Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Barbara Norman, Chair of Urban & Regional Planning and Director of Canberra Urban & Regional Futures, University of Canberra

The Australian bushfires have caught the world’s attention. They dominated the speeches by global leaders at the World Urban Forum (WUF10) in Abu Dhabi this week. The United Nations secretary-general and the executive director of UN-Habitat, the convenor of the forum, expressed their sympathy and support for the Australian people. Both highlighted the need to act on climate change.

In Abu Dhabi this week, over 18,000 participants from nearly 170 nations have discussed the critical issues of climate change, social inclusion and urban innovation. The theme of planning for climate change (mitigation and adaptation) ran through the whole conference.

In the many discussions at this forum, it’s clear the world is watching how Australia responds to the recent extreme events experienced by so many communities across the country.

Read more: As the world looks to put cities on a sustainable path, the Australian government goes missing

The World Urban Forum is held every two years. It is the global gathering of city leaders, non-government organisations (NGOs) and UN agencies engaged in developing more sustainable solutions for an urbanising world.

The majority of urban communities in Australia and across the globe are located in coastal zones. They face similar challenges responding to climate risks (fire, flood and coastal inundation) as well as managing urban growth and, in some cases, decline following economic loss.

Planning for “coastal urban futures” will require an integrated response. This depends on support by all levels of government, taking into account social, economic and environmental considerations, including climate change.

Read more: Coastal communities, including 24 federal seats at risk, demand action on climate threats

I interviewed a leading Australian planner, Commonwealth Association of Planners president Dyan Currie, who emphasised the importance of a holistic approach to the recovery from the recent fires and floods. “Building resilience by building back better, considering economic structures, mental health and communities, is critical,” she said. And it will take time.

An expanding new global network, Planners for Climate Action, shared experiences, including of the recent Australian fires. A range of built environment professional institutes support the network, which includes a number of Australians.

Case studies of success in implementing change at the subnational level were showcased. One of these was the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) reaching its goal of 100% renewable electricity by 2020.

A shared vision, clear targets and leadership were yet again clearly identified as key ingredients for cities to successfully implement more sustainable urban solutions.

A climate tipping point

The costs to communities, economies and the environment have passed the tipping point. The urgency to act is immediate. As we tackle the big challenges of climate change and urbanisation, we must, in the words of UN Secretary-General António Guterres, “ensure that no one and no place is left behind”.

In opening WUF10, Guterres said:

As we embark on a decade of action to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals, the world’s cities, towns and communities will be at the heart of this work.

The UN under-secretary-general and executive director of UN-Habitat, Maimunah Sharif, said:

Urbanisation is inevitable and if left unplanned it will continue to lead humanity deeper into the climate emergency and higher forms of inequality and deprivations.

Underpinning all discussions was the need to implement the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the New Urban Agenda adopted in Quito in 2016 and to meet the global climate goals of the Paris Agreement.

The global population is expected to grow from 7 billion to 10 billion by 2050. Most people will live in urban settlements. This means the planning and development of our cities is fundamental to our future sustainability.

Key messages from the forum

The overall theme for WUF10 was “culture and innovation as a basis for achieving inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities and human settlements”. Valuing the contribution of different cultures, creativity and and innovation was highlighted as central to urban sustainability.

Key points of agreement at WUF10 include:

• the need for cultural diversity to be celebrated and embraced in planning and designing urban settlements

• the importance of connecting urban innovation with culture in the process of urbanisation

• the critical role of civic engagement by all communities in urban planning.

WUF10 provided hope in outlining the opportunities to create new sustainable urban futures. These will be based on renewable energy, more self-reliant local systems for smaller communities, and combining innovation with natural solutions.

New ideas were canvassed, such as floating cities, as well as the marrying of the traditional with the future. Environmental industries – including regeneration, waste management and energy transition – were discussed as an example of opportunities for smaller coastal communities.

Read more: Floating cities: the future or a washed-up idea?

In all this, acting on climate change was a given. Implementing the SDGs was core to discussions.

The real value of WUF10, in my view, this year being also the UN’s 75th anniversary, was the emphasis given to the importance of local cultures, communities and social inclusion. Communities must be actively involved in determining their own futures for long-term urban sustainability.

Following the recent devastation from bushfires and extreme weather events in Australia, we should embrace this opportunity to build back better. If higher levels of government provide the enabling frameworks to support and empower local communities to develop more resilient and sustainable urban futures, it is all possible.

– ref. All eyes on Australia as World Urban Forum urges climate action – https://theconversation.com/all-eyes-on-australia-as-world-urban-forum-urges-climate-action-130884

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Finkel, Australia’s Chief Scientist, Office of the Chief Scientist

I want you to imagine a highway exclusively devoted to delivering the world’s energy.

Each lane is restricted to trucks that carry one of the world’s seven large-scale sources of primary energy: coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydro, solar and wind.

Our current energy security comes at a price, the carbon dioxide emissions from the trucks in the three busiest lanes: the ones for coal, oil and natural gas.

We can’t just put up roadblocks overnight to stop these trucks; they are carrying the overwhelming majority of the world’s energy supply.

But what if we expand clean electricity production carried by the trucks in the solar and wind lanes — three or four times over — into an economically efficient clean energy future?

Think electric cars instead of petrol cars. Think electric factories instead of oil-burning factories. Cleaner and cheaper to run. A technology-driven orderly transition. Problems wrought by technology, solved by technology.

Read more: How to transition from coal: 4 lessons for Australia from around the world

Make no mistake, this will be the biggest engineering challenge ever undertaken. The energy system is huge, and even with an internationally committed and focused effort the transition will take many decades.

It will also require respectful planning and retraining to ensure affected individuals and communities, who have fuelled our energy progress for generations, are supported throughout the transition.

As Tony, a worker from a Gippsland coal-fired power station, noted from the audience on this week’s Q+A program:

The workforce is highly innovative, we are up for the challenge, we will adapt to whatever is put in front of us and we have proven that in the past.

This is a reminder that if governments, industry, communities and individuals share a vision, a positive transition can be achieved.

The stunning technology advances I have witnessed in the past ten years make me optimistic.

Renewable energy is booming worldwide, and is now being delivered at a markedly lower cost than ever before.

In Australia, the cost of producing electricity from wind and solar is now around A$50 per megawatt-hour.

Even when the variability is firmed with storage, the price of solar and wind electricity is lower than existing gas-fired electricity generation and similar to new-build coal-fired electricity generation.

This has resulted in substantial solar and wind electricity uptake in Australia and, most importantly, projections of a 33% cut in emissions in the electricity sector by 2030, when compared to 2005 levels.

And this pricing trend will only continue, with a recent United Nations report noting that, in the last decade alone, the cost of solar electricity fell by 80%, and is set to drop even further.

So we’re on our way. We can do this. Time and again we have demonstrated that no challenge to humanity is beyond humanity.

Ultimately, we will need to complement solar and wind with a range of technologies such as high levels of storage, long-distance transmission, and much better efficiency in the way we use energy.

But while these technologies are being scaled up, we need an energy companion today that can react rapidly to changes in solar and wind output. An energy companion that is itself relatively low in emissions, and that only operates when needed.

In the short term, as Prime Minister Scott Morrison and energy minister Angus Taylor have previously stated, natural gas will play that critical role.

In fact, natural gas is already making it possible for nations to transition to a reliable, and relatively low-emissions, electricity supply.

Look at Britain, where coal-fired electricity generation has plummeted from 75% in 1990 to just 2% in 2019.

Driving this has been an increase in solar, wind, and hydro electricity, up from 2% to 27%. At the same time, and this is key to the delivery of a reliable electricity supply, electricity from natural gas increased from virtually zero in 1990 to more than 38% in 2019.

I am aware that building new natural gas generators may be seen as problematic, but for now let’s assume that with solar, wind and natural gas, we will achieve a reliable, low-emissions electricity supply.

Is this enough? Not really.

We still need a high-density source of transportable fuel for long-distance, heavy-duty trucks.

We still need an alternative chemical feedstock to make the ammonia used to produce fertilisers.

We still need a means to carry clean energy from one continent to another.

Enter the hero: hydrogen.

Hydrogen is abundant. In fact, it’s the most abundant element in the Universe. The only problem is that there is nowhere on Earth that you can drill a well and find hydrogen gas.

Don’t panic. Fortunately, hydrogen is bound up in other substances. One we all know: water, the H in H₂O.

We have two viable ways to extract hydrogen, with near-zero emissions.

First, we can split water in a process called electrolysis, using renewable electricity.

Second, we can use coal and natural gas to split the water, and capture and permanently bury the carbon dioxide emitted along the way.

I know some may be sceptical, because carbon capture and permanent storage has not been commercially viable in the electricity generation industry.

But the process for hydrogen production is significantly more cost-effective, for two crucial reasons.

First, since carbon dioxide is left behind as a residual part of the hydrogen production process, there is no additional step, and little added cost, for its extraction.

And second, because the process operates at much higher pressure, the extraction of the carbon dioxide is more energy-efficient and it is easier to store.

Returning to the electrolysis production route, we must also recognise that if hydrogen is produced exclusively from solar and wind electricity, we will exacerbate the load on the renewable lanes of our energy highway.

Think for a moment of the vast amounts of steel, aluminium and concrete needed to support, build and service solar and wind structures. And the copper and rare earth metals needed for the wires and motors. And the lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese and other battery materials needed to stabilise the system.

It would be prudent, therefore, to safeguard against any potential resource limitations with another energy source.

Well, by producing hydrogen from natural gas or coal, using carbon capture and permanent storage, we can add back two more lanes to our energy highway, ensuring we have four primary energy sources to meet the needs of the future: solar, wind, hydrogen from natural gas, and hydrogen from coal.

Read more: 145 years after Jules Verne dreamed up a hydrogen future, it has arrived

Furthermore, once extracted, hydrogen provides unique solutions to the remaining challenges we face in our future electric planet.

First, in the transport sector, Australia’s largest end-user of energy.

Because hydrogen fuel carries much more energy than the equivalent weight of batteries, it provides a viable, longer-range alternative for powering long-haul buses, B-double trucks, trains that travel from mines in central Australia to coastal ports, and ships that carry passengers and goods around the world.

Second, in industry, where hydrogen can help solve some of the largest emissions challenges.

Take steel manufacturing. In today’s world, the use of coal in steel manufacturing is responsible for a staggering 7% of carbon dioxide emissions.

Persisting with this form of steel production will result in this percentage growing frustratingly higher as we make progress decarbonising other sectors of the economy.

Fortunately, clean hydrogen can not only provide the energy that is needed to heat the blast furnaces, it can also replace the carbon in coal used to reduce iron oxide to the pure iron from which steel is made. And with hydrogen as the reducing agent the only byproduct is water vapour.

This would have a revolutionary impact on cutting global emissions.

Third, hydrogen can store energy, not only for a rainy day, but also to ship sunshine from our shores, where it is abundant, to countries where it is needed.

Let me illustrate this point. In December last year, I was privileged to witness the launch of the world’s first liquefied hydrogen carrier ship in Japan.

As the vessel slipped into the water I saw it not only as the launch of the first ship of its type to ever be built, but as the launch of a new era in which clean energy will be routinely transported between the continents. Shipping sunshine.

And, finally, because hydrogen operates in a similar way to natural gas, our natural gas generators can be reconfigured in the future to run on hydrogen — neatly turning a potential legacy into an added bonus.

Hydrogen-powered economy

We truly are at the dawn of a new, thriving industry.

There’s a nearly A$2 trillion global market for hydrogen come 2050, assuming that we can drive the price of producing hydrogen to substantially lower than A$2 per kilogram.

In Australia, we’ve got the available land, the natural resources, the technology smarts, the global networks, and the industry expertise.

And we now have the commitment, with the National Hydrogen Strategy unanimously adopted at a meeting by the Commonwealth, state and territory governments late last year.

Indeed, as I reflect upon my term as Chief Scientist, in this my last year, chairing the development of this strategy has been one of my proudest achievements.

The full results will not be seen overnight, but it has sown the seeds, and if we continue to tend to them, they will grow into a whole new realm of practical applications and unimagined possibilities.

This is an edited extract of a speech to the National Press Club of Australia on February 12, 2020. The full speech is available here.

– ref. Chief Scientist: we need to transform our world into a sustainable ‘electric planet’ – https://theconversation.com/chief-scientist-we-need-to-transform-our-world-into-a-sustainable-electric-planet-131658

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Liu, Chancellors Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Fashion and Textiles Designer, University of Technology Sydney

Hollywood legend Jane Fonda hit the 92nd Academy Awards ceremony stage this week in a beaded red dress by Elie Saab – a gown she had previously worn at Cannes in 2014.

Rising star Kaitlyn Dever walked the Oscars red carpet in a deep scarlet Louis Vuitton dress she told reporters was “completely sustainable” thanks to fibre technology.

Two very different fashion approaches towards saving the planet – but how effective are they at mitigating the environmental impact of fashion? The first comes from an activist trying to be more sustainable, the second from a designer label making production changes.

