average wages (but not actual wages) higher again.

It’s enough to make you think the legislation and contracts should switch from a measure that’s close to worthless to one that actually measures wage growth.

The bureau offers such a measure. It’s called the wage price index, and the bureau has been trying to encourage people to switch to it since 1998.

À lire aussi :
Other Australians don’t earn what you think. $59,538, is typical

It is also built around a survey of employers, but rather than asking how much they pay each worker, it asks how much they pay for each job title and classification. The bureau calculates growth by comparing like with like, regardless of how many people were employed in each classification at the time.

Wage Price Index

The results are believable: private sector like-for-like wages climbed 1.9% over the past year, and public sector wages 1.3%.

But even they are not right when it comes to the wage growth of individuals.

Individuals get promoted, and (much less often) demoted. They change jobs, usually for better ones.

People aren’t positions

So if you were trying to use the recent like-for-like wage growth of around 2% per year as a guide to what will happen to your own wage (in order, for instance, to work out whether you could afford a mortgage) you would probably guess too low.

It’s why many Australians — those who’ve got not only regular pay rises but also promotions — wonder what the fuss about low wage growth is about.

À lire aussi :
Top economists say cutting immigration is no way to boost wages

A good measure of the actual wage growth of Australians doesn’t yet exist, although it might soon. The bureau is working on tracking individuals through the use of payroll data reported to the tax office.

In the meantime the (HILDA) Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey that tracks 17,000 Australians over time finds that the actual wage growth of full-time workers is indeed higher than the like-for-like figure suggests (which might help explain soaring home prices) although it too is weakening.

Part time workers don’t seem to get the same benefit.

As Mark Wooden, director of the HILDA survey puts it, “Australians in full-time work are doing pretty well – provided they remain in employment”.

Peter Martin ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. The official figures say wages aren’t growing —
here’s why they’re wrong – https://theconversation.com/the-official-figures-say-wages-arent-growing-heres-why-theyre-wrong-166566

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Zietsch, Associate Professor, The University of Queensland

Same-sex sexual behaviour may seem to present a Darwinian paradox. It provides no obvious reproductive or survival benefit, and yet same-sex sexual behaviour is fairly common — around 2-10% of individuals in diverse human societies — and is clearly influenced by genes.

These observations raise the question: why have genes associated with same-sex sexual behaviour been maintained over evolutionary time? Given that evolution depends on genes being passed down through the generations via reproduction, how and why were these genes passed down too?

In a new paper published in Nature Human Behaviour, my colleagues and I tested one possible explanation: that the genes associated with same-sex sexual behaviour have evolutionarily advantageous effects in people who don’t engage in same-sex sexual behaviour.

Specifically, we tested whether those genes are also associated with having more opposite-sex partners, which might therefore confer an evolutionary advantage.

To investigate this, we used genetic data from more than 350,000 people who had participated in the UK Biobank, a huge database of genetic and health information.

These participants reported whether they had ever had a same-sex partner, and also how many opposite-sex partners they had had in their lifetime.

We analysed the association of millions of individual genetic variants with each of these self-reported variables. For both variables, there were not only one or a few associated genetic variants, but very many, spread throughout the genome. Each had only a tiny effect, but in aggregate, their effects were substantial.

We then showed that the aggregate genetic effects associated with ever having had a same sex partner were also associated — among people who had never had a same-sex partner — with having had more opposite-sex partners.

This result supported our main hypothesis.

Further exploration

We then tried replicating and extending our findings.

First, we successfully replicated the main finding in an independent sample.

Second, we tested whether our results still held true if we used different definitions of same-sex sexual behaviour.

For example, did it still hold true if we tightened the definition of same-sex sexual behaviour to cover only those individuals with predominantly or exclusively same-sex partners (rather than including anyone who has ever had one)?

Our results remained largely consistent, although statistical confidence was lower due to the smaller sub-samples used.

Read more:
‘Gay gene’ search reveals not one but many – and no way to predict sexuality

Third, we tested whether physical attractiveness, risk-taking propensity, and openness to experience might help to account for the main result.

In other words, could genes associated with these variables be associated with both same-sex sexual behaviour and with opposite-sex partners in heterosexuals?

In each case, we found evidence supporting a significant role for these variables, but most of the main result remained unexplained.

So we still don’t have a solid theory on exactly how these genes confer an evolutionary advantage. But it might be a complex mix of factors that generally make someone “more attractive” in broad terms.

Simulating evolution

To investigate how the hypothesised evolutionary process might unfold, we also constructed a digital simulation of a population of reproducing individuals over many generations. These simulated individuals had small “genomes” that affected their predispositions for having same-sex partners and opposite-sex reproductive partners.

These simulations showed that, in principle, the kind of effect suggested by our main result can indeed maintain same-sex sexual behaviour in the population, even when the trait itself is evolutionarily disadvantageous.

Crucially, our simulations also showed that if there were no countervailing benefit to genes associated with same-sex sexual behaviour, the behaviour would likely disappear from the population.

These findings give us intriguing clues about the evolutionary maintenance of same-sex sexual behaviour, but there are important caveats too.

An important limitation is that our results are based on modern, Western samples of white participants – we cannot know to what extent our findings apply to other ethnicities or cultures in different places and times. Future studies using more diverse samples may help clarify this.

Read more:
African scientists recognise that diverse sexuality is the norm

On a final note, I am aware some people believe it is inappropriate to study sensitive topics such as the genetics and evolution of same-sex sexual behaviour. My perspective is that the science of human behaviour aims to shine a light on the mysteries of human nature and that this involves understanding the factors that shape our commonalities and our differences.

Were we to avoid studying sexual preference or other such topics due to political sensitivities, we would be leaving these important aspects of normal human diversity in the dark.

Brendan Zietsch received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Why has same-sex sexual behaviour persisted during evolution? – https://theconversation.com/why-has-same-sex-sexual-behaviour-persisted-during-evolution-166571

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Deb Massey, Associate Professor, Chair of Nursing, Faculty of Health, Southern Cross University

Rising COVID cases in several Australian states means demand for intensive care unit (ICU) beds and specialist critical nurses will rise.

This increase in demand is on top of the typical workload ICUs might see.

And because of the nature of COVID itself and other factors, this puts pressure on the entire hospital system.

Read more:
How are the most serious COVID-19 cases treated, and does the coronavirus cause lasting damage?

What happens in ICU?

The ICU is where we care for the most critically unwell patients, where treatments are designed to support breathing and circulatory problems affecting the heart, blood, or blood vessels.

The most unstable and sickest ICU patients require airway support in the form ventilation to help them breathe. They also need circulatory support in the form of drugs to improve blood pressure and heart function.

Patients come to ICU as a planned admission (for example, after a complex operation), or as an emergency admission (for example, after a serious car accident).

Read more:
ICU ventilators: what they are, how they work and why it’s hard to make more

Patients stay for, on average, three days in ICU before recovering enough to be moved to a ward, or sadly, dying.

Because patients in ICU are unstable and critically unwell, there is usually one nurse to care for each patient. This is a highly skilled job. Most ICU nurses have extra postgraduate qualifications.

COVID changed the type of patients we see

Patients who are critically ill with COVID are often sicker than other ICU patients and may require more support for their breathing and circulation. Often, they need to stay in ICU longer than other patients.