Size of the problem

The fashion industry creates in excess of 85 billion tonnes of clothing a year and is responsible for 10% of global carbon emissions.

Chemical dyes in fashion create 20% of global waste water and crops such as cotton use 24% of global insecticides.

Microfibers and micro plastics from laundered garments have contaminated our beaches, bottled drinking water, and aquatic food chain.

Fast fashion promotes the reckless over-production and over-consumption of cheaply made clothing, and is reliant on exploiting inexpensive labour.

Less than 1% of fabrics can be recycled and fibre-to-fibre recycling technology is still in its infancy, without the infrastructure to address the vast amount of garments produced.

A ‘completely sustainable’ dress?

Dever’s dress was made from a material called “Tencel Luxe”, with lyocell fibre created from sustainably-grown trees. The wood is cut into tiny pieces, dissolved in a solvent and extruded into a soft cellulose fibre.

This process first developed in 1972 to create a cheap cotton substitute, often blended into cotton and polyester in inexpensive fabrics. Over time, lyocell improved to make a fabric more appropriate for luxurious products.

The sustainability of the fabric has also improved significantly. Today, 99% of the solvent used in the manufacturing process is recyclable. The fabric itself has the same challenges as cotton when it comes to recycling. The length of the fibres break down and shorten over time, lowering the quality when recycled into new fabrics – unless virgin material is added.

Indeed, lyocell fabric is far from perfect, and requires a large amount of energy in its production. Just substituting one material for another does not solve sustainability problems.

Read more: Time to make fast fashion a problem for its makers, not charities

Dever’s dress was made over 1,900 hours by a team of artisans with 14,400 Swarovski crystals and glass beads. A gown this opulent uses so much material, energy and labour that its carbon footprint becomes excessive.

The sustainability measure of a garment must include how it is recycled after its life. At present, some cutting edge fibre-to-fibre recycling technologies exist but Louis Vuitton is yet to offer recycling services.

The Louis Vuitton group hosts the Viva Tech Conference for exhibitors working on sustainable concepts to showcase their developments. It is encouraging that the company’s chairman and chief executive Bernard Arnault believes “sustainable, globalised growth is possible” and a priority for the company.

Read more: Five weird and wonderful ways nature is being harnessed to build a sustainable fashion industry

A second outing

With her commitment to climate change activism, Fonda has said she will no longer buy new clothing.

In a world that demands novelty, Fonda’s bold act of choosing an old gown that tastefully fits into today’s trends truly brings “vintage” clothing to the red carpet.

Fonda used her celebrity influence to turn a dress on the red carpet into a political symbol.

She has vowed not to buy clothing ever again, inspired by teenage activist Greta Thunberg, who she said showed that we can’t just “go about our business” in the face of a climate emergency.

No stranger to being arrested, Fonda’s real world activism is that type needed to change government policies in ways that reign in the fashion industry.

Activists can petition governments, watch over corporations and form grassroots community groups to organise change. Celebrities who straddle the red carpet and the picket line such as Jane Fonda (or Emma Thompson for Extinction Rebellion) are key to a sustainable fashion industry.

Think before you shop

It is inspiring to see these two stars’ dresses become talking points.

It shows the public’s growing awareness of climate change and their willingness to change their behaviour to make a difference. The fashion industry will determine significant aspects of the future of our environment and the lives of over 40 million workers around the world.

From developing new green technology to changing consumer consumption behaviour and outlawing exploitative labour practices that make fast fashion possible, we are still a long way from a “completely sustainable” industry.

Corporations will need to evolve and adapt to customers who demand sustainability. They will have to offer services that recycle garments after they have been used, and embrace recycled materials. Celebrities bring these issues to the public and give them steps they can take right now.

When ask by a reporter about what people could do right now to be more sustainable, Dever said, “it’s just a matter of letting it be a part of your lifestyle”.

With fashion, I think you can think a little before you buy something brand new, and I think can also support vintage – I think that’s really, really important. And also look into the brands you’re supporting.

This is a great starting point which hopefully continues into a deeper conversation of how far we yet have to go.

– ref. Is the dress green or red? Planet-friendly couture won’t be for everyone but it can lead the way – https://theconversation.com/is-the-dress-green-or-red-planet-friendly-couture-wont-be-for-everyone-but-it-can-lead-the-way-131469

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Crowley, Associate Professor, Public and Environmental Policy, University of Tasmania

When barrister, former world champion alpine skier, and now independent MP Zali Steggall took Tony Abbott’s New South Wales seat of Warringah in the 2019 election, she promised to pressure the government for action on climate change.

She was voicing the heightened concern in Warringah about climate change and the environment, and repudiating the denialism of one-time Prime Minister Abbott, who once described climate change as “absolute crap”.

Read more: Abbott’s loss in Warringah shows voters rejecting an out-of-touch candidate and a nasty style of politics

On Monday, Steggall released her Climate Change (National Framework for Adaptation and Mitigation) Bill 2020. It will be presented to the federal House of Representatives on March 23 for a conscience vote.

The bill came just as horrendous flooding hit the east coast of Australia, not quite extinguishing the fires that, nationally, have killed 33 people, burned 11 million hectares of land, and destroyed thousands of homes.

Steggall’s bill outlines ways to bring Australia’s carbon emissions down to zero by 2050. It focuses on climate risks, with adaptation and mitigation measures to secure a more resilient Australia, including establishing an independent climate change commission to advise parliament.

Steggall is a non-aligned, conservative independent. So while the bill isn’t likely to pass – most private members bills don’t – hers is unique in its non-partisan nature. And it could even shift Australia’s stubborn climate change politics through her #climateactionnow appeal to the public.

What the bill says

The federal government, and Prime Minister Scott Morrison in particular, have faltered in leadership and policy in the face of Australia’s recent disasters. He argues the government will not be panicked into stronger climate policy.

Read more: States shine as federal government flounders this summer – now they should lead on climate change

Last year, the government was re-elected on a platform of supporting an expanded coal industry, promoting regional coal industry jobs, paying polluters to reduce emissions, paying for reduced land clearing, and using carry-over credits to meet its global emissions target.

But Steggall’s bill changes the climate policy conversation entirely. It calls for a detailed risk assessment of the challenges of warming across all sectors, and national plans for adapting to those challenges, while reducing emissions in a transparent and accountable way.

It provides five-year plans to reduce emissions to zero by 2050, linking climate risks and impacts with emissions reduction. The plans are sector-wide, as similar plans are in the UK, with safeguards to ensure equitable transition, and they’ll be revised to adjust emissions reduction targets every five years.

This is a climate policy approach that reflects national and international malaise about Australia’s recent bush fire horrors, and now flooding crisis, because proposing zero emissions by 2050 is what more than 60 countries have already promised.

What’s more, the bill calls for transparent monitoring, reporting and accountability in line with global expectations, by establishing an independent Climate Change Commission. The commission’s role wouldn’t be to develop policy, but to ensure the five-year climate plans are progressing towards their targets.

Non-partisan nature

On the same day as its release, Business Council of Australia CEO Jennifer Westacott put forward her support for a net zero emissions target, saying Zali’s bill offered a sensible climate target the major parties could agree on.

Westacott’s support signals to the Morrison government the business community is looking for more ambitious and targeted climate policy action, anticipating the new jobs that will follow a transition to a low carbon economy.

But the main strength of Zali’s bill is its non-partisan nature. And it’s important for side stepping toxic climate politics and for proposing reasoned, apolitical, tried and tested policy solutions.

The bill is modelled on the David Cameron government’s 2008 Climate Change Act in the UK – legislation from a conservative party. This act sets carbon budgets, which can be controversial, but the UK are successfully reducing emissions.

Read more: The UK has a national climate change act – why don’t we?

Shifting the climate debate

All it would take for Zali’s bill to pass is for a majority of MPs in the House of Representatives to vote for it, meaning some members of the government would need to use their conscience vote.

If this were to happen, it would be a relief for business and industry, which are looking for certainty; for State and Territories, which are building vibrant renewable energy economies; and for Australians for whom climate change is now a foremost concern.

Although members of parliament are elected to represent their constituents, political allegiance invariably trumps popular will as they vote along party lines.

So Steggall is appealing directly to voters to contact their MP to secure support for her bill, and through her “Climate Act Now” petition.

Read more: Australia’s bushfire smoke is lapping the globe, and the law is too lame to catch it

If enough constituents do this, the climate debate may shift as a result of Zali’s efforts. Whether or not her legislation is adopted as she has proposed it, it may still open the door to a revised version resolving Australia’s climate policy deadlock.

This is an almost impossible task, but Zali will likely build support as she did in seeking her election in Warringah, by staying focused, by meeting as many people as possible, and by staying true to her ideas.

– ref. Conservative but green independent MP Zali Steggall could break the government’s climate policy deadlock – https://theconversation.com/conservative-but-green-independent-mp-zali-steggall-could-break-the-governments-climate-policy-deadlock-131644

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Penm, Lecturer (Pharmacy), University of Sydney

Digital technology is making access to health care easier than ever before. Multiple websites and apps allow consumers to consult general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists from any location, at any time.

Recently, we’ve seen the emergence of apps which generate prescriptions almost instantly, removing the need for a person to visit their GP when they need a new prescription.

While this is clearly convenient, there are some possible drawbacks we need to consider.

Read more: Prescription monitoring is here, but we need to tread carefully to avoid unintended harms

People want convenience

Taking medicines as prescribed, without breaks, results in better health outcomes for the individual. It also produces substantial health system savings by reducing emergency department visits and hospitalisations.

The World Health Organisation estimates around 50% of people who take prescription medicines fail to take them correctly, such as missing doses.

Although we don’t know how many of these people miss doses because they aren’t able to see their doctor in time to get a new prescription, it’s likely to be a contributing factor. In 2018-2019, 19% of Australians reported having to wait longer than they considered acceptable to get an appointment with a GP.

Australians, like many people around the world, now have an appetite for more digital solutions to access health services.

How the apps work

Although many online service providers require a video or phone consultation with a health-care professional before issuing a prescription, some newer services only ask consumers to enter their information into an online form.

These services, often mobile apps, require users to select what health condition they need medicine for, which medicine they need, and then answer some questions about previous use, pregnancy status, other medicines and medical conditions. They are charged for a GP to review their responses and approve a script if appropriate. The script is then sent to a pharmacy.

Although some apps offer the option to speak to the GP directly for an additional fee, in most of these cases, people don’t speak to a health-care professional.

These services are being marketed as helpful for people who have run out of a regular medicine but have been unable to see a GP to get a new prescription.

Read more: ‘Use this app twice daily’: how digital tools are revolutionising patient care

But some online services also offer prescriptions for new health problems. Missing out on a face-to-face consultation in these cases creates the potential for misdiagnosis. And a person is more likely to be prescribed a medicine that may not be the most appropriate for their condition.

Many health-care decisions mean weighing up the pros and cons of medical treatment with the guidance of a health-care professional. These online services may not allow people to make fully informed decisions about their health care.

Continuity of care

Although digital solutions may be convenient, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners has raised concerns about quality and safety.

We’ve long accepted continuity of care as an essential feature of health care, especially in general practice. Having a regular doctor who knows your medical history, spends sufficient time with you and explains things well improves the quality of care you receive and is associated with fewer visits to hospital.

A review of 22 studies found most (82%) showed a significant reduction in deaths with increased continuity of care with the same GP.

Digital consultations, however, have the potential to cause fragmented care. A person may “see” a variety of different providers online, increasing the risk that doctors – including one’s regular GP – will have incomplete health and medication histories to guide future conversations about best care. These gaps can increase the risk of mistakes and possible harms.

Read more: A loaf of bread and a packet of pills: how supermarket pharmacies could change the way we shop

When things can go wrong

These services rely on the consumer choosing the correct medicine (often from a list of medicines). Although this may seem reasonable, there are thousands of medicines available on prescription in Australia, and many of them sound and look similar, despite being very different.

If the online service prompts users to choose from a list of medicines used for the same reason, people may be confronted with multiple options that seem similar. For instance, a person wanting blood pressure medications may be asked to choose between Coveram 5/10 or Coveram 10/5. Coveram 5/10 includes 5mg of perindopril and 10mg of amlopdipine, while Coveram 10/5 includes 10mg of perindopril and 5mg of amlopdipine. Inadvertently taking double or half the needed dose can be dangerous.

Even health-care professionals with years of professional training and experience can select the wrong medicine. So they commonly use digital aids, such as bar code scanners, to reduce the risk of errors. Without an interaction between the consumer and the health-care professional, there’s no opportunity for health-care providers to manage the risk of these sorts of mistakes.

See the benefits, manage the harms

There’s little doubt a growing proportion of medical encounters will in future be virtual, using video or other technologies.

But we need more research to evaluate the benefits or possible harms of online services that provide prescriptions based on a questionnaire.

Read more: Drug resistance: how we keep track of whether antibiotics are being used responsibly

The best way forward may be digital solutions integrated into the services offered by existing providers as a flexible option for regular clients. For example, providing online prescriptions may be appropriate if they’re reviewed by your regular GP and sent to your regular pharmacist – people who know your health needs and know your medicines.

– ref. Instant prescriptions might be the way of our digital future, but we need to manage the risks first – https://theconversation.com/instant-prescriptions-might-be-the-way-of-our-digital-future-but-we-need-to-manage-the-risks-first-131308

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

Scott Morrison is expected to warn against adopting a “deficit mindset” towards progress on Indigenous disadvantage, when on Wednesday he presents the twelfth “Closing the Gap” report, which shows disappointing results on key targets.

The prime minister will give details of the government’s major overhaul of the assessment process, saying that until recently Closing the Gap was never a partnership with Indigenous people. “We believed we knew better – we don’t”.

Among the current seven targets, those not met or not on track are for child mortality, school attendance, literacy and numeracy (where there is improvement), employment (which is stable), and life expectancy.

Those “on track” are in the areas of childhood education and year 12 attainment.

Morrison will say “we must see the gap from the viewpoint of Indigenous Australians before we can hope to close it”.

He says, in a draft of his speech, “the targets don’t celebrate the strengths, achievements and aspirations of indigenous people. They don’t tell you what’s happening on the ground or stirring under it.

“They don’t tell you how realistic or achievable these targets were in the first place. They reinforce the language of failing and falling short and they mask the real progress that has been made.”

Morrison says that on “almost every measure” there has been progress – although not as much as should have been made by now.

The government’s “refreshed” process is billed as aiming to deliver shared responsibility and accountability.

“There remains much more to do and we will do it differently by working together,” Morrison says. “By going from good intentions and sky-high aspirations to local, practical action that’s driven by local leaders and local needs with clear accountability and responsibility and a clear line of sight to the community.”

The federal government and the Coalition of Peaks (a group of about 50 community-controlled peak organisations) are working together with the states and territories to produce a new national agreement on Closing the Gap. This is to set out shared priorities for the next decade.

The structure and targets of the revamped scheme are to be finalised in April and then will go to the Council of Australian Governments.

It is planned to have some 15 targets, with a more specific and measurable path to them. The Closing the Gap program was started by the Rudd government.

The results from the latest report are:

Child Mortality – Target: Halve the gap in mortality rates for Indigenous children under five within a decade (by 2018) – Not met.

• in 2018, the Indigenous child mortality rate was 141 per 100,000 —twice the rate for non-Indigenous children (67 per 100,000)

• since the 2008 target baseline, the Indigenous child mortality rate has improved slightly, by about 7%. But the mortality rate for non-Indigenous children has improved at a faster rate and so the gap has widened.

Early Childhood Education – Target: 95% of all Indigenous four-year-olds enrolled in early childhood education (by 2025) – On track.

• in 2018, 86.4% of Indigenous four-year-olds were enrolled in early childhood education compared with 91.3% of non-Indigenous children

• between 2016 and 2018, the proportion of Indigenous children enrolled in early childhood education increased by almost 10 percentage points. There was a slight decline of less than one percentage point for non-Indigenous children

• the attendance rate for Indigenous children was highest in inner-regional areas (96.6%), almost 17 percentage points higher than the lowest attendance rate in very remote areas (79.7%).

School Attendance – Target: Close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous school attendance within five years (by 2018) – Not met.

• the majority of Indigenous students attended school for an average of just over four days a week in 2019. These students mostly lived in major cities and regional areas

• school attendance rates for Indigenous students have not improved over the past five years. Attendance rates for Indigenous students remain lower than for non-Indigenous students (around 82% compared to 92% in 2019)

• gaps in attendance are evident for Indigenous children as a group from the first year of schooling, and the gap widens during secondary school. In 2019, the attendance rate for Indigenous primary school students was 85% -— a gap of about nine percentage points. By Year 10, Indigenous students attend school 72% of the time on average — a gap of about 17 percentage points.

Literacy and Numeracy – Target: Halve the gap for Indigenous children in reading, writing and numeracy within a decade (by 2018) – Not met but improvements.

• at the national level, the share of Indigenous students at or above national minimum standards in reading and numeracy has improved over the decade to 2018. The gap has narrowed across all year levels by between three and 11 percentage points

• despite these improvements, in 2018 about one in four Indigenous students in years 5, 7 and 9, and one in five in year 3, remained below national minimum standards in reading. Between 17 to 19% of Indigenous students were below the national minimum standards in numeracy

• between 2008 and 2018, the share of year 3 students exceeding national minimum standards in reading increased by about 20 percentage points.

Year 12 Attainment – Target: Halve the gap for Indigenous Australians aged 20–24 in Year 12 attainment or equivalent attainment rates (by 2020) – On track.

• in 2018–19, 66% of Indigenous Australians aged 20–24 had attained year 12 or equivalent

• between 2008 and 2018–19, the proportion of Indigenous Australians aged 20–24 attaining year 12 or equivalent increased by 21 percentage points. The gap has narrowed by 15 percentage points, as non-Indigenous attainment rates have improved at a slower pace

• the biggest improvement in year 12 attainment rates was in major cities, where the gap narrowed by 20 percentage points — from 26 percentage points in 2012–13 to six percentage points in 2018–19.

Employment – Target: Halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade (by 2018) – Not met (stable).

• in 2018, the Indigenous employment rate was 49% compared to 75% for non-Indigenous Australians

• over the decade 2008–2018, the employment rate for Indigenous Australians increased slightly (by 0.9 percentage points), while for non-Indigenous Australians it fell by 0.4 percentage points. Thus the gap has not changed much

• the Indigenous employment rate varied by remoteness. Major cities had the highest employment rate at 59%, compared to 35% in very remote areas. The gap in employment outcomes was widest in remote and very remote Australia.

Life Expectancy – Target: Close the life expectancy gap within a generation (by 2031) – Not on track.

• in 2015–2017, life expectancy at birth was 71.6 years for Indigenous males (8.6 years less than non-Indigenous males) and 75.6 years for Indigenous females (7.8 years less than non-Indigenous females)

• over 2006 to 2018, there was an improvement of almost 10% in Indigenous age-standardised mortality rates. But non-Indigenous mortality rates improved at a similar rate, so the gap has not narrowed

• since 2006, there has been an improvement in Indigenous mortality rates from circulatory disease (heart disease, stroke and hypertension). But this has coincided with an increase in cancer mortality rates, where the gap is widening.

Meanwhile, in response to some disquiet in the Coalition party room on Tuesday, Morrison gave an assurance that it would be consulted on the design and timing of the proposed referendum for indigenous recognition the government aims to run this term.

– ref. ‘Closing the Gap’ process will better involve Indigenous Australians: Morrison – https://theconversation.com/closing-the-gap-process-will-better-involve-indigenous-australians-morrison-131570

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Baohua Jia, Professor, Swinburne University of Technology

Every age in the history of human civilisation has a signature material, from the Stone Age, to the Bronze and Iron Ages. We might even call today’s information-driven society the Silicon Age.

Since the 1960s, silicon nanostructures, the building-blocks of microchips, have supercharged the development of electronics, communications, manufacturing, medicine, and more.

Read more: Why nanotechnology is more than just a buzzword

How small are these nanostructures? Very, very small – you could fit at least 3,000 silicon transistors onto the tip of a human hair. But there is a limit: below about 5 nanometres (5 millionths of a millimetre), it is hard to improve the performance of silicon devices any further.

So if we are about to exhaust the potential of silicon nanomaterials, what will be our next signature material? That’s where “atomaterials” come in.

What are atomaterials?

“Atomaterials” is short for “atomic materials”, so called because their properties depend on the precise configuration of their atoms. It is a new but rapidly developing field.

One example is graphene, which is made of carbon atoms. Unlike diamond, in which the carbon atoms form a rigid three-dimensional structure, graphene is made of single layer of carbon atoms, bonded together in a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice.

Read more: Harder than diamond, stronger than steel, super conductor … graphene’s unreal

Diamond’s rigid structure is the reason for its celebrated hardness and longevity, making it the perfect material for high-end drill bits and expensive jewellery. In contrast, the two-dimensional form of carbon atoms in graphene allows electron travelling frictionless at a high speed giving ultrahigh conductivity and the outstanding in plane mechanical strength. Thus, graphene has broad applications in medicines, electronics, energy storage, light processing, and water filtration.

Using lasers, we can fashion these atomic structures into miniaturised devices with exceptional performance.

Using atomaterials, our lab has been working on a range of innovations, at various stages of development. They include:

• A magic cooling film. This film can cool the environment by up to 10℃ without using any electricity. By integrating such a film into a building, the electricity used for air conditioning can be reduced by 35%, and summer electricity blackouts effectively stopped. This will not only save electricity bills but also reduce greenhouse emissions.

• Heat-absorbing film. Some 97% of Earth’s water is in the oceans, and is salty and unusable without expensive processing. Efficiently removing salt from seawater could be a long-term solution to the growing global freshwater scarcity. With a solar-powered graphene film, this process can be made very efficient.

The film absorbs almost all the sunlight shining on it and converts it into heat. The temperature can be increased to 160℃ within 30 seconds. This heat can then distil seawater with an efficiency greater than 95%, and the distilled water is cleaner than tapwater. This low-cost technology can be suitable for domestic and industry applications.

• Smart sensing film. These flexible atomaterial films can incorporate a wide range of functions including environmental sensing, communication, and energy storage. They have a broad range of applications in healthcare, sports, advanced manufacturing, farming, and others. For example, smart films could monitor soil humidity near plants’ roots, thus helping to make agriculture more water-efficient.

• Ultrathin, ultra-lightweight lenses. The bulkiest part of a mobile phone camera is the lens, because it needs to be made of thick glass with particular optical properties. But lenses made with graphene can be mere millionths of a millimetre thick, and still deliver superb image quality. Such lenses could greatly reduce the weight and cost of everything from phones to space satellites.

• Near-instant power supply. We have developed an environmentally friendly supercapacitor from graphene that charges devices in seconds, and has a lifetime of millions of charge cycles. By attaching it to the back of a solar cell, it can store and deliver solar-generated energy whenever and wherever required. You will be free and truly mobile.

Where to next?

It can take years for some of these laboratory technologies to reach fruition. To try and speed up the process, we established the CTAM Global OpenLab to engage with industry, academia, government and the wider community and to promote sharing and collaboration. The lab was launched earlier this month at the International Conference on Nanomaterial and Atomaterial Sciences and Applications (ICNASA2020).

Read more: Finding an affordable way to use graphene is the key to its success

The world is facing pressing challenges, from climate change, to energy and resource scarcity, to our health and well-being.

Material innovation is more vital than ever and needs to be more efficient, design-driven and environmentally friendly. But these challenges can only be solved by joint effort from worldwide researchers, enterprise, industry and government with a sharing and open mindset.

– ref. Small world: atom-scale materials are the next tech frontier – https://theconversation.com/small-world-atom-scale-materials-are-the-next-tech-frontier-131147

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer Menzies, Principal Research Fellow, Policy Innovation Hub, Griffith University

The recent federal government response to the bushfire crisis and the “sports rorts” affair are symptomatic of a deeper political malaise – role confusion.

Since the roles and responsibilities of the federal government have become untethered from Australia’s Constitution through a range of High Court decisions, there are no principles to guide what is a meaningful role for the Commonwealth. This means it dips into areas that are the responsibility of the states.

Funding local sports clubs, for example, replicates existing state and local government programs. But it has become a key campaign tool for the federal Coalition government to be “seen” to be relevant to issues affecting local communities.

The Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRAA) have given Australia a framework for a world-class response to natural disasters. With four categories of assistance, the federal government provides funding for relief and recovery. This summer, after being accused of being to slow to respond, the Commonwealth is forging a new role for itself by deploying the Australian Defence Force. Again, it wants to be “seen” to be responsive.

This role instability means the federal government campaigns on issues under the jurisdictional control of the states and territories. When the prime minister changes, so do the areas of the federal government’s interest. The Commonwealth’s approach to managing the relationship with the states and territories is unstable and can veer from the cooperative to the coercive, from benign neglect to micro-managing program outcomes.

Read more: State governments are vital for Australian democracy: here’s why

The culture of the federal government stands for the political culture in Australia. This is underpinned through most political commentary being generated by journalists based in Parliament House in Canberra. They promote a world view forged by constant interaction with federal ministers and senior bureaucrats.

Yet the political culture in Canberra is not the same as the political culture within state governments. While the federal government can cherry-pick when and what issues to become involved in, the states keep all the big service-delivery systems in Australia ticking over. They keep building hospitals, managing law and order, educating children, building and operating infrastructure and managing population and natural resources.

There are a number of reasons why state governments have created a more effective platform to deliver on their responsibilities.

The past couple of decades has seen the rise of managerialist, non-ideological and pragmatic premiers. These leaders have become more sophisticated in how they approach issues. They are genuinely responsive to the community through mechanisms like community cabinets held regularly in regional towns and ministerial consultative and advisory committees.