This creates challenges for hospital systems, because beds in ICU become blocked, and planned operations may be cancelled because of the lack of ICU beds.

Once patients with COVID no longer need ventilation or circulatory support, they are transferred to the ward for additional care. They may have experienced painful procedures and have a degree of physical impairment.

They may also have witnessed a number of stressful events in the ICU, such as emergency resuscitation procedures and deaths, which may increase the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression.

Although we don’t have definitive long-term data, patients who have been critically ill from COVID often have a long and difficult journey of recovery and will likely remain dependant on health care services for some time.

Read more:
Younger adults can get very sick and die from COVID too. Here’s what the data tell us

COVID changed how we nurse

ICU staff looking after COVID patients have the additional demands of working in full personal protection equipment (PPE), which can be hot and uncomfortable and very challenging to work in.

The need to use PPE correctly, and the constant concern about becoming infected or dying if there’s an infection breach, adds to nurses ongoing stress.

The International Council of Nurses’ latest analysis shows the number of nurses who have died after contracting COVID-19 globally is greater than 2,200 – more than any other health-care worker. This data are from earlier this year, so we expect those figures to have risen since then.

Read more:
Here’s the proof we need. Many more health workers than we ever thought are catching COVID-19 on the job

COVID challenges Australia

In Australia, there has been more time to respond to the challenges of COVID. In many states, the numbers of ventilators increased, models of care were developed for COVID-positive patients, and snap lockdowns ensured scarce ICU resources were not overwhelmed.

However, the increasing number of positive cases in New South Wales in particular, coupled with the highly infectious Delta variant, means ICUs risk reaching capacity.

At the time of writing, 109 patients were in Australian ICUs and 37 of these patients required ventilation.

Australia has 191 ICUs with 2,378 beds and the capacity to increase this by by up to 4,258 beds.
But there may not be enough specialised nurses or equipment match this bed increase.

Surge capacity also varies between ICU categories and jurisdictions, with tertiary hospitals reporting more capacity. So deteriorating patients may need to be air-lifted to major metropolitan or regional centres.

Read more:
Does anyone know what your wishes are if you’re sick and dying from coronavirus?

What can happen in the future?

Fortunately, public health measures have meant Australia has been spared the horrors of countries that were unable to successfully increase their ICU resources to meet demands, for example, Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom.

Yet, hospitals are still feeling the impact of a rise in critically unwell COVID patients in many ways, and will do so in the future.

Undergraduate student nursing placements, for example, have been delayed and many universities have moved their education online. So student nurses may struggle to achieve the clinical hours required to graduate. This may mean a shortfall of clinically competent and educated ICU nurses in the future.

The best we can do

So the next time you hear the latest number of COVID patients in ICU, think of what’s behind those numbers and what this means for the whole hospital system and its staff.

Protect them, yourself and others by sticking to the public health advice, including getting tested with the mildest of symptoms. Most importantly, get vaccinated. People fully vaccinated against COVID rarely end up in ICU.

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

– ref. We’re seeing more COVID patients in ICU as case numbers rise. That affects the whole hospital – https://theconversation.com/were-seeing-more-covid-patients-in-icu-as-case-numbers-rise-that-affects-the-whole-hospital-165966

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caitlin Vincent, Lecturer in Creative Industries, The University of Melbourne

Many of the world’s most popular operas are rife with misogyny and gendered violence — and things aren’t much better for women behind the scenes.

Opera production has long been dominated by male directors and designers, with the role of costume designer one of few exceptions.

Yet there has been little empirical data that tracks the precise degree to which women are under-represented in opera. Most data is either anecdotal or, more often, compiled by arts journalists in response to male-heavy season announcements.

In our new study, we addressed this knowledge gap by investigating women’s representation at one of the world’s leading opera companies.

The Royal Opera in Covent Garden is the largest and best funded opera company in the UK and a recognised leader in the international field.

The company has also publicly committed to addressing gender inequality.

In 2019, The Royal Opera joined the Keychange 50/50 initiative, pledging that women would make up 50% of all creatives on new opera productions by 2022.

In order to assess the status of women working at the company — and the likely impact of this pledge — we turned to historical production data. We analysed the production credits of 325 operas staged between 2005/06 and 2019/20. Drawing on the self-identified pronouns used in professional biographies, we then mapped the gender profile of 1,342 credited directors and designers.

The man at the top

The role of stage director was critical to our study because directors assume a leadership position over the artistic vision of a staged work. They are also responsible for selecting the other members of the creative team.

Over the 15 seasons included in our study, 90% of all opera productions at The Royal Opera credited a male director.

Men were significantly more likely to be credited on more than one production, while women were more likely to be “one-offs”. 44% of men directed at least two different operas, compared to 14% of women directors.

Because the majority of women directors only had one opportunity to direct at the company, we also considered the repertoire — or the specific opera — they were chosen to direct.

Repertoire matters

Opera companies tend to stage a combination of works, including canonical operas, less common or non-canonical works, and modern operas written in the 20th and 21st centuries, including world premieres.

Canonical operas are essentially the “greatest hits” of the operatic stage, written by the likes of Mozart and Puccini. They are reliably popular at the box office and frequently revived later.

Modern operas, in contrast, are high risk in terms of audience appeal and are rarely revived in later seasons.

Non-canonical operas sit somewhere in between: not as well-known as the greatest hits, but still far less risky than modern operas from an organisational perspective.

Women directors were more likely to be credited on modern operas than men. Almost half of the operas directed by women fell into this category. Meanwhile, 92% of the canonical operas staged over the 15 seasons were directed by men.

As a consequence, 92% of all revival productions presented by the company were also directed by men. 61% of men directors saw one or more of their original productions revived in a later season, compared to 27% of women directors.

Building a creative team

We also analysed the relationship between the gender profile of the director and that of the other key creatives.

Under the artistic leadership of the stage director, the set designer, lighting designer, costume designer, and projection/video designer play critical roles in creating the world of an opera on stage.

Our analysis showed that male directors were significantly more likely to work with other men in these important creative roles. 36% percent of operas directed by men did not credit a single woman designer. 38% credited only one woman in any designer role. More than half the time, this role was costume designer.

In other words: out of all the operas directed by men at The Royal Opera, nearly 75% had low rates of representation for women on creative teams.

In comparison, 81% of female-led productions credited women in two or more key creative roles.

Change must start with the director’s chair

Women’s low rates of representation at the company has significant consequences for their prestige and visibility.

Because men worked more frequently and were more likely to direct high-profile operas, in turn, more likely to be revived, they could accrue professional capital at a much higher rate than their female peers.

Men’s over-representation in the role of stage director — combined with their tendency to work primarily with other men — had a further negative effect on women’s representation on creative teams.

Read more:
Opera is stuck in a racist, sexist past, while many in the audience have moved on

These findings have clear implications for efforts to address gender inequality in opera, and highlight where The Royal Opera’s 50/50 pledge falls short.

Opera companies must place the role of stage director at the centre of any gender-equity initiatives.

Any approach must also consider the compounding effects of repertoire and production type. Women directors must be actively prioritised for popular canonical operas, which are most likely to be revived and incorporated into long-term artistic programming plans.