State leaders are comfortable with and have initiated accountability regimes (still lacking federally) and have become experienced crisis managers who are willing to lead in such a situation. Because service delivery requires them to be less ideological and more pragmatic, they are not riven by the kind of ideological fervour that prevents the federal government from acting on issues such as climate change.

Finally, with Queensland adopting fixed four-year parliamentary terms, the federal government is now the only jurisdiction with an erratic election timetable called by the prime minister for political advantage. Four-year terms allow for the business of government to progress in an orderly manner and through the parliament. It brings a steadiness and certainty missing from the more febrile arrangements in place federally.

Read more: Securing Australia’s future: governance and state-federal relations

The states bring stability and ballast to our federation. Since commissioning the original Garnaut report in 2007 they have acted to address the challenge of climate change. They have implemented mitigation and adaptation policies. They do this because they are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change such as extended droughts, coastal erosion, inundation and natural disasters. All have the target of zero emissions by 2050.

While the federal government struggles to find a meaningful role for itself in the 21st century, there is greater scope to harness the stability the states provide. A collective agreement between the states on emission targets is a good starting point. If all states and territories agreed on an approach, Australia would have a national plan without the need for federal government involvement.

As we enter another week of parliamentary theatrics, perhaps the time has come to turn to the workhorse of the federation for action on climate change – the states.

– ref. States shine as federal government flounders this summer – now they should lead on climate change – https://theconversation.com/states-shine-as-federal-government-flounders-this-summer-now-they-should-lead-on-climate-change-131302

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Renee Morrison, Lecturer in Curriculum Studies, University of Tasmania

Searching online has many educational benefits. For instance, one study found students who used advanced online search strategies also had higher grades at university.

But spending more time online does not guarantee better online skills. Instead, a student’s ability to successfully search online increases with guidance and explicit instruction.

Young people tend to assume they are already competent searchers. Their teachers and parents often assume this too. This assumption, and the misguided belief that searching always results in learning, means much classroom practice focuses on searching to learn, rarely on learning to search.

Read more: Most young Australians can’t identify fake news online

Many teachers don’t explictly teach students how to search online. Instead, students often teach themselves and are reluctant to ask for assistance. This does not result in students obtaining the skills they need.

For six years, I studied how young Australians use search engines. Both school students and home-schoolers (the nation’s fastest growing educational cohort showed some traits of online searching that aren’t beneficial. For instance, both groups spent greater time on irrelevant websites than relevant ones and regularly quit searches before finding their desired information.

Here are three things young people should keep in mind to get the full benefits of searching online.

1. Search for more than just isolated facts

Young people should explore, synthesise and question information on the internet, rather than just locating one thing and moving on.

Search engines offer endless educational opportunities but many students typically only search for isolated facts. This means they are no better off than they were 40 years ago with a print encyclopedia.

It’s important for searchers to use different keywords and queries, multiple sites and search tabs (such as news and images).

Part of my (as yet unpublished) PhD research involved observing young people and their parents using a search engine for 20 minutes. In one (typical) observation, a home-school family type “How many endangered Sumatran Tigers are there” into Google. They enter a single website where they read a single sentence.

The parent writes this “answer” down and they begin the next (unrelated) topic – growing seeds.

The student could have learnt much more had they also searched for

• where Sumatra is

• why the tigers are endangered

• how people can help them.

I searched Google using the key words “Sumatran tigers” in quotation marks instead. The returned results offered me the ability to view National Geographic footage of the tigers and to chat live with an expert from the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) about them.

Clicking the “news” tab with this same query provided current media stories, including on two tigers coming to an Australian wildlife park and on the effect of palm oil on the species. Small changes to search techniques can make a big difference to the educational benefits made available online.

2. Slow down

All too often we presume search can be a fast process. The home-school families in my study spent 90 seconds or less, on average, viewing each website and searched a new topic every four minutes.

Searching so quickly can mean students don’t write effective search queries or get the information they need. They may also not have enough time to consider search results and evaluate websites for accuracy and relevance. .

Read more: On an average day, only 1% of Australian news stories quoted a young person. No wonder so few trust the media

My research confirmed young searchers frequently click on only the most prominent links and first websites returned, possibly trying to save time. This is problematic given the commercial environment where such positions can be bought and given children tend to take the accuracy of everything online for granted.

Fast search is not always problematic. Quickly locating facts means students can spend time on more challenging educational follow-up tasks – like analysing or categorising the facts. But this is only true if they first persist until they find the right information.

3. You’re in charge of the search, not Google

Young searchers frequently rely on search tools like Google’s “Did you mean” function.

While students feel confident as searchers, my PhD research found they were more confident in Google itself. One year eight student explained: “I’m used to Google making the changes to look for me”.

Read more: Now there’s a game you can play to ‘vaccinate’ yourself against fake news

Such attitudes can mean students dismiss relevant keywords by automatically agreeing with the (sometimes incorrect) auto-correct or going on irrelevant tangents unknowingly.

Teaching students to choose websites based on domain name extensions can also help ensure they are in charge, not the search engine. The easily purchasable “.com”, for example, denotes a commercial site while information on websites with a “.gov”(government) or “.edu” (education) domain name extension better assure quality information.

Search engines have great potential to provide new educational benefits, but we should be cautious of presuming this potential is actually a guarantee.

– ref. Don’t ‘just Google it’: 3 ways students can get the most from searching online – https://theconversation.com/dont-just-google-it-3-ways-students-can-get-the-most-from-searching-online-116519

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amity James, Senior Lecturer, School of Economics, Finance and Property, Curtin University

More than half of Australians over the age of 55 are open to downsizing, according to a new report based on a survey of 2,400 households. The main barrier to moving to a smaller home is a lack of housing that matches their needs and preferences. The rapid growth in the number of older Australians adds to the major challenge housing markets face in meeting their diverse housing needs.

Downsizing, or rightsizing, is considered an essential component of meeting the housing aspirations of older Australians. At the same time, downsizing creates housing opportunities for younger households by freeing up family homes.

Read more: What sort of housing do older Australians want and where do they want to live?

The ageing population also creates fiscal challenges for government, in terms of delivering services to the home and providing residential care. Downsizing can enable older Australians to age well and age in place rather than potentially move prematurely into residential care.

The report released today by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), for which 2,400 households over 55 were surveyed, found 26% of such households had downsized. Another third had thought about it. Overall, the findings point to a strong appetite among older Australians to downsize their dwellings.

With about 6.5 million Australians aged 55 or older, living in about 4.3 million households, our findings suggest downsizing could be relevant to 2.5 million households.

Why downsize? And what are the obstacles?

We know older Australians downsize in response to life events such as changes in health and relationship status, or children leaving the parental home. Lifestyle preferences and difficulties maintaining their garden or house also shape downsizing behaviour.

Barriers to downsizing include a lack of suitable housing and a lack of financial incentives. There are also emotional and physical barriers to moving. Financial factors, however, do not greatly impact the decision to move, nor does perceived financial well-being increase once they have downsized.

Read more: Downsizing cost trap awaits retirees – five reasons to be wary

Where those who had downsized were dissatisfied, this was most commonly related to the new dwelling, particularly its size, and the neighbourhood.

Is it actually downsizing?

One of the policy rationales for downsizing is to reduce the underutilisation of dwellings. However, this is at odds with the attitude of many older Australians. They consider “spare” bedrooms necessary for use as permanent guest rooms (58%), studies (50%), or dedicated rooms for children or grandchildren (31%).

Space remains important to Australian downsizers. Over half of them move to a dwelling with three or more bedrooms. A third move to an apartment.

However, two-thirds of downsizers surveyed did move to a dwelling with fewer bedrooms. Three bedrooms was the preferred dwelling size for older Australians. Downsizing the garden was essential for most.

Older Australians aspire to attain or retain home ownership. Their preferred neighbourhood has shopping, medical, recreational and public transport services all within walking distance.

Downsizers appear mobile. While under a quarter downsized within their original neighbourhood, 42% moved to a neighbourhood completely new to them.

The survey finding of a lack of suitable housing options matching would-be downsizers’ preferences may explain why so few were able to downsize in their original neighbourhood.

Delivering what older Australians want

If the local market does not have enough options available to meet the needs of older households, it is very difficult to downsize within an existing community. Moving to another desired location can also be problematic.

Meeting the needs of older Australians generally means an increase in medium-density housing. Developers are likely to require incentives to produce these medium-density products rather than potentially more profitable high-density development – although there is, of course, a downsizing market for well-located apartments.

Read more: People want and need more housing choice. It’s about time governments stood up to deliver it

The retirement industry has begun responding to the aspirations of older Australians. It is developing larger dwellings and offering a growing range of options, from high-end to affordable — all of which are accessible and suitable for ageing in place.

Equity-rich older Australians may wish to build a new dwelling in which to downsize. But they are often unable to borrow for this unless they have considerable capital available.

To support this avenue, new development finance models could be created to allow older Australians to develop without first having to sell the primary home. This shift would allow more collaborative forms of development, such as a group of like-minded individuals developing a site as housing for a small community.

Read more: Co-housing works well for older people, once they get past the image problem

For those vulnerable private renters moving into retirement, more secure rental accommodation through the social housing sector and delivered privately is essential. The community housing sector has a key role to play.

Where next?

The Australian housing landscape must shift towards a model of dwelling diversity with secure tenures – ownership and rental – in neighbourhoods where residents can walk easily to weekly services and recreation facilities, participate socially and be close to public transport options.

Read more: Fall in ageing Australians’ home-ownership rates looms as seismic shock for housing policy

Design is equally important. Australians need adaptable dwellings that can change to meet housing needs.

Such a landscape will provide effective downsizing options in which households can age well in the places that best meet their needs and aspirations.

Read more: For Australians to have the choice of growing old at home, here is what needs to change

– ref. Half of over-55s are open to downsizing – if only they could find homes that suit them – https://theconversation.com/half-of-over-55s-are-open-to-downsizing-if-only-they-could-find-homes-that-suit-them-130531

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mingming Cheng, Senior Lecturer, School of Marketing, Curtin University

Australia has joined New Zealand, the United States, Indonesia, India, Israel and other countries in deciding to refuse entry to all foreigners flying from or who have recently been in mainland China.

These bans dramatically escalate the potential economic impact of the novel coronavirus.

Read more: How does the Wuhan coronavirus cause severe illness?

Over the past two decades China has grown from a minnow to a whale in international travel. Not counting mainland Chinese visiting Hong Kong and Macau (about 76 million in 2018), data from the United Nations World Tourism Organisation show the number of Chinese going abroad climbed from 2.8 million in 1997 to about 73 million in 2018.

This places China fourth in terms of international visits, behind Germany (about 92 million), the United States (88 million) and Britain (74 million).

Rise of the Chinese traveller

Besides Hong Kong and Macau, Chinese travellers most visit neighbouring nations – Thailand, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea and Singapore. Next is Italy, then the United States and Malaysia.

Australia is somewhat down the list – just the 17th-most-popular destination for Chinese visitors in 2018 (1.4 million visits). New Zealand was the 26th (about 448,000).

But China is now Australia’s largest source of international visitors. Short-term arrivals from China overtook those from New Zealand (the top source for many decades) in 2017.

In the 12 months to November 2019, there were 1.44 million Chinese visitors to Australia, according to Tourism Australia. This was about 15% of the total 9.44 million short-term arrivals.

But Chinese visitors contributed relatively more to the Australian economy. The average spend per Chinese trip was $A9,235. This compared with $A5,943 for Germans, $A5,219 for Americans, $4,614 for Japanese and $A2,032 for New Zealanders.

This meant Chinese travellers contributed about A$12 billion to the Australian economy – or 27% of the total amount spent by all international visitors. International tourism accounts for about a quarter of Australia’s total tourism market. That means, in the greater scheme of things, Chinese travellers help create 0.6% of Australia’s annual GDP.

The student effect

The reason the Chinese spend (on average) so much more than other visitors is due to the large number of Chinese who come to Australia to study.

The Tourism Australia data show almost 275,000 of the 1.44 million Chinese visits – about 20% – were for educational purposes. By comparison, study was the reason for fewer than 14,000 – or less than 1% – of the 1.42 million visits by New Zealanders.

Read more: Why New Zealand is more exposed than others to the economic chills of China’s coronavirus outbreak

Chinese students stayed an average of 124 nights before going home and spent an average of $27,000. This is more than any other nationality. The average spent by all international students was A$22,000.

Chinese tourists, on average, stayed an average of 14 days and spent A$4,655. The average for all international holidaymakers was A$4,286. The biggest-spending were the Italians (A$7,174), Germans (A$6,028) and British ($A6,011).

So Chinese students accounted for just shy of 58% – or A$7.1 billion – of all the money spent by Chinese visitors.

Ban impacts

Australia’s travel ban has come just in time to disrupt the plans of thousands of Chinese students coming or returning to Australia. February is normally the peak month for Chinese arrivals in Australia. In 2019, the month recorded 206,300 arrivals – roughly double the average month.

This is because this month is when many Chinese students arrive or return to Australia to start the university year. (It’s also due in part to the proximity of the Chinese lunar new year – January 25 this year, February 25 last year – when hundreds of thousands of Chinese travel for a holiday or to visit family.)

Read more: The coronavirus outbreak is the biggest crisis ever to hit international education

Chinese students enrolled in Australian universities comprise 38% of all full-fee paying international students. With international students now contributing about 23% of university revenues, this suggests the Chinese market alone contributes about 9%.

More Chinese students come to Australia for vocational education and training or school. All up, Chinese students account for about 30% of total overseas student enrolments.

Long-term impacts

Our main point of reference for the economic impact of the coronavirus is the impact of SARS in late 2002. The Chinese government imposed similar travel restrictions to now. But Australia did not ban travellers from China outright. It instead relied on screening at airports.

In May 2003 just 3,100 Chinese visited Australia, a 75% decline on the 12,600 visitors in May 2002. Visitor numbers from other Asian countries also suffered, with the total number of international short-term arrivals falling 8.5% in April , then a further 2.6% in May.

But SARS was contained relatively quickly. By July the Chinese government had lifted its restrictions. The following month Chinese arrivals were back up to more than 12,000.

The economic impact of SARS was therefore “short-lived and limited”, according to the Australian Treasury.

Read more: Fear spreads easily. That’s what gives the Wuhan coronavirus economic impact

The economic impact of the novel coronavirus is shaping to be more signficant, based on the scale of crisis, the severity of travel restrictions, the likelihood travel bans will stay in place for longer and the much greater numbers of Chinese tourists and students on which Australia’s tourism and education industries have come to rely.

– ref. We depend so much more on Chinese travellers now. That makes the impact of this coronavirus novel – https://theconversation.com/we-depend-so-much-more-on-chinese-travellers-now-that-makes-the-impact-of-this-coronavirus-novel-130798

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Portolan, PhD student, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University

Consider the moments you have fallen in love.

If you unpick the threads, you will quickly find much of the falling occurred in the mind. Many artefacts that go towards creating intimacy are imagined. We can’t fully understand or know someone else, but we can construct a persona around them and a shared view of the future.

Yes, there were likely tangible and physical components that went towards constructing the intimacy. You would have seen that person, had a discussion with them, a date (or several dates even), but realistically a lot of it happened in your mind.

Love requires imagination: a shared vision, narrative or trajectory.

In our connected world, this imagination is fostered from the very start of the interaction. It happens from the moment we pick up our phones, tap on an app and consider swiping right. And we’re doing a lot of swiping: 5 million matches a day on Tinder alone. Dating apps and dating have become virtually synonymous.

Read more: Why Tinder is so ‘evilly satisfying’

It would be easy to chalk up the success of the dating app to functionality, mobility and ease, but what about its reawakening of the imagination?

Dreamspaces

Dating apps provide users with the ability to dream, to fantasise, to construct a person and an imagined story based on limited information. We open the app with a series of beliefs about who might make for our perfect match. Athletic, committed, creative, respectful, passionate, educated, age-appropriate (or inappropriate) … and then we interpret.

Consider what you are supplied with: a few profile pictures and a brief description. Information is limited; gaps need to be filled.

A photo taken with an adorable chocolate Labrador. Is he an animal lover – and therefore dependable? Holding a cocktail in a party dress with a friend. Does she enjoy her social life – and so is she fun to be around? On the beach: they must love the outdoors.

From there, we springboard into interpreting other prompts and creating a narrative. You’re imaging an afternoon spent at the dog park (with the chocolate lab and your cavoodle – they would be the best of friends); an evening at the latest bar sipping the newest drink; a swimsuit, board shorts and a towel haphazardly flung over a balcony in the memory of a day spent at the beach.

And while you are imagining your potential match, they are imagining you, too.

Read more: Must love jokes: why we look for a partner who laughs (and makes us laugh)

Swipe right, and start a DM chat, and our intrepid interpretation of the other person and potential intimacy continues. The ghost of an imagined relationship has begun to haunt us.

Go on, ghost me

“Hauntology” was coined by philosopher Jacques Derrida to refer to the return or persistence of elements from the past, as in the manner of a ghost.

Dating apps allow the user to mobilise hauntological recollections from a previous relationship, a movie, a novel, or an idea.

The virtual digital space is the perfect location for such hauntologies. You might think there is another person on the other side of the app, but we can also consider them to be a ghost.

It’s easy to understand why dating apps are so popular. Their mobility makes them easy to use; users are in control of their selection of potential matches.

Tinder founders Sean Rad and Justin Mateen say the design takes “the stress out of dating”, and the game-like quality of the app creates less emotional investment.

But the imagining constitutes a significant emotional investment. Studies have shown imagined occurrences have similar, if not the same, impact as reality.

Despite the lack of a face-to-face interaction you might find yourself intensely linked to your ghost. But will your ghost match the actual person when you meet them face-to-face for the first time? Will the two converge, or will there be an unbearable space between?

Awareness is half the battle. When you’re next flicking through potential matches on a dating app, be conscious of how far you’re taking your digital imaginings.

You can aim to keep them in check, or you can consciously let them spiral – in the knowledge of the notion you might be falling for a ghost.

Researchers at Western Sydney University are looking for Bumble and Tinder users aged between 18 and 35 living in New South Wales to investigate dating apps and gender roles. Click here for more information and to register.

– ref. Looking for love on a dating app? You might be falling for a ghost – https://theconversation.com/looking-for-love-on-a-dating-app-you-might-be-falling-for-a-ghost-128626

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

As he battles to put containment lines around the damage the Nationals’ meltdown is causing his government, Scott Morrison has given his party room a pointed lecture about unity.

He has also obtained a letter from Llew O’Brien in which O’Brien reaffirms he will support the government. O’Brien quit the Nationals this week and then won the deputy speakership thanks to the votes of several rebel Nationals.

O’Brien, who remains a member of the Queensland Liberal National Party, sent the letter after meeting Morrison on Monday night.

Before Tuesday’s Coalition meeting, the word was put out for members to show restraint, after recent public airings of differences over coal in particular.

Addressing the party room, Morrison reminded members they were there as a team, declaring the government had a “contract” with the Australian people.

Those walking into the government party room took on serious responsibilities and must do so as a government. The government had gone to the election highlighting local plans and the capabilities of local members but also very much as members of a team.

“The people endorsed us to be the government,” he said, emphasising the government wasn’t him or any individual. “We are together the government.”

Read more: View from The Hill: It turned into a profitable day at the office for Nat rat

He said there were many parties in this government: the Liberal party, the National party, the CLP in the Northern Territory, the LNP in Queensland.

But “the contract we have with the Australian people” was to work collectively as their government. The government’s strength was its values, policies and beliefs, which were endorsed at the election.

Acknowledging the difficulties of the last couple of months Morrison told members, when they returned home after the current fortnight sitting, “to focus on the people who put us here”.

Treasurer and deputy Liberal leader Josh Frydenberg invoked John Howard’s adage about being a broad church, when Howard added, “you sometimes have to get the builders in to put in the extra pew on both sides of the aisle to make sure that everybody is accommodated”.

Frydenberg lamented Monday’s “historic moment” in the Australian-Indonesian relationship, with President Joko Widodo visiting Australia and addressing parliament, had been overshadowed in the news bulletins. He also urged MPs to focus on government achievements and policies and future plans “and put internal issues of recent days behind us”.

Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Michael McCormack moves on from his near-death experience

Embattled Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who at the weekend did the Tumbarumba trek which was started by Tim Fischer, said he’d had a call from Fischer’s widow Judy, who’d reflected on how Tim and his team had “stuck firm through difficult periods”. She had said Tim “would want us all to stand firm and together at present”, focused on continuing to deliver the government’s commitments.

O’Brien was present at the meeting but didn’t speak.

Also quiet were the Liberal moderates, who have been recently outspoken on climate change.

One of the Nationals rebels, former resources minister Matt Canavan, spruiked the advantages of the feasibility study for a Queensland coal-fired power station at Collinsvillle, but his comments were relatively non-combative.

Read more: VIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the Coalition and coal

In contrast, earlier Canavan prodded the southern Liberals when on Monday night he hit back with heavy sarcasm against former prime minister Malcolm’s Turnbull’s comment that it was “nuts” to advocate government support to build a coal-fired power station.

Canavan told Sky, “Good luck to Malcolm, he’s welcome to have his views. In fact, I hope that Malcolm keeps expressing those views and that maybe come around the next election he can lead a convoy, let’s say, up to Collinsville, and have a rally up there, and campaign against the coal-fire power station.

“I think that would go down very well, to have Malcolm’s motorcade come up to North Queensland, and tell us all why we shouldn’t be using our own product which we export overseas to create jobs here.”

Asked in question time whether the government would be willing to indemnify a Collinsville coal-fired power station against carbon risk, Morrison said it was committed to the feasibility study but “the matter that the member has raised with me in this question is not currently before the government”.

– ref. Behave as a team, Morrison tells the troops – https://theconversation.com/behave-as-a-team-morrison-tells-the-troops-131143

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simone Blackman, Lecturer in Commercial Law, University of Tasmania

This summer’s bushfires and heatwaves may have led you to wonder how climate change will shape our lives. But have you given any thought to how it might affect your pets?

The issue of climate change and pet ownership came to the fore in recent weeks after several dogs reportedly died during air transit in soaring temperatures. They included a boxer called Duke, who died in December after being left in a crate on the tarmac in near 40℃ heat during a flight delay.

Read more: Vets can do more to reduce the suffering of flat-faced dog breeds

Qantas and Virgin Australia subsequently announced an overhaul of how some breeds of dogs, cats and rabbits – those with physical features that restrict their airways – travel on their planes.

The new flight restrictions have their pros and cons. One the one hand, it’ll improve welfare for dogs who struggle on flights and put a spotlight on the issues snub-nosed dogs face. But also it can create complications for breeders, and for transporting rescue dogs.

Travel woes

The bushfire crisis has made us rethink the typical Australian holiday. And by extension, we should integrate our pets into our bushfire survival plans and reconsider whether to take them on holiday.

Snub-nosed dogs, with their short snouts and respiratory systems, mean they’re more prone to dying in flight. This risk is higher in warm weather, when the body must work harder to regulate temperature.

Read more: Curious Kids: is it true dogs don’t like to travel?

Both Qantas and Virgin Airlines have long had more stringent travel requirements for certain breeds, such as for snub-nosed dogs.

Among Qantas’s recent changes, a registered veterinarian must clear all snub-nosed animals to fly immediately before travelling. In making the announcement, Qantas said the extreme features of snub-nosed breeds mean they often struggle to breathe, even in mild conditions.

Qantas’s new precautions apply to snub-nosed breeds including boxers, bulldogs and pugs, which are becoming increasingly popular.

Virgin has banned snub-nosed dogs altogether, as well as some types of rabbits, from flying until further notice.

These calls, however, are somewhat arbitrary when it comes to which dog breeds to ban or apply restrictions to. There is no evidence-based threshold beyond which certain temperatures become untenable for dogs of a given head shape, or a given age or body weight.

Inbreeding risk

With 4.8 million pet dogs in Australia, the travel restrictions will not only affect dog owners, but dog breeders and rescue groups who fly puppies to their new homes across Australia.

We predict a sustained decline in demand for puppies of breeds the travel restrictions affect. This means breeds with a smaller population may fall victim to less interstate and international movement of gametes (reproductive cells), leading, in turn, to less genetic diversity and, sadly, more inbreeding.

One of us, Simone Blackman, breeds Tibetan spaniels, a snub-nosed breed that is subject to the new flight restrictions. These Tasmanian-bred puppies can now only be transported to mainland Australia by ferry, if a person accompanies them. Clearly, this is neither good for the puppies in question – because the trip by air is considerably shorter – nor practical for a hobby breeder. It also means there is less opportunity to garner genetic diversity from mainland Australia.

The carbon pawprint

As the climate warms, it will become more important to make sound ethical and financial decisions around pet ownership.

For example, those who seek to lighten their ecological footprint may need to consider the methane and nitrous oxide emissions, potent greenhouse gases that come from pet food production. The meat in dog food is highly processed and must be transported.

In fact, a 2017 US study found these gases from pet food release the equivalent of 64 million tons of carbon dioxide a year. That’s equivalent to the emissions produced from over a year of driving 13.6 million cars.

Owners can make low-carbon pet food decisions, sourcing locally made food. For example, buying from local markets or from producers such as the Pet Grocer whose mission is to produce dog food that’s healthy, sustainable and ethical.

Read more: What about your carbon pawprint?

Rising temperatures mean owners also need to think twice about leaving pets outside without shade, instead opting to leave pets indoors with air conditioning on.

Looking to the future

Of course, dogs exist in the same climate, and breathe the same bushfire smoke, as their owners. Under climate change, dogs (and people) with breathing issues will suffer the most, alongside those which are old and overweight.

Warmer weather also means less dog-walking in the heat of the day, which is not good for dogs or their owners.