Above all, in a sector that benefits heavily from public funding, opera companies must be held accountable for the ways in which they perpetuate gender discrimination and disadvantage through their institutional choices.

Caitlin Vincent is a member of OPERA America’s Women’s Opera Network and Victorian Opera’s Peer Review Panel.

Amanda Coles and Jordan Beth Vincent do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. New study revealing stark gender inequality at UK’s The Royal Opera has lessons for the industry worldwide – https://theconversation.com/new-study-revealing-stark-gender-inequality-at-uks-the-royal-opera-has-lessons-for-the-industry-worldwide-166491

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathleen Daly, Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University

The federal government has just launched a A$378 million scheme for Stolen Generations survivors in the Australian Capital Territory, Northern Territory and Jervis Bay. At the same time, the Czech Republic has passed legislation offering payments to women, mostly from the Roma community, who were sterilised without their consent.

Last month, the Boy Scouts of America reached a US$850 million agreement with thousands of child sex abuse survivors.

These are recent examples of what we term “money justice”. This is how organisations and nations seek to redress wrongs by offering money to victims.

But if, as victims say, money cannot recompense a wrong, why is money sought by victims and offered as justice? More generally, what does money achieve (or not achieve) as justice and for victims?

What is money justice?

Money justice — sometimes referred to as compensation, redress, reparations — permeates our everyday life. We hear daily about victims and their family members seeking or receiving payments to remedy wrongs.

The major mechanisms of money justice are civil justice awards or out-of-court settlements for personal or cultural harms, and redress programs or payment schemes.

Money is paid to victims of terrorism and violent common crime, those victimised by civil conflict and political repression, or for historical injustice and institutional abuse. Consider the payments to Australian victims and families of the Bali bombings or London terror attacks, German payments to Holocaust survivors, and state schemes for violent crime such as sexual assault and robbery.

How much can victims receive?

One aim of money justice research is to map and compare payments to victims of diverse wrongs, and identify inequalities in payments. But when it comes to civil justice, the research task is nearly impossible because average payments are secret.

We may see a headline about the total amount decided in an out-of-court settlement — for example, the A$35 million to young people in Northern Territory detention facilities. But we will never know what, on average, individuals received, nor how much was deducted from the $35 million for legal fees and costs. The cost, meanwhile, is borne by taxpayers.

Except for court-determined awards, which are a tiny share of civil justice outcomes, little is known about average payments and their range. This year, we published an article on what Australian Catholic Church bodies (archdioceses, dioceses and institutes) paid for claims of child sexual abuse. We found a huge range in the civil litigation cases (from A$11,000 to A$1.5 million) and the Towards Healing redress scheme (from about A$4,200 to A$184,000).

We were only able to compute and publish these figures because the child abuse royal commission had used its powers to seek data from the various authorities.

The money justice paradox

Despite the many forms it takes — and the many victims who seek it — money payments may not be interpreted as “justice” when received by victims.

We call this the money justice paradox. How can a sum of money, however large, compensate for a loss of life or health? Victims also ask why their loss was “worth” less than that of others, when comparing payments. For these reasons, money may fail as justice to victims.

Turia Pitt spoke to the Seriously Social podcast about her experience of seeking money justice. In 2011, Pitt was caught in a grassfire during an ultra-marathon. She suffered horrific burns to 65% of her body, leading to more than 200 medical procedures. As she explains:

At the end of the day, we settled out of court. I wasn’t happy with the money, but then no amount of money would ever be able to compensate me for what I’d been through.

Legal history and ‘balancing’ a wrong

We hypothesise one reason money may fail as justice is that it no longer contains the sense of “balancing” the wrong, as it did thousands of years ago, when the relationship between retribution and recompense was closely tied.

Then, the pain suffered by a victim was met with an equivalent, painful loss to an offender. Many will be familiar with the concept of “an eye for an eye”. At the time, a complementary concept of the “value of an eye for an eye” co-existed. Depending on the crime, a victim could demand payment in valued goods or money instead.

As legal systems evolved, this close connection became separated with dual systems of civil and criminal justice. Today, civil justice (“money damages” in lieu of punishment) is no longer associated with an equivalent painful loss for a wrongdoer, and it cannot achieve the “balance” or true recompense it once did.

Read more:
Morrison government sets up redress scheme for survivors of Stolen Generation in territories

So, why does society persist with justice through money?

Money as the only option

The wheel of money justice is set in motion by civil justice, law firms, organisational defendants, and insurance companies. Money is all that is on offer.

For civil justice, law firms are motivated to focus on money because it supports their practice. Administrative schemes, such as those for victims of violent crime or institutional abuse, are a lower-cost version of civil justice. Here too, money is the principal element, although schemes may also offer support for medical and counselling costs.

Victims may seek and accept money for wrongs because that is what’s offered. We would not say money is the most important element for justice from victims’ perspectives. They may have other objectives, such as wrongdoers accepting responsibility and organisational change, but these are rarely realised. In time, and understood symbolically, money may offer survivors validation and vindication.

Money also has practical benefits. It can relieve financial stress, improve daily life, pay for medical and dental care, and enable visits to family and friends.

A complex experience

Victims’ experiences of money justice highlight its complexity. For example, Pitt found going to court to be difficult and confronting. But she also described her settlement as a punctuation point in her recovery process:

For me it was freeing because once we reached a settlement we could look towards the future and not be stuck in our past anymore. So even though [the court process] was taxing, exhausting, all of those things … I think it helped us on our journey.

This same complexity was revealed in a 2018 study on sexual assault victims who applied to Queensland’s payment scheme for victims of violent crime. Almost all gave financial reasons for applying — such as the need to relocate or medical and counselling costs. They felt uncomfortable doing so because they did not want to appear to be chasing money.

But after they received the payment, half said the money was public acknowledgement that what had happened to them was wrong. So, after receiving the money, it was a symbolic form of justice, although this was not the reason they applied.

Beyond the headlines

As money justice continues to permeate society, we need to understand it better. This involves going behind the splashy headlines to find out what victims will, on average, receive in their bank accounts.

It also means using clear language. Terms such as “compensation” and “reparations” typically refer to money, so let’s skip the niceties and call them a money payment.

The wheel of money justice is greased by insurance premiums and tax revenues, which ordinary citizens pay for. So, we all have a vested interest in understanding payment amounts and inequalities, and we should be asking who gets what, and why.

As we continue to research the complexities of money justice, it is important to emphasise that money is not the only way to acknowledge victims. Truth commissions, memorialisation, the return of property, and apologies can all can have great significance.

Kathleen Daly also talks about money justice on the Seriously Social podcast by the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.

Kathleen Daly receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Juliet Davis receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Money is frequently offered to redress wrongs — what does it achieve for victims and justice? – https://theconversation.com/money-is-frequently-offered-to-redress-wrongs-what-does-it-achieve-for-victims-and-justice-166415

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Hurley, Policy Fellow, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University

The federal government yesterday announced a relief package for childcare providers affected by extended lockdowns.

Childcare services in Commonwealth-declared hotspots will be eligible for payments of 25% of their pre-lockdown revenue. Outside-school-hours-care services will be eligible for payments of 40%.

Childcare centres must be experiencing a 50% drop in attendance, and agree to a fee freeze for the duration of support.

About 60% of childcare centres in Sydney reportedly had less than half their usual number of children. In Melbourne, the reported expectation is attendance would settle at about 40-50%.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the payments would immediately help around 3,600 childcare services in Greater Sydney. In Greater Melbourne, the package will assist about 2,300 services and nearly 300 in the ACT.

This is the second time in two years the pandemic has brought parts of Australia’s childcare system to the verge of collapse. Last year, the government put in place several rescue packages for childcare and out-of-school-hours-care services.

Read more:
Not much relief for parents, but new childcare measures will rescue providers (again)

But unlike in 2020, the recently announced package falls short of meeting the full costs of closure.

The most recent announcement means the federal government will meet most, but not all, the fee revenue childcare services collect. Parents whose children are still attending childcare may be asked to pay gap fees.

What does this package mean for providers?

Around 160 childcare centres have reportedly closed nationally due to the immediate risk of COVID transmission.

In Victoria, childcare and preschools are open to children who have at least one parent or guardian with a valid authorised worker permit, working either at home or on site, and who can’t make alternative supervision arrangements.

In NSW, parents and families are strongly encouraged to keep their children at home.

Australia’s childcare is provided by a mixture of for-profit and not-for-profit services who usually charge on a per hour or daily basis.

The federal government provides a subsidy, paid directly to early childhood services, who then pass it on to families as a fee reduction.

The amount of the subsidy, and the amount parents pay out-of-pocket, depends on family income and the fee childcare providers charge.

Normally, childcare providers must charge a gap fee to receive the federal government subsidy.

In 2020, during the first wave of the pandemic, the federal government implemented a “free childcare” package.

Effectively, this meant the federal government continued to pay childcare providers the subsidies they normally received, as well as cover parents’ out-of-pocket costs.

Before the announcement yesterday, the federal government had already agreed to waive gap fees for services in certain coronavirus “hot-spots”. Childcare providers can still receive the federal childcare subsidy, regardless of whether the child attends the service or whether they charge a gap fee to the child’s family.

Read more:
It takes a village: why sending your kid to childcare isn’t ‘outsourcing parenting’

However, the federal government was not covering the out-of-pocket costs of parents. Without fees collected from families, childcare providers were suffering.

The table below shows government subsidies account for about 62% of all income received by childcare providers. Out-of-pocket expenses are estimated to be on average about 38% of total revenue for early childhood service providers.

Without the fees collected from families, it was difficult for providers to pay and retain their staff during the crisis. There were other difficult choices, too.

Childcare providers needed to make the decision whether to continue charging out-of-pocket expenses or waive the gap fee. While some providers may be eligible for state based support, many do not meet eligibility requirements.

For parents and carers, whether they were required to pay out-of-pocket costs depends on the childcare provider. Many were faced with the tough decision of whether to pay for a service they are not using to keep their child enrolled.

The current announcement has helped ease these issues, but the sector remains vulnerable, especially when the rescue measures end.

Let’s fix the funding model

In the short term, advocates in the sector are also calling for two further measures. The first is clarification about which children are able to access childcare, particularly in NSW. This is so childcare providers and parents can more clearly understand their obligations.

The second is a vaccination program that enables childcare workers to access vaccines as essential workers.

In the long term, Australia may need to review how it approaches childcare to ensure a more resilient system less susceptible to external shocks.

Australia’s childcare system is a market-based subsidy model. This is different from other education or health services, which are often directly run or funded by governments.

Mostly non-government providers operate in the sector. Providers choose where to operate and set their own fees.

Australia applies similar types of economic principles to childcare that it does industries such as aviation. Like an airline seat, payment is based entirely on use. Competition between providers on services and fees is encouraged.

Like the airline industry, the system is also prone to periodic collapse. In 2008, Australia’s largest provider of childcare services, ABC Learning, folded leaving the childcare arrangements for more than 110,000 children in the balance.

Read more:
Quality childcare has become a necessity for Australian families, and for society. It’s time the government paid up

There is a huge amount of research showing the benefits of high quality early childhood education and care.

According to the OECD:

The evidence suggests that direct public funding of services brings more effective governmental steering of early childhood services, advantages of scale, better national quality, more effective training for educators and a higher degree of equity in access compared with parent subsidy models.

The experience of the pandemic shows a fundamentally different approach might be needed for Australia to take full advantage of the benefits childcare can offer.

Peter Hurley works for the Mitchell Institute who receive funding from Minderoo and the Thrive by Five campaign to undertake research on Australia’s early childhood, education and care (ECEC) sector.

Hannah Matthews works for the Mitchell Institute who receive funding from Minderoo and the Thrive by Five campaign to undertake research on Australia’s early childhood, education and care (ECEC) sector.

– ref. The government has again rescued the childcare sector from collapse. But short-term fixes still leave it at risk – https://theconversation.com/the-government-has-again-rescued-the-childcare-sector-from-collapse-but-short-term-fixes-still-leave-it-at-risk-166568

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Goldfeld, Director, Center for Community Child Health Royal Children’s Hospital; Professor, Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne; Theme Director Population Health, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

It’s been a tough 18 months for Australian families and their children. We can’t underestimate the cumulative impact of parent and carer job losses, mental strain, working from home and remote learning. As developmental paediatricians we are increasingly concerned about how these have affected children’s development.

As a result of pandemic restrictions, children all over the world are doing significantly less physical activity, and spending more time sitting. This is one reason playgrounds are so important for children right now.

Play is vital for children. It improves their learning, as well as social and physical development. Play also encourages development of coping skills, which are critical in times of crisis.

In these uncertain and restrictive times, playing outdoors also gives kids some sense of normalcy.

Victoria closed outdoor playgrounds last week due to concerns about potential transmission. Closing playgrounds particularly impacts children living in medium- and high-density housing, with limited access to outdoor play spaces. These children tend to fall into lower-income brackets and are already more vulnerable to the effects of social isolation.

While there may be some risks to keeping playgrounds open, these must be appropriately balanced with the overwhelming benefits playgrounds have for children’s development. There are certain precautions we can take to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission in playgrounds.

What’s the research on playgrounds and transmission?

To date, few studies have looked at the specific role of playgrounds in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. We found none that have been conducted with the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant.

Three studies focused on surface contamination — in Israel, Brazil and Indonesia. Some samples of playground surfaces (two out of 25 in the Israeli study) tested positive. The Brazil study (which collected samples in February 2021) identified toilets, ATMs, handrails, playground, and outdoor gym equipment as having the highest rates of viral contamination of all surfaces studied.

Read more:
High priority: why we must vaccinate children aged 12 and over now

But while the virus has been found on the surfaces, there was no clear evidence of whether this has led to transmission in playgrounds. The Indonesian study suggested transmission may be more likely if children share food or drinks. However, that study only looked at journals published in 2019 and 2020, so that doesn’t account for Delta.

Two studies examined transmission in parks. In the United Kingdom (with data collected June to November 2020) with two main findings. Less movement of people was associated with decreased transmission. This supported lockdowns. But the study also noted outdoor park use was associated with decreased case rates, especially in urban areas with low green space availability (including areas of higher density living). This is because parks offer an alternative to indoor spaces where transmission is higher. If parks close, then people congregate more indoors.

In the United States (with data collected March to May 2020), park use increased with school closures. Interestingly, this was not associated with growth of COVID-19 levels, either at the time or in the following weeks.