Dog ownership brings immense joy for many Australians, but we must understand how climate change will complicate the way we keep and care for them. It’s clear the welfare of pets, humans and the planet are inextricably intertwined.

– ref. Duke the dog’s plane death shows how climate change complicates pet ownership – https://theconversation.com/duke-the-dogs-plane-death-shows-how-climate-change-complicates-pet-ownership-130601

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stefanie Vaccher, Statistician/Epidemiologist, UNSW

New regulations come into place this month that allow the sale of amyl nitrite, known as poppers, in Australian pharmacies.

Amyl nitrite and the broader class of drugs it belongs to, alkyl nitrites, were previously illegal in Australia. But poppers were easy to obtain, sold as “room deodoriser” or “leather cleaner” in adult stores and sex-on-premises venues.

Poppers are inhaled, giving a short buzz and mild head-rush because they relax muscles and blood vessels. They’re also used to facilitate more pleasurable sex, particularly anal intercourse. They relax the anal sphincter muscles, allowing for easier sex.

Read more: Weekly Dose: amyl started as a poison antidote, now a common party drug

But you’re not likely to find poppers in pharmacies anytime soon – no product has yet completed the manufacture, testing, and registration processes required to sell a medication in Australia.

There are also a number of other barriers to overcome before users can make a successful transition to purchasing poppers in a pharmacy.

In the meantime, exemptions should be given to stores and venues where poppers were previously sold to ensure people can continue to access them.

Who uses poppers?

Our recent research found almost half of gay and bisexual men in Australia have used poppers in the last six months.

Women also use poppers, but much less frequently. Almost 10% of lesbian, bisexual, and queer women report using poppers in the last six months, mostly at parties.

The majority (65%) of men we surveyed reported that despite any changes to the legal status of poppers, they would continue to find ways to obtain them.

We found the use of poppers wasn’t associated with an increased risk of acquiring HIV.

In fact, men who used poppers were more likely to be protected against HIV by using pre-exposure prophylaxis or PrEP (a medication to prevent HIV) than men who didn’t use poppers.

Poppers may also play a role in reducing the risk of HIV transmission, by decreasing the risk of tearing or abrasions during sex.

Read more: Is Truvada (PrEP) the game-changer that will end new HIV transmissions in Australia?

What’s changing?

Recent regulatory changes were designed to ensure that safe and reliable medications could be sold in Australian pharmacies in an easily accessible manner.

This presents an opportunity for pharmacists to have a conversation with potential poppers users prior to their purchase. The discussion could include information about side effects, drug interactions, and safe use practices.

However, at this stage it’s unclear whether poppers will only be dispensed to people who intend to use it as a sexual enhancement aid, or whether it will also be made available for people wanting a quick high.

In its ruling, the Therapeutic Goods Administration stated amyl nitrite could only be sold in Australian pharmacies “when in preparations for human therapeutic use and packaged in containers with child-resistant closures”.

No product has passed through the lengthy manufacture, testing, and registration processes required to sell a medication in Australia.

This process can take several years, so we don’t expect the gap in the market to be filled in the near future.

Making sure stigma doesn’t become a barrier

It’s important pharmacists provide information about all medications in a non-judgemental way.

But the experience of Australian women accessing the morning after pill suggests this may not always be a reality.

Some women accessing emergency contraception from pharmacists feel stigmatised for their actions, which may deter them from purchasing the medication from a pharmacist in future.

Read more: Note to pharmacists on how not to sell the morning-after pill

Similarly, the potential for stigma and discrimination could deter some people from visiting a pharmacy to access poppers. They may also face other practical barriers, such as opening hours and accessibility of pharmacies.

We need a transition plan

It’s still illegal to buy poppers in sex shops and sex-on-premises venues. But it’s unclear whether there will be crackdowns on their sale outside of pharmacies in Australia.

During the transition to pharmaceutical poppers, these stores and venues should be offered exemptions to continue to sell poppers. This would allow ongoing access while the market catches up to new regulatory requirements.

These shops and venues could also provide an alternative for people who may not be comfortable discussing their sexual practices in public pharmacies. People who want more information could then be referred onto a knowledgable and LGBT-friendly pharmacist in their area.

So how can people legally access poppers?

Under Australia’s personal importation scheme, people with a valid prescription can buy poppers online.

However, this requires finding a general practitioner who is willing to write a prescription for amyl nitrite, and a reliable overseas pharmacy to purchase this medication through.

Poppers have been used as a sexual enhancement aid for decades. Allowing their sale in pharmacies is a good first step but we have a long way to go until they’re easily accessible.

– ref. Poppers can now be sold in pharmacies, but getting them might not be so easy – https://theconversation.com/poppers-can-now-be-sold-in-pharmacies-but-getting-them-might-not-be-so-easy-131146

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Galloway, Associate Professor of Law, Griffith University

The High Court made an important decision today about whether it is possible for Aboriginal Australians to be deported from the country if they are not citizens.

By a majority of 4:3, the court decided that

Aboriginal Australians … are not within the reach of the ‘aliens’ power conferred by s 51(xix) of the Constitution.

The outcome of the decision is clear for one of the men, Brendan Thoms, who is a registered native title holder. As such, it is beyond the power of the Commonwealth to deport him.

However, the majority was divided on the question of whether the other plaintiff, Daniel Love, was an Aboriginal person as a question of fact, and so did not make a finding about whether or not he was an “alien”.

This case is significant. In some regards, it is about questions of deportation and immigration. But, crucially, it is a constitutional law case grappling with the deeper question of whether Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians can be aliens and therefore excluded from the Australian state.

Although the decision applies to only a small number of people – Indigenous Australians who are not citizens – it has a broader impact in recognising the special status of Indigenous Australians in Australia.

Background of the case

The case involved two Aboriginal men born overseas who were ordered to be deported from Australia because they each had a criminal conviction. Both men appealed to the High Court and their cases were heard together late last year.

Love, a Kamileroi man, was born in Papua New Guinea to an Aboriginal father and PNG mother. He moved to Australia in 1984 when he was five years old, but never applied for citizenship. After serving a 12-month sentence for assault occasioning bodily harm, his permanent residency visa was cancelled by the government. He was in detention but was released in 2018 pending the High Court’s decision.

Read more: Can Indigenous Australians be deported as ‘aliens’? A High Court decision will show us the strength of modern colonial power

Thoms, a Gunggari man and declared native title holder, was born in New Zealand to an Aboriginal mother and New Zealand father. He has lived in Australia since 1994. Like Love, his visa was cancelled after he served part of an 18-month sentence for a domestic violence assault. He has remained in immigration detention pending the court’s decision.

The Commonwealth has maintained that since the men are not citizens of Australia, the minister for Home Affairs has the power to cancel their visas and deport them. Under Section 51 (xix) of the Constitution, the Commonwealth has the power to make laws relating to “naturalisation and aliens”.

However, lawyers for the two men argued that although they are not citizens, they cannot be aliens – and therefore cannot be deported.

As a question of law, an alien is a person who owes allegiance to another country because they were born there. For people recognised as Aboriginal Australians, with longstanding connections to community, culture and traditional land, this implies they do not belong in their own country.

As Love’s lawyers argued to the court,

as a member of the Aboriginal race of Australia and the child of an Australian citizen … [he] is not an alien.

This argument suggests a new category of person described as “non-citizen non-aliens”. And under this special category, the lawyers argued, the minister would not have the constitutional right to deport them.

Read more: The government’s ‘new page’ on Indigenous policy is actually just more of the same

The conflict in this case arises because it seems contradictory for Aboriginal people to be thought of as strangers in their own land. This is especially so for registered native title holders, such as Thoms. As a native title holder, the law recognises his connection to the land.

The basis of the men’s argument, therefore, rests on the connection of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to their country and the obvious implication of belonging.

Impact for Indigenous Australians

The court’s decision is good news for Indigenous Australians, as it expresses a new form of relationship between Indigenous people and the state – that of a “non-citizen, non-alien”.

The category will protect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians born overseas, ensuring they will not lose their right to traditional lands because of an accident of birth. The decision upholds the law’s recognition of the importance of Indigenous Australians’ connection to, and rights over, their lands.

But it does mean that a person must be able to prove their Aboriginality before the court as a question of fact.

Read more: Ken Wyatt’s proposed ‘voice to government’ marks another failure to hear Indigenous voices

Because Thoms is a native title holder, his circumstances were clear. The majority was divided, however, on Love’s status as an Aboriginal person, as he is not a native title holder. And there was ultimately no finding as to whether he qualifies as an alien under the law.

The case also highlights the ongoing challenges for Indigenous Australians in their fight for proper legal recognition in relations with the state.

The minister ignored the implications of these men’s Aboriginality in seeking to deport them. And the Commonwealth argued before the High Court that these men did not belong in Australia – that they were aliens. Further, three of the seven judges agreed with that argument and decided there was no special category for “non-citizen, non-aliens”.

The fact this case was brought at all indicates that the relationship between Indigenous Australians and the state remains unresolved.

Despite the majority decision, it seems First Nations peoples’ close connection with the land is still not enough on its own to guarantee their ongoing rights to be part of Australia, and to retain their ties to community and country.

This decision will be recognised as a milestone for Indigenous Australians. But the closeness of the decision and the qualified finding in relation to Love’s case means this question of belonging for non-citizen Indigenous people will likely be raised again.

– ref. High Court rules Indigenous people cannot be deported as aliens, but the fight for legal recognition remains – https://theconversation.com/high-court-rules-indigenous-people-cannot-be-deported-as-aliens-but-the-fight-for-legal-recognition-remains-131377

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jake Clark, PhD Candidate, University of Southern Queensland

Is the sky blue on other planets, like on Earth? What is an atmosphere, and do other planets have one? – Charlie, age 10

G’day Charlie, and thank you so much for your incredibly curious question.

Before I get too excited talking about the atmospheres of other planets, first we have to talk about what an atmosphere actually is.

The atmosphere is normally the outermost layer of a planet. On rocky worlds like Earth it is usually the lightest and thinnest layer.

The thing that makes an atmosphere an atmosphere is what it’s made of. It’s not made up of big lumps of rocks or huge swirling oceans; it is made up of gases.

What’s in an atmosphere?

Atmospheres can contain a wide variety of gases. Most of Earth’s atmosphere is a gas called nitrogen that doesn’t really react with anything. There’s also a fair bit of oxygen, which is what we need to breathe. There are also two other important gases called argon and carbon dioxide, and tiny amounts of lots of other ones.

The mix of gases is what gives a planet’s atmosphere its colour.

Read more: Curious Kids: Why is the sky blue and where does it start?

Earth’s atmosphere is made up of gases that tend to bounce blue light in all directions (known as “scattering”) but let most other colours of light straight through. This scattered light is what gives Earth’s atmosphere its blue colour.

Do other planets have blue atmospheres? Some of them sure do!

Other worlds

The atmospheres of the two ice giants in our solar system, Neptune and Uranus, are both beautiful shades of blue.

However, these atmospheres are a different blue than ours. It’s caused by the huge amounts of a gas called methane swirling around.

(Side note: methane is also the main component of farts. That’s right, there’s a layer of farts on Uranus.)

Jupiter and Saturn, however, have completely different-coloured atmospheres.

Ice crystals made of a chemical called ammonia in Saturn’s upper atmosphere make it a pale shade of yellow.

Uranus’ atmosphere also contains some ammonia, which makes the planet a slightly greener shade than the deep blue we see on Neptune.

Jupiter’s atmosphere has distinctive brown and orange bands, thanks to gases that may contain the elements phosphorus and sulfur, and possibly even more complicated chemicals called hydrocarbons.**

In some extreme cases, the entire planet might just be a huge atmosphere with no rocky surface at all. Astronomers and planetary scientists like myself are still trying to work out whether Jupiter and Saturn have rocky surfaces, deep down in their atmosphere, or whether they’re both simply huge balls of gas.

However, there are some planets that have no atmosphere at all! The Sun’s closest and smallest neighbour, Mercury, is one example. Its surface is exposed to the vastness of space.

Beyond our solar system

So far I’ve been talking about the atmospheres of planets in our Solar system. But what about planets in other planetary systems, orbiting other stars?

Well, astronomers have been detecting the atmospheres of these planets (which we call “exoplanets”) for the past 20 years! It wasn’t until last year, however, that astronomers managed to detect the atmosphere of a rocky exoplanet. The planet is called LHS 3844b and it’s so far away that the light takes almost 50 years to reach us!

LHS 3844b weighs twice as much as Earth, and we astronomers thought it would have a pretty thick atmosphere. But, to our surprise, it has little to no atmosphere at all! So it might be more like Mercury than Earth.

We still have a lot to learn about far-off planets and discovering one with an Earth-like atmosphere that’s ripe for life is still many years away.

Maybe, Charlie, you could be the first astronomer to detect an Earth-like atmosphere on another world!

– ref. Curious Kids: is the sky blue on other planets? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-is-the-sky-blue-on-other-planets-129779

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meredith Nash, Associate Professor in Sociology, University of Tasmania

It’s hard for women to succeed in science. Our research shows it’s even harder for women of colour.