So, there is surface contamination, but no published evidence of transmission. And outdoor use of parks is not necessarily associated with more cases. And in high density areas parks are an important space.

With the right strategies, we can minimise the risks in playgrounds while ensuring children don’t miss out on the vital need for play in a time of heightened stress and uncertainty.

We can keep playgrounds safe

Access to outdoor play is essential for healthy child development. Indoor play does not appear to equate with outdoor play in terms of benefits.

Read more:
Are the kids alright? Social isolation can take a toll, but play can help

To keep playgrounds safe for children, we must ensure children are central to our thinking. Both the United Kingdom and the US offer guidelines for COVID-safe playgrounds. These include play equipment being cleaned regularly, and children maintaining a distance of six feet (around 2 metres) from each other (clearly where possible).

Similar recommendations have been proposed in Australia:

• check current restrictions

• stay home if unwell

• socially distance

• use disinfectant wipes on equipment

• sanitise hands

• avoid using shared taps or water fountains

• remind children to avoid touching their faces

• try to prevent physical contact between children as much as possible

• avoid sharing toys

• use the playground outside peak-use periods

Read more:
Heading back to the playground? 10 tips to keep your family and others COVID-safe

Some of these are more implementable than others but point to the need for thinking through what we could in playgrounds to keep them safe and open.

Anecdotally, early childhood and school teachers, particularly in low income areas, are seeing children with less social, coping and physical skills after 18 months of recurrent lockdowns — a significant proportion of preschool children’s whole lives.

Paediatricians are seeing families where the parents are confused and frightened to take their children to playgrounds, even when lockdown closures end. Recurrent playground closures add to these fears.

Finally we need adults to help. They must also follow the restrictions in their state or territory. These include adhering to gathering limits, wearing face masks and socially distancing. In the COVID-19 world we will need to safeguard our children’s health and their development.

Sharon Goldfeld receives funding from NHMRC, ARC and state and federal government for research.

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

– ref. Children need playgrounds now, more than ever. We can reduce COVID risk and keep them open – https://theconversation.com/children-need-playgrounds-now-more-than-ever-we-can-reduce-covid-risk-and-keep-them-open-166562

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

The Tokyo Paralympic Games, which start today, will feature around 4,400 para athletes competing in 539 medal events across 22 sports.

Among the world’s disability sports organisations, the Paralympic movement has a unique competition framework which permits the pursuit of excellence by athletes who are affected by a wide range of impairments, from relatively mild to severe.

The games are organised and delivered by the International Paralympic Committee (IPC). Its vision is to “make for an inclusive world through sport”, and several recent initiatives demonstrate its global leadership in this area.

Shining examples of this are the IPC’s recent agreement with the World Health Organization promoting diversity and equity in sport and its role in WeThe15, a movement devoted to ending discrimination against people with disabilities.

Read more:
A brief history of the Paralympic Games: from post-WWII rehabilitation to mega sport event

Equity can be hard to achieve, even for the IPC

However, the work required for governments and sports organisations to make their policies and procedures more inclusive can be complex, exacting and difficult to achieve.

The IPC itself — and the rule used to determine the viability of events on the Paralympic program — are a case in point.

This event viability rule requires that, among other things, individual medal event at the Paralympics must include at least 10 athletes from at least four countries on the world ranking list.

The rule is needed because the number of events on the program can vary from one games to the next. If the number of events needs to be reduced, the rule provides a clear, transparent criterion for determining which ones should be excluded.

Read more:
Paralympics haven’t decreased barriers to physical activity for most people with disabilities

For example, the IPC recently informed national Paralympic committees there would be fewer swimming events at the Paris 2024 Games than in Tokyo. All the individual events that were removed were for swimmers with the most severe impairments — those in classes S1 and S2 who are affected by conditions such as complete quadriplegia or severe cerebral palsy.

Conversely, no individual medal events were removed for athletes with the least severe disabilities – those in classes S9 and S10 who may, for instance, be missing part of (or an entire) hand.

How the event viability rule is inequitable

The event viability rule exemplifies the difference between equality and equity. The rule applies equally to all para athletes, but it is not equitable for three main reasons.

First, athletes with more severe impairments face greater barriers to participation in sports than athletes with less severe impairments.

In swimming, for example, an S9/S10 athlete can train with a squad comprising people without disabilities and a coach who requires little specialist disability knowledge. These athletes also do not require facilities with disability access.

Most S1/S2 athletes, however, need individualised sessions with a coach who has considerable specialist disability knowledge and who works in facilities with accessible parking, change rooms and pool entry.

S1/S2 athletes also have complex disabilities and require multidisciplinary medical care in order to participate safely and effectively.

Second, athletes with severe impairments are not guaranteed the protections afforded by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the same way that athletes with less severe impairments are. This is because Article 30.5 only protects participation in sport by people with disabilities if the required accommodations are deemed to be reasonable.

Unfortunately, many athletes with severe impairments require accommodations — building adjustments and medical expertise — that cannot be reasonably expected of many community sports organisations. Therefore, community organisations can — and do — exclude people with severe impairments, but still meet the requirements of the convention.

Third, compared with athletes with less severe impairments, there are disincentives associated with selecting athletes with severe impairments on national teams.

For example, athletes with severe impairments often require their own personal support staff, accessible accommodation and training facilities, and individualised training and travel arrangements, which makes local and international travel more difficult and expensive.

Read more:
Why the 2000 Sydney Paralympics were such a success — and forever changed the games

Fewer events for those with severe impairments

It stands to reason that greater barriers to participation for these athletes reduces the likelihood they will meet the event viability criteria. This is having a significant deleterious effect on their participation in the movement’s flagship event – the Paralympic Games.

As the chart below illustrates, the number of swimming events for S1/S2 athletes has been consistently low for the last 20 years — and it is getting lower.

There will be no S1 female swimmers at this year’s Tokyo Games. And the Paris 2024 swimming program will have no S1 events at all for the first time since the current classification system was introduced in 1992.

In addition, fewer than 5% of the individual medal events in Paris will be for S2 athletes — all male.

This means a swimmer like Singapore’s Yip Pin Xiu could miss out. Xiu won two golds in S2 swimming events at the 2016 Rio Games and a gold and silver at the 2008 Beijing Games, and is also competing in Tokyo. However, if there are no S2 women’s events in Paris, she might not be able to participate.

By contrast, athletes in the S9/S10 classes will have six times as many events as S1/S2 athletes.

The IPC recognises the unique barriers faced by people with severe impairments who wish to participate in sport. One of its strategic priorities is to increase their participation in para sports across the spectrum. In this respect, the removal of events for these athletes from the Paralympic program is counterproductive.

The legitimacy of the Paralympics depends on inclusion

The IPC’s pursuit of a more inclusive world through sport is an honourable and laudable one. However, in order to be effective, it must start with a rigorous review of its own policies and procedures to make sure that, as an organisation, it is leading by example.

This means reviewing the event viability rule to make it more equitable and reinstating events for athletes with high support needs that were removed from the Paris program.

The IPC should also re-establish the Committee for Athletes with High Support Needs, which is charged with ensuring all sports rules and policies of the IPC are equitable and and inclusive.

This is crucial because, in the long run, the legitimacy of the Paralympic movement depends on not only retaining, but increasing the presence of athletes with severe impairments at the Games.

Iain Dutia is an investigator on the ParaSTART program, a multi-arm program of longitudinal studies investigating physical and psychosocial responses of people with high support needs to performance-focused sports training. One of the sports is swimming and one swimmer – Female, class S2 – recently swam an Australian national record in 50m backstroke. That event has been removed from the Paris 2024 Paralympic Games based on the IPC’s Event Viability Rule” (4.15(b) Ch3, Section 1, IPC Handbook). Funding for ParaSTART has been received from Queensland Academy of Sport, Paralympics Australia and Swimming Australia. Iain is also a member of the World Para Swimming High Support Needs Working Group.

Sean Tweedy is lead investigator on the ParaSTART program, a multi-arm program of longitudinal studies investigating physical and psychosocial responses of people with high support needs to performance-focused sports training. One of the sports is swimming and one swimmer – Female, class S2 – recently swam an Australian national record in 50m backstroke. That event has been removed from the Paris 2024 Paralympic Games based on the IPC’s Event Viability Rule” (4.15(b) Ch3, Section 1, IPC Handbook). Funding for ParaSTART has been received from Queensland Academy of Sport, Paralympics Australia and Swimming Australia. Sean is also on the IPC Classification Committee and the World Para Athletics Classification Advisory Group.

– ref. The Paralympics strive for inclusion. But some rules unfairly exclude athletes with severe disabilities – https://theconversation.com/the-paralympics-strive-for-inclusion-but-some-rules-unfairly-exclude-athletes-with-severe-disabilities-166347

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC Principal Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW

Israel has one of the highest COVID vaccination rates in the world, having fully vaccinated 78% of people 12 years and over.

Many people are surprised at the country’s resurgence of COVID cases since restrictions were lifted in June.

Israel’s vaccination rate is similar to Australia’s plan to start relaxing restrictions when 70% of over-16s are fully vaccinated.

So, why are cases surging in Israel? And what can Australia learn from it, particularly as Sydney charts its path out of the pandemic?

Let’s break it down.

Herd immunity is much harder with Delta

Around 25% of Israel’s population is younger than 12, so the whole population vaccination rate is only about 60% (including a small proportion of children under 12 with high-risk medical conditions who’ve also been vaccinated).

Even with last year’s virus and the use of the Pfizer vaccine, that wouldn’t be enough for herd immunity.

Read more:
COVID is surging in the world’s most vaccinated country. Why?

The Delta variant, which has swept the world since April, is much more contagious. It has an R0 of 6.4, which means one infected person on average infects more than six others in the absence of restrictions and vaccinations. This is compared to the strain circulating in 2020, responsible for Melbourne’s second wave, which had an R0 of 2.5.

In Israel, 60% of hospitalised cases are vaccinated. This is something called the “paradox of vaccination” — in highly vaccinated populations, most cases will be in the vaccinated because no vaccine is 100% protective.

However, the rate of serious cases in Israel is double for unvaccinated under-60s and nine times higher for unvaccinated over-60s, so vaccines remain highly protective against severe outcomes.

Lifting restrictions too quickly

What’s clear in Israel (and the United Kingdom and United States) is lifting all movement restrictions and mask mandates after Delta arrived resulted in surging cases. Current vaccines at about 60% uptake weren’t enough.

In the US, Southern states with lower vaccination rates are seeing the worst surges, with the majority hospitalised being unvaccinated. Alabama, with 36% fully vaccinated (higher than Australia) is overwhelmed. Hospitals and ICUs are full and the health workforce is in crisis due to infected and quarantined health workers.

It provides a glimpse of what Sydney faces if we lift restrictions without the population being adequately vaccinated.

And that includes children. In Texas, paediatric ICUs are full and children cannot get beds. This is another warning that we must urgently vaccinate children, at least those 12 years and over, before lifting restrictions.

In Australia, the 70% vaccination rate at which the federal government proposes to begin easing restrictions corresponds to about 56% of the total population vaccinated.

It was modelled on 30 cases at the start of a new outbreak. With Sydney likely facing daily new cases in the 1000s (with no change in strategy), the outcomes could be much worse than anticipated.

Read more:
Vaccination rate needs to hit 70% to trigger easing of restrictions

Let’s recap

So, the situation in Israel is caused by several factors:

• the Delta variant has some ability to escape the protection offered by vaccines, and the protection seems to wane a bit over time after two doses

• premature lifting of restrictions

• the herd immunity threshold required for Delta is higher, likely over 80% of the whole population, not the 60% achieved in Israel

• over 70% of infections with Delta arise from asymptomatic transmission, which makes it harder to control

• cases of Delta breakthrough infection in vaccinated people can be as infectious as in unvaccinated people (though viral load declines faster in vaccinated people).

Reasons for optimism

There’s a good news story in one of the most highly vaccinated cities in the US, San Francisco, where over 70% of the whole population has been vaccinated and cases are starting to decline.

This is also likely due to the reintroduction of layered social measures such as mask mandates.

Israel has reintroduced a green-pass system of proof of vaccination or a negative test for anyone three years or over accessing public indoor spaces. It has also started vaccinating over-50s with a third dose booster.

It seems a third dose dramatically boosts immunity, even in people with weakened immune systems. The US will soon start offering a third dose for everyone.

Many vaccines require three doses for full protection, and it’s too early to know what the final primary immunisation schedule will be. We may end up needing three doses plus regular boosters, or more effective spacing of two doses.

There’s reason to be optimistic because the vaccine pipeline isn’t static. We’ll have vaccines updated to tackle Delta and other variants in time, which will raise their efficacy and lower the herd immunity threshold.

What about children?

In addition to crippling outbreaks of Delta in schools, new data shows kids 0-3 years old transmit to adults more than older children.

Ultimately, vaccination of children will be required to fully control SARS-CoV-2, or it will become a pandemic of the young, with unknown long-term, generational health effects for our children.

COVID has mutated to become more contagious, more vaccine resistant and more deadly. As a result, there’s no safe “living with COVID” until at least 80% of the whole population is vaccinated, including boosters or vaccines updated to tackle the Delta variant.

We can live with COVID as we do with measles – occasional travel-imported outbreaks that never become sustained — with an ambitious vaccination strategy.

Read more:
Should we give up on COVID-zero? Until most of us are vaccinated, we can’t live with the virus

Lifting restrictions with only 60% of the population vaccinated in Australia will result in a resurgence of COVID like Israel, the UK or the US. The health system will be endangered and its workforce will be stricken.

To lift restrictions safely, we should also continue some social interventions such as wearing masks, vaccinating children, ventilating public venues including classrooms, and prioritising front-line health workers for a third dose booster to protect them and the health system.

There’s light at the end of the tunnel. But we need to keep using masks and other restrictions for now, learn from Israel and other countries, protect health workers and hospitals, vaccinate kids, use boosters, await vaccines updated for variants, implement smarter dosing schedules and aim for the most optimal vaccination strategy with equitable vaccine access, everywhere.

C Raina MacIntyre currently receives funding from NHMRC and MRFF. In the past 5 years she has received grants for investigator-led research from Sanofi and Seqirus. She has been on advisory boards or consulted for Janssen, Astrazeneca, Sanofi and Seqirus.