We interviewed women of colour working in scientific and technical organisations across Australia about their experiences. As well as direct discrimination, they face a barrage of brief, everyday racial slights and indignities that one described as “death by a thousand cuts”.

In addition, we found women of colour often hesitate to tackle these affronts themselves as they are wary their claims will be doubted and they will be perceived as “too emotional”.

However, there’s plenty that white people and those in positions of authority can do to improve the situation.

Read more: Science prizes are still a boys’ club. Here’s how we can change that

Looking from all angles

In Australia, there are many programs and policy initiatives that address the barriers faced by women in scientific and technical fields. Without meaning to, these efforts often disproportionately benefit white women.

Our research comes after a recent US survey of women in astronomy and planetary science that revealed women of colour experience the most hostile workplace environment of any group and are at greater risk of gender and racial harassment.

As sociologists, we argue that to describe women’s experiences in the workplace, we need to take an intersectional approach – one that traces the interconnections between gender, race, class, age, sexuality, ability and other features of identity.

What do women of colour say about their experiences?

In our study of the experiences of 30 women of colour in Australian scientific and technical organisations, we found that racial microaggressions are a common experience.

Racial microaggressions are the brief, everyday verbal, behavioural, and environmental racial slights and indignities experienced by people of colour. The cumulative effect of these seemingly minor events has a devastating impact.

Read more: Many small microaggressions add up to something big

Some women described feeling invisible, and having to work hard to overcome preconceptions. These experiences are likely to resonate with many white women as well. As Shankari (53, born in India) noted, “getting to the same table takes so much effort”.

However, women of colour also face microaggressions based on their racial or cultural background. For instance, Gabbie (44, born in the UK) said, “as a woman you have to be better than your male counterparts and as a woman of colour you have to be even better than your white female counterparts”.

You can really start to feel like you’re not valued because […] it’s the tenth time your manager said, ‘Oh, don’t worry about it, you’re stressing too much’ […] And it makes you home in on yourself as if there’s something wrong with you and you almost start – I don’t know – gaslighting yourself. (Astrid, 28, born in Australia)

Women of colour also have to manage their (white) colleagues in a non-threatening manner to create change.

It’s like a constant managing up […] just fitting in and not being difficult, quietly getting your point across, slowly over time. (Kelly, 35, born in South Africa)

Why do these experiences matter?

Microaggressions are subtle and often unintended, making them difficult to recognise and confront. They can be verbal (such as asking “Where are you from?”), behavioural (such as a white woman avoiding getting in a lift with an African man) or environmental (such as all buildings in a university being named after rich white men).

People of colour may describe a feeling that “something is not right”. In contrast, white people often sincerely believe they have acted in good faith, leading them to perceive people of colour as oversensitive. So identifying and responding to racial microaggressions is fraught.

What can white people do to change the situation?

White people hold the bulk of leadership positions in scientific and technical organisations. They are best positioned to bring about change, yet they are often the least likely to recognise microaggressions.

Here’s what white people can do:

• listen to what people of colour say about their experiences

• learn to recognise racial microaggressions and take action when you see them. Being passive won’t help

• confront your own prejudices and biases. For example, white scientists must question the common belief that anyone can succeed in science as long as they work hard

• white people tend to see other white people as more credible. So amplify the concerns of women of colour

• follow women of colour rather than trying to lead.

Read more: Australia needs more engineers. And more of them need to be women

Today is International Day of Women and Girls in Science. It’s a day to highlight the contributions of women and girls in science – and to remember that gendered barriers aren’t the only ones many women must overcome.

– ref. ‘Death by a thousand cuts’: women of colour in science face a subtly hostile work environment – https://theconversation.com/death-by-a-thousand-cuts-women-of-colour-in-science-face-a-subtly-hostile-work-environment-130204

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Webb, Clinical Lecturer and Principal Hospital Scientist, University of Sydney

It’s always you, isn’t it? The person busy swatting away buzzing backyard mosquitoes or nursing an arm full of itchy red lumps after a weekend camping trip.

You’re not imagining it – mosquitoes really are attracted to some people more than others.

Why do mosquitoes need blood?

Only female mosquitoes bite. They do it for the nutrition contained in blood, which helps develop their eggs.

Mosquitoes don’t just get blood from people. They’re actually far more likely to get it from biting animals, birds, frogs and reptiles. They even bite earthworms.

But some mosquitoes specifically target people. One of the worst culprits is the Aedes aegypti species, which spreads dengue and yellow fever viruses.

Another that prefers humans are the Anopheles mosquitoes, responsible for spreading the parasites that cause malaria.

Read more: Curious Kids: When we get bitten by a mosquito, why does it itch so much?

How do mosquitoes find us?

Most mosquitoes will get their blood from whatever is around and don’t necessarily care if they’re biting one person or another.

Although it’s our blood they’re after, there is no strong indicator they prefer a particular blood type over another. Some studies have suggested they prefer people with type O blood but that’s unlikely to be the case for all types of mosquitoes.

Whether we’re picked out of a crowd may come down to heavy breathing and skin smell.

When they need blood, mosquitoes can pick up on the carbon dioxide we exhale. Around the world, carbon dioxide is one of the most common “baits” used to attract and collect mosquitoes. If you’re exhaling greater volumes of carbon dioxide, you’re probably an easier target for mosquitoes.

Read more: The worst year for mosquitoes ever? Here’s how we find out

When the mosquito gets closer, she is responding to a range of stimuli.

Perhaps it’s body heat and sweat: exercise that increases body temperature and perspiration can attract mosquitoes.

Perhaps it’s body size: studies indicate pregnant women are more likely to be bitten by mosquitoes.

How hairy are you? Mosquitoes may have a tough job finding a path through to your skin if there is an abundance of body hair.

Read more: Mozzie repellent clothing might stop some bites but you’ll still need a cream or spray

More than anything else, though, it’s about the smell of your skin. Hundreds of chemicals are sweated out or emitted by our body’s bacteria. The cocktail of smells they create will either attract or deter mosquitoes.

It’s not just who they bite but where

Mosquitoes could also have a preference for different parts of the body.

One study showed mosquitoes are more attracted to hands and feet than armpits, but that just turned out to be because of deodorant residues.

Mosquitoes may also be more attracted to our feet: studies have shown cheese sharing similar bacteria to that found between our toes attracts mosquitoes!

Who is to blame for this misery?

It’s not your diet. There is no evidence that what you eat or drink will prevent mosquito bites. Some food or drink may subtly change how many mosquitoes are likely to bite you but it won’t make that much difference.

Eating bananas or drinking beer has been shown to marginally increase the attraction of mosquitoes but the results aren’t enough to suggest any dietary change will reduce your mosquito bites. That’s why our supermarket shelves aren’t full of “mozzie repellent” pills.

Read more: What can I eat to stop mosquitoes biting me?

Your irresistibility to mosquitoes may not be your fault. Blame your parents. Studies have shown the chemicals responsible for the “skin smell” that attracts mosquitoes has a high level of heritability when twins are exposed to biting mosquitoes.

What can you do about it?

We have to be careful about generalisations. There are thousands of types of mosquitoes around the world and all will have a different preference for what or who to bite. And the attraction of individuals and the scenario that plays out in one part of the world may be much different in another.

Remember, it only takes one mosquito bite to transmit a pathogen that could make you sick. So whether you’re a mosquito magnet or feeling a little invisible because you’re not bitten so often, don’t be complacent and use insect repellents.

– ref. Feel like you’re a mozzie magnet? It’s true – mosquitoes prefer to bite some people over others – https://theconversation.com/feel-like-youre-a-mozzie-magnet-its-true-mosquitoes-prefer-to-bite-some-people-over-others-128788

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lily van Eeden, PhD Candidate in Human-Wildlife Conflict, University of Sydney

Almost one in five Australians think introduced horses and foxes are native to Australia, and others don’t want “cute” or “charismatic” animals culled, even when they damage the environment. So what are the implications of these attitudes as we help nature recover from bushfires?

Public opposition to culling programs is often at odds with scientists and conservationists.

These tensions came to the fore last month when scientists renewed calls for a horse-culling program to protect native species in Kosciusko National Park – a move strongly opposed by some members of the public.

To manage the environment effectively, including after bushfires, we need to understand the diversity of opinion on what constitutes a native animal, and recognise how these attitudes can change.

Governments are responding

In Australia, native species are usually defined as those present before European settlement in 1788. Lethal pest control usually targets species introduced after this time, such as horses, foxes, deer, rabbits, pigs, and cats.

But fire makes native fauna more vulnerable to introduced predators. Fire removes ground layer vegetation that small wildlife would use as protective cover. When this cover is gone, these animals are easier targets for predators like cats and foxes.

Read more: Fire almost wiped out rare species in the Australian Alps. Feral horses are finishing the job

State governments have started to respond to this impending crisis. In January, the New South Wales government announced its largest ever program to control feral predators, in an effort to protect native fauna after the fires.

The plan includes 1500-2000 hours of aerial and ground shooting of deer, pigs, and goats and distributing up to a million poison baits targeting foxes, cats, and dingoes over 12 months.

Similarly, the Victorian government announced a A$17.5 million program to protect biodiversity the fires affected, including A$7 million for intensified management of threats like introduced animals.

But will the public be on board? Widespread media coverage of the recent fires and their impacts on wildlife, including the loss of more than a billion animals, might garner support for protecting native wildlife from pests.

On the other hand, efforts to manage animals such as cats and horses might be hampered by a lack of public support for culling charismatic animals that many people value or view as belonging in Australia now.

Different folks, different strokes

The distinctions many Australians draw – native animals are “good” and introduced species are “bad” – shape how people view conservation efforts. A survey we conducted in 2017 found people more likely to disapprove of lethal methods for managing species they perceived to be native.

In the same survey, we found nearly one in five Australians considered horses and foxes to be native to Australia.

This suggests either that a) people lack knowledge of Australia’s natural history or b) people disagree with conservationists’ definition of animal “nativeness”.

Many introduced species, such as horses and foxes, have existed in Australia for more than a century and have established populations across much of the country. It’s unlikely they’ll ever be eradicated.

Some people, including scientists, say we should just accept introduced species as part of Australia’s fauna. They argue current management justifies killing based on moral, not scientific judgements and introduced animals may increase biodiversity.

Read more: Feral cat cull: why the 2 million target is on scientifically shaky ground

But the issue remains extremely divisive. A central tenet of traditional conservation is that humans have a duty to protect native species and ecosystems from the threat introduced species pose. It’s difficult to do this without culling introduced animals.

Animal welfare concerns may also drive opposition to culling, taking the view that all animals, even non-natives, have intrinsic value and the right to live.

What’s more, non-native culling programs can be controversial when the animal is considered “cute” or “charismatic”, or of cultural value. For example, a plan to cull feral horses in the Kosciusko National Park in 2018 was met with public outrage, prompting the NSW government to overturn the decision.

Yet protecting introduced species in national parks goes against the very reason they were created – to conserve native ecosystems and species.

Some animals are more equal than others

When analysing public attitudes towards various species, we must also consider how attitudes shift over time.

In Australia, non-native animals such as domestic camels and donkeys were considered useful for transport and highly valued. But we ultimately turned them loose and relabelled them as pests when we started using cars.

Interestingly, we’ve already accepted some introduced species as native. Humans brought dingoes to Australia at least 3,500 years ago. They’re described as native under Australian biodiversity legislation, and 85% of our 2017 survey participants considered dingoes to be native.

Perhaps its only a matter of time until more recently arrived species like horses and foxes are counted as native. Some scientists argue this shift should be based on how ecosystems and species adapt to these new arrivals. For example, some small Australian mammals show fear of dingoes or dogs, but they haven’t yet learnt to fear cats.

Native species can be pests too

Native species, such as kangaroos and possums, may also be culled if they’re perceived to be overabundant or damaging economic interests like agriculture.

Read more: From feral camels to ‘cocaine hippos’, large animals are rewilding the world

While the plight of bushfire-affected koalas on Kangaroo Island attracted considerable media interest, and the immediate welfare of any animal affected by fires is always a concern, koalas were actually introduced there.

They’ve been managed as a pest on Kangaroo Island for more than 20 years, and it’s unlikely the rescued koalas will be returned to the island. In this case, public concern transcends the distinction between native and introduced.

Public perception is important

We might never all agree on how best to manage native and non-native species. But effective environmental management, including after bushfires, requires understanding the diversity of opinion.

Doing so can help to develop management plans the public supports and allow effective communication about management that is controversial.

In fact, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage did undertake an extensive public consultation process in developing their horse management plan for Kosciuszko National Park, but it wasn’t used after the “brumby bill” gave horses protection in 2018.

Read more: Passing the brumby bill is a backward step for environmental protection in Australia

With human lives and many animal lives lost, response to the bushfires is already highly emotive. Failure to consider public attitudes towards managing animals will lead to backlash, wasted money and time, and continuing decline of the native species whose conservation is the goal of these actions.