– ref. COVID cases are rising in highly vaccinated Israel. But it doesn’t mean Australia should give up and ‘live with’ the virus – https://theconversation.com/covid-cases-are-rising-in-highly-vaccinated-israel-but-it-doesnt-mean-australia-should-give-up-and-live-with-the-virus-166404

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

The housing market in most parts of Australia is notoriously competitive. You might be surprised to learn we humans are not the only ones facing such difficulties.

With spring rapidly approaching, and perhaps a little earlier due to climate change, many birds are currently on the hunt for the best nesting sites.

This can be hard enough for birds that construct nests from leaves and twigs in the canopies of shrubs and trees, but imagine how hard it must be for species that nest in tree hollows.

They are looking for hollows of just the right size, in just the right place. Competition for these prime locations is cut-throat.

Sulphur-crested cockatoos battling for spots

Sulphur-crested cockatoos, Cacatua galerita, are relatively large birds, so naturally the hollows they nest in need to be quite large.

Unfortunately, large hollows are only found in old trees.

It can take 150 years or more before the hollows in the eucalypts that many native parrot species nest in are large enough to accommodate nesting sulphur-crested cockatoos. Such old trees are becoming rarer as old trees on farms die and old trees in cities are cleared for urban growth.

In late winter, early spring you quite often find sulphur crested-cockatoos squabbling among themselves over hollows in trees.

These squabbles can be very loud and raucous. They can last from a few minutes to over an hour, if the site is good one. Once a pair of birds takes possession and begins nesting, they defend their spot and things tend to quieten down.

The stakes are high, because sulphur-crested cockatoos cannot breed if they don’t have a nesting hollow.

Read more:
Don’t disturb the cockatoos on your lawn, they’re probably doing all your weeding for free

Enter the rainbow lorikeets

In parts of southeastern Australia, rainbow lorikeets, Trichoglossus moluccanus (and/or Trichoglossus haematodus), have expanded their range over the past couple of decades. It is not uncommon to see sulphur-crested cockatoos in dispute with them over a hollow.

The din can be deafening and if you watch you will see both comedy and drama unfold. The sulphur-crested cockatoos usually win and drive the lorikeets away, but all is not lost for the lorikeets.

Sometimes the hollows prove unsuitable — usually if they are too small for the cockatoos — and a few days later the lorikeets have taken up residence. Larger hollows are rarer and so more highly prized.

How hollows form

Many hollows begin at the stubs of branches that have been shed either as part of the tree’s growth cycle or after storm damage. The wood at the centre of the branch often lacks protective defences and so begins to decay while the healthy tree continues to grow over and around the hollow.

Other hollows develop after damage to the trunk or on a large branch, following lightning damage or insect attack. Parrots will often peck at the hollow to expand it or stop it growing over completely. Just a bit of regular home maintenance.

Sulphur-crested cockatoos can often be seen pecking at the top of large branches on old trees, where the branch meets the trunk. They can do considerable damage. When this area begins to decay, it can provide an ideal hollow for future nesting.

Sadly, for the cockatoo, it may take another century or so and the tree might shed the limb in the interim. Cockatoos apparently play a long game and take a very long term perspective on future nesting sites.

Which trees are best for hollows?

In watching the local battles for parrot nesting sites, some tree species are the scenes of many a conflict.

Sugar gums, Eucalyptus cladocalyx, were widely planted as wind breaks in southern Australia and they were often lopped to encourage a bushier habit that provided greater shade.

Poor pruning often leads to hollows and cavities, which are now proving ideal for nesting — but it also resulted in poor tree structure. Sugar gums are being removed and nesting sites lost in many country towns and peri-urban areas (usually the areas around the edges of suburbs with some remaining natural vegetation, or the areas around waterways).

Old river red gums, (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) growing along our creeks and rivers are also great nesting sites. They are so big they provide ideal sites for even the largest of birds.

These, too, are ageing and in many places are declining as riverine ecosystems suffer in general. Even the old elms, Ulmus, and London plane trees, Platanus x acerifolia — which were once lopped back to major branch stubs each year, leading to hollow developmenttthew eee dnB
st eisk—sh

reGeMgoreo w are disappearing as they age and old blocks are cleared for townhouses.

Read more:
The river red gum is an icon of the driest continent

Protecting tree hollows

Cavities in trees are not that common. Large cavities are especially valuable assets. They are essential to maintaining biodiversity because it is not just birds, but mammals, reptiles, insects and arachnids that rely on them for nesting and refuge.

If you have a tree with a hollow, look after it. And while some trees with hollows might be hazardous, most are not. Every effort must be made to ensure old, hollowing-forming trees are preserved. Just as importantly, we must allow hollow-forming trees to persist for long enough to from hollows.

We consider our homes to be our castles. Other species value their homes just as highly, so let’s make sure there are plenty of tree hollows in future.

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

– ref. Cockatoos and rainbow lorikeets battle for nest space as the best old trees disappear – https://theconversation.com/cockatoos-and-rainbow-lorikeets-battle-for-nest-space-as-the-best-old-trees-disappear-165973

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sandris Zeivots, Lecturer in Educational Development, University of Sydney

University course readings are pivotal to advance student knowledge and prepare them for class discussions. Despite this, only 20-30% of students read the assigned materials. Drawing on research findings that help explain this alarmingly low rate, this article offers some strategies to help students engage with their required readings.

Over the past two decades educators have raised concerns about changing patterns of student motivation, engagement and comprehension of academic reading. The power of technology, media and apps have affected student reading patterns.

Read more:
If you can read this headline, you can read a novel. Here’s how to ignore your phone and just do it

Studies indicate that students are reading more slowly and comprehending less. They often struggle to read anything beyond an excerpt.

The challenging statistics on reading show a steep decline in student reading compliance. These trends are emerging not just at primary and secondary education level, but increasingly at a university level.

Students often underestimate the centrality of course readings. They rarely regard textbooks and academic papers as their primary source of information.

This often results in a lack of class participation, rich conversations and, at times, assessment quality.

In our increasingly technological world, new online and application solutions have assisted students with motivation and supported their learning preferences. Digital technology has made access to academic texts more flexible. However, some researchers argue screen-based reading may compromise the quality of the readers’ engagement.

Why are readings so often left unread?

A comprehensive study identifies four main reasons university students don’t engage with course readings:

1. unpreparedness due to language deficits
2. time constraints
3. lack of motivation
4. underestimating the importance of the readings.

“Unpreparedness” is an alarming finding, as it highlights deficits in language understanding and use. Some students have limited knowledge of technical terms used in courses, which explains why they struggle to understand assigned course literature.

Social and cultural dimensions also influence student engagement (or disengagement) with readings. For example, students’ previous experiences, year in university, and native versus non-native (English) speakers can all play an important role in their perception of, and attitudes to, readings.

Students naturally approach the assigned content with their own unique expectations and strategies. Some may review the reading, take notes and google summaries, while others may translate each unknown word or difficult concept.

Read more:
What my students taught me about reading: old books hold new insights for the digital generation

Don’t just blame the problem on students

The engagement with readings is often seen as an exclusively student-centred problem. I urge a move away from this view. Instead, I invite educators, learning designers and educational developers to reconsider the methods we use to integrate assigned academic literature in the course design.

Research indicates that educators struggle to clearly communicate the rationale for why students need to read and how these texts contribute to their learning. We need to recognise different student personalities and anxieties, and to develop flexible ways for students to interact with academic literature.

But don’t students know that reading matters? Isn’t that what being at uni is about? Maybe, but here’s the problem.

Teachers regularly engage with complex papers, books and reports. Over the years they develop effective approaches to tackling the academic content.

Most students, on the other hand, have limited, if any, exposure to such texts. Many have low reading confidence. This results in situations where students face a black box (of readings) and are simply expected to know what to do with it, how to do it and, importantly, why. First-year and international students are particularly familiar with this scenario.

How can educators improve engagement with readings?

Educators often use questions and reflections to determine whether students have learned or missed anything in the readings. While it is a good starting point, quite often these sessions are done to test students rather than foster their learning. So, what else can we do?

With the development of blended (in person and online) and technology-rich learning environments, educators can use mixed approaches to engage students with assigned readings. We can divide these into pre-class and in-class strategies.

Read more:
Digital learning is real-world learning. That’s why blended on-campus and online study is best

Ideas for pre-class strategies:

• Students participate in pre-class activities online. Learning management systems and collaborative tools – such as quizzes, polls and collaborative apps – offer multiple interactive options. Invite students to practise different approaches, including unfamiliar reading strategies.

• Offer clear expectations and strategies on what, how and why to read. For example, should I skim, review the text or look for best practice? Sometimes a discussion early on is enough.

• Gradually introduce technical terms and cognitive load. Don’t assume students know all specific terms from the start.

Ideas for in-class strategies:

• Invite students to apply the readings to real-life experience, assignments or projects. Activities with clear longer-term agendas not only engage students but also allow educators to observe how students grasp new information.

• Gradually increase informed learning concepts and strategies to help students develop critical and creative academic skills.

• Provide a safe space for students to clarify confusing aspects. Weekly reading groups, talking circles or other collaborations enable students to share and ask genuine questions. These conversations can encourage students to tackle complex content.

Various techniques are effective in different contexts. What strategies have you found to meaningfully engage students with readings?

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

– ref. Up to 80% of uni students don’t read their assigned readings. Here are 6 helpful tips for teachers – https://theconversation.com/up-to-80-of-uni-students-dont-read-their-assigned-readings-here-are-6-helpful-tips-for-teachers-165952

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Potter, Associate Professor, University of the Sunshine Coast

Long running Australian television dramas like Packed to the Rafters, All Saints, McLeod’s Daughters and Blue Heelers are no longer being made. Blue Heelers racked up 510 episodes and 25 Logies during its 12 year run; 122 episodes of Packed to the Rafters aired between 2008 and 2013.

These shows provided an ongoing slice of Australian life to viewers here and overseas. But a lot has changed. From 1999 to 2019, the total hours of adult TV drama produced by all TV services (including the commercial broadcasters, ABC and SBS, Foxtel and the streamers) dropped by 20%.

And since 2015, Australian adult TV dramas have averaged just seven episodes a year. This represents a stunning fall in production levels from the early 2000s, when series of more than 20 episodes were common.

The shrinking length of the average Australian TV drama reflects other substantial changes in production over the last two decades. Our research explores how new technologies enabling multichannels and streaming services, combined with changes in the global TV business, have impacted homegrown drama.

As a first step, we assembled a database of all the Australian TV drama series produced since 1999. Our analysis of that data, published in the Australian Drama Index, found hours of adult, prime-time drama produced by commercial broadcasters Seven, Nine, and Ten fell by 68% between 1999 and 2019.

We excluded long-running soap operas such as Neighbours or Home and Away from this count because soaps account for so many hours of Australian drama they obscure the changes elsewhere. Still, even with the inclusion of soap operas, hours of adult drama on commercial channels fell by 45% over this time.

In contrast, national broadcasters, mostly the ABC, increased their drama hours. From 44 hours in 1999, the ABC’s annual local drama output had fallen to just five hours in 2006. But by 2019, it had reached 72 hours. This trend was especially pronounced after 2009 when the ABC received significant extra funding for drama and children’s programs for three years.

The introduction of streaming services in 2015 provided minimal additional Australian drama hours, with 22 hours commissioned by all providers in 2019. Still, these hours of Australian-made drama matched Foxtel’s that year.

Read more:
Crunching the numbers on streaming services’ local content: static growth, but more original productions

Who produces?

Our study shows twice as many production companies made Australian drama in 2019 than in 1999. So more companies made fewer hours of drama — more of them foreign owned.

Several formerly Australian production companies such as Matchbox Pictures, Southern Star, and Screentime are now owned by foreign media conglomerates. In the first decade of our study, foreign-owned companies accounted for only 12% of Australian adult drama hours produced.

This figure grew to 38% of hours in the decade since 2009, with such companies making series including The Family Law, Offspring and Love Child.

Our concern here regarding foreign ownership isn’t one of foreign influence (as might be the case when considering news). Rather, there are implications for Australian-owned companies that might lack the resources (money to develop new ideas, international sales networks) to go head to head with foreign-owned firms.

And with 38% of Australian drama now made by foreign-owned companies, this means taxpayer supports, such as the proposed 30% tax rebate for producers of Australian films and TV shows, are going to overseas firms.

What is commissioned?

Interestingly, the number of titles produced yearly has not changed much. Rather, the number of episodes for each title has dropped significantly across all commissioners — commercial broadcasters, national broadcasters, Foxtel and the streamers.

Another trend is the shift in children’s drama production from live-action drama to animation. This has largely been caused by Seven, Nine and Ten increasingly using animation to fill their children’s drama quotas from the mid-2000s. These quotas were removed entirely in 2021, with big implications for animation producers.

Read more:
The slow death of Australian children’s TV drama

An uncertain future

Although many might assume the challenges facing Australian TV drama are a result of the 2015 arrival of streaming services, our data illustrates the disruption began much earlier. The introduction of multi-channels from 2009, like 7mate, 9Life and Eleven, challenged the business of commercial broadcasters, incurring new costs but with no increase in television advertising spending.

Since then, search engines (Google, Amazon) and social media have drawn advertising dollars away from television, resulting in less funds going towards the making of Australian drama.

Australia is not unusual in this regard. The fall in advertising has hurt commercial broadcasters all over the world, making it harder for them to fund drama production. The rise of transnational streaming services such as Netflix, Disney+, and Paramount+ is also challenging the development of stories about Australian life.

Even when these services produce shows in Australia, they are designed to be watched by subscribers around the globe.

Well-crafted policy in the 1970s and 80s supported Australian television when foreign-produced dramas dominated our TV screens. Given commercial broadcasters’ withdrawal from drama commissioning, we need 21st century policies that will support Australian drama, particularly children’s.

Increasing financial support for the national broadcaster is an efficient and effective way to safeguard supplies of drama made first and foremost for Australian audiences. Our new drama index confirms the urgent need for such policy solutions.

Anna Potter receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery Programme (DP210100849)

Amanda Lotz receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery Programme (DP190100978 and DP210100849)

– ref. Fewer episodes, more foreign owners: the incredible shrinking of Australian TV drama – https://theconversation.com/fewer-episodes-more-foreign-owners-the-incredible-shrinking-of-australian-tv-drama-166274