– ref. When introduced species are cute and loveable, culling them is a tricky proposition – https://theconversation.com/when-introduced-species-are-cute-and-loveable-culling-them-is-a-tricky-proposition-130471

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Helen Joanne Adam, Lecturer in Literacy Education and Children’s Literature, Edith Cowan University

Only 18% of books available in four Australian childcare centres include non-white characters. Animal characters make up around half the books available, with the animals largely leading lives, and adhering to values, of middle-class Caucasians.

My study, published in The Australian Educational Researcher recently, analysed 2,413 books in four Western Australian childcare centres. Most of the small proportion of books that included minorities tended to perpetuate stereotypes rather than providing an authentic representation of the people and their lifestyle.

The books we share with young children can be a valuable opportunity to develop their understanding of themselves and others. But the overwhelming promotion of white middle-class ideas and lifestyles risks alienating children from minority groups and giving white middle-class children a sense of superiority.

Five categories of books

I used a format from multicultural literature experts to split the books into five categories: culturally authentic, culturally neutral, culturally generic, solely Caucasian and no people.

1. Culturally authentic books have a main character from a minority background and are usually written by an author from the background represented. Only 2% of the books I analysed were in this category.

An example of this type of book is “Sam’s Bush Journey”. Written by Sally Morgan and Ezekiel Kwaymullina, the book is about an Aboriginal boy learning about his culture.

Culturally authentic books allow children to see reflections of their backgrounds. These often have storylines most children, of all groups, can relate to in some way.

They can increase children’s understanding and appreciation of those from different cultures, which helps break down stereotypes and misunderstandings.

2. Culturally neutral books usually have a white main character with non-white characters playing minor roles, often just in the background in pictures. The authors of these books are usually white.

An example of this type of book is “Ready for Kindergarten, Stinky-face”. Stinky Face is a white boy who voices many anxieties about going to kindergarten. Some of the illustrations of Stinky Face’s anxieties have children from minority groups.

Culturally neutral books allow children to see some diversity but present majority viewpoints. Only 5% of the books in my analysis were culturally neutral.

Culturally generic books usually aim to teach children about cultural diversity. People appearing in culturally generic books from minority backgrounds are usually portrayed in stereotypical ways, often with a focus on their special clothing, food or celebrations.

Sometimes, books in this category present diversity in socially conscious ways but the authors of these books are usually white. In my analysis, 11% of books were in this category.

An example of this type of book is “Where are you from?”, which teaches kids about the different cultures of the world.

Culturally generic books can be used to talk about or challenge stereotypes. But in my study – as well as a similar one I conducted in 2011 – they were often the only book representing a particular culture or race.

Read more: Five tips to make school bookshelves more diverse and five books to get you started

Relying on this type of book to teach about a particular race or culture can reinforce stereotypical beliefs about non-white races.

Solely Caucasian books are ones in which all the characters are white and they are usually written by white authors. Around 33% of the books in my analysis were in this category.

No people represented the largest proportion of books I analysed – 49%. Most of these are animal stories, mirroring white middle-class storylines. The storylines are shown through such things as style of dress, housing, daily activities and food.

Why is this a problem?

Many of the books I’ve described are, on their own, of a high quality and worth sharing with children. But collectively, they represent a problem.

Books can be mirrors – allowing children to see themselves, their lifestyles and backgrounds. This helps develop a positive sense of self.

Books can also be windows, allowing children to see how those different to themselves live, as well as note similarities and differences between them. This can help develop understanding, acceptance and appreciation of diversity.

Children develop their sense of identity and views towards others from a very young age. Research shows children develop a bias towards their own race from as young as three months of age. By the time children are four to six years old they already show awareness of racial stereotyping or prejudice in different situations.

Read more: 5 reasons I always get children picture books for Christmas

But studies also show this bias can be changed or prevented even through brief exposure to other racial faces, including in pictures.

Despite Australia’s multicultural society many children from ethnic minority groups are more likely to see a dinosaur or rabbit as a main character in a book than a member of their own culture. And the few characters that do represent a minority culture play secondary roles to white characters, can give the impression whiteness is of greater value.

We can take action and choose books that increase diversity and present our children with authentically diverse viewpoints. If we want to see genuine and long lasting change in society, we need to start with our children.

– ref. Bias starts early – most books in childcare centres have white, middle-class heroes – https://theconversation.com/bias-starts-early-most-books-in-childcare-centres-have-white-middle-class-heroes-130208

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Norman Day, Lecturer in Architecture, Practice and Design, Swinburne University of Technology

As high-rise cities grow upwards and outwards, increasing numbers of birds die by crashing into glass buildings each year. And of course many others break beaks, wings and legs or suffer other physical harm. But we can help eradicate the danger by good design.

Most research into building-related bird deaths has been done in the United States and Canada, where cities such as Toronto and New York City are located on bird migration paths. In New York City alone, the death toll from flying into buildings is about 200,000 birds a year.

Across the US and Canada, bird populations have shrunk by about 3 billion since 1970. The causes include loss of habitat and urbanisation, pesticides and the effects of global warming, which reduces food sources.

An estimated 365 million to 1 billion birds die each year from “unnatural” causes in the US. The greatest bird killer in the US remains the estimated 60-100 million free-range cats that kill nearly 4 million birds a year. Australia is thought to have up to 6 million feral cats.

Read more: For whom the bell tolls: cats kill more than a million Australian birds every day

But rampant global urbanisation is putting the reliance on glass buildings front-of-stage as an “unnatural” cause of bird deaths, and the problem is growing exponentially.

In the line of flight

Most birds fly at around 30-50km/h, with falcons capable of up to 200km/h. When migrating, birds generally spend five to six hours flying at a height of 150 metres, sometimes much higher.

And that’s where the problems start with high-rise buildings. Most of them are much taller than the height at which birds fly. In Melbourne, for example, Australia 108 is 316 metres, Eureka 300 metres, Aurora 270 metres and Rialto 251 metres. The list is growing as the city expands vertically.

The paradigm of high-rise gothams, New York City, has hundreds of skyscrapers, most with fully glass, reflective walls. One World Trade is 541 metres high, the 1931 Empire State is 381 metres (although not all glass) and even the city’s 100th-highest building, 712 Fifth Avenue, is 198 metres.

To add to the problems of this forest of glass the city requires buildings to provide rooftop green places. These attract roosting birds, which then launch off inside the canyons of reflective glass walls – often mistaking these for open sky or trees reflected from behind.

A problem of lighting and reflections

Most cities today contain predominantly glass buildings – about 60% of the external wall surface. These buildings do not rely on visible frames, as in the past, and have very limited or no openable windows (for human safety reasons). They are fully air-conditioned, of course.

Read more: Glass skyscrapers: a great environmental folly that could have been avoided

Birds cannot recognise daylight reflections and glass does not appear to them to be solid. If it is clear they see it as the image beyond the glass. They can also be caught in building cul-de-sac courtyards – open spaces with closed ends are traps.

At night, the problem is light from buildings, which may disorientate birds. Birds are drawn to lights at night. Glass walls then simply act as targets.

Some species send out flight calls that may lure other birds to their death.

Read more: Want to save millions of migratory birds? Turn off your outdoor lights in spring and fall

We can make buildings safer for birds

Architectural elements like awnings, screens, grilles, shutters and verandas deter birds from hitting buildings. Opaque glass also provides a warning.

Birds see ultraviolet light, which humans cannot. Some manufacturers are now developing glass with patterns using a mixed UV wavelength range that alerts birds but has no effect on human sight.

New York City recently passed a bird-friendly law requiring all new buildings and building alterations (at least under 23 metres tall, where most fly) be designed so birds can recognise glass. Windows must be “fritted” using applied labels, dots, stripes and so on.

The search is on for various other ways of warning birds of the dangers of glass walls and windows.

Combinations of methods are being used to scare or warn away birds from flying into glass walls. These range from dummy hawks (a natural enemy) and actual falcons and hawks, which scare birds, to balloons (like those used during the London Blitz in the second world war), scary noises and gas cannons … even other dead birds.

Researchers are using lasers to produce light ray disturbance in cities especially at night and on dark days.

Noise can be effective, although birds do acclimatise if the noises are produced full-time. However, noise used as a “sonic net” can effectively drown out bird chatter and that interference forces them to move on looking for quietness. The technology has been used at airports, for example.

A zen curtain developed in Brisbane has worked at the University of Queensland. This approach uses an open curtain of ropes strung on the side of buildings. These flutter in the breeze, making patterns and shadows on glass, which birds don’t like.

These zen curtains can also be used to make windows on a house safer for birds. However, such a device would take some doing for the huge structures of a metropolis.

More common, and best adopted at the design phase of a building, is to mark window glass so birds can see it. Just as we etch images on glass doors to alert people, we can apply a label or decal to a window as a warning to birds. Even using interior blinds semi-open will deter birds.

Birds make cities friendlier as part of the shared environment. We have a responsibility to provide safe flying and security from the effects of human habitation and construction, and we know how to achieve that.

– ref. Buildings kill millions of birds. Here’s how to reduce the toll – https://theconversation.com/buildings-kill-millions-of-birds-heres-how-to-reduce-the-toll-130695

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bjorn Sturmberg, Research Leader, Battery Storage & Grid Integration Program at The Australian National University, Australian National University

Bushfires, storms and floods regularly leave thousands of Australian homes and businesses without power.

Sydney’s wettest weekend in three decades left more than 130,000 households without power on Sunday.

South Australian storms two weeks ago blew over the transmission towers connecting the state to the national energy grid. The Royal Adelaide Hospital was among the buildings affected.

Tens of thousands more households in Queensland, New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory, Victoria and South Australia have endured blackouts lasting from hours to days in the past month or so due to bushfires.

Read more: Trust Me I’m An Expert: Why February is the real danger month for power blackouts

It’s timely to consider how we can build a better system – one that’s more resilient in times of disaster and also doesn’t contribute, through carbon emissions, to making disasters more frequent.

One part of the solution is more connectedness, so one transmission line being severed is not the crisis it is now.

But just as important is ensuring connectedness isn’t crucial.

This means moving away from centralised systems – powered by a few big generators – to decentralised ones, with many local and small-scale generators. Instead of one big grid, we need many microgrids, interconnected but able to operate independently when necessary.

Power in a warming world

Australia’s energy infrastructure is looking increasingly fragile as global warming intensifies.

First, hotter and longer heatwaves put more pressure on grids. As energy demand spikes on hot afternoons, so does the incidence of coal-fired generators breaking down. At the same time, heatwaves reduce the capacity of both coal and gas generators.

The following graph from the Australian Energy Market Operator shows how the efficiency falls for coal-power turbines, combined-cycle gas turbines and open-cycle gas turbines.

Hotter weather also impedes the efficiency of photovoltaic solar panels as well as the capacity of electrical wires to transport power.

Read more: 35 degree days make blackouts more likely, but new power stations won’t help

Second, hot and windy weather increases the chance of electrical wires sparking fires by contacting dry plants. This is what led to some of the deadly Black Saturday bushfires in 2009. The only protection against this is to turn off power on windy days. In California such blackouts affect millions of people.

Third, as already alluded to, a warmer climate increases the regularity and intensity of bushfires, floods and storms – events that in recent weeks have cut off power to communities right when they needed it most.

Modern microgrids

To make the system more resilient, we need to ensure a local area can maintain power even when power is cut off elsewhere. This is feasible with microgrids.

A microgrid is simply an electricity grid built to a more local scale. The national electricity grid stretches from Port Lincoln in South Australia to Port Douglas in far-north Queensland. A microgrid might stretch no further than a few streets. It might cover an industrial estate, a town or a region.

Rather than relying on electricity generators hundreds or thousands of kilometres away, it has enough local generators to generally meet local demand. Though “grid-tied” – drawing or contributing power to a bigger grid as needed – it can also “island” (disconnect) and run independently.

Australian demonstrations

There are microgrid projects around Australia. These are preparing for a greater system transformation through ironing out problems and proving the benefits.

One is in the Melbourne suburb of Mooroolbark. It has demonstrated a single street (of 18 houses) can continue to operate on its own solar panels and battery storage for 22 hours before reconnecting to the national grid.

At a regional scale, the ESCRI project near Dalrymple in South Australia combines a much larger battery array with 55 wind turbines and solar systems. So long as there’s enough wind, the system can provide electricity indefinitely to 4,600 customers.

Managing distributed energy resources

Microgrids are not only ideal for isolating regions from blackouts. They also help integrate “distributed energy resources” such as rooftop solar systems and electric vehicles, which pose a challenge to the way centralised way grids have traditionally been controlled.

Read more: How electric cars can help save the grid

We should build on these strengths to reconfigure our national energy market as a grid of self-managing, self-reliant microgrids.

The main investment required for a “grid of microgrids” is for each region to install a battery and microgrid controller (and potentially more local generators). In remote regions this may be cheaper than the cost of maintaining transmission lines. Most of the system will continue to be connected, however, ensuring efficiency by drawing on the cheapest energy available. Only when disturbances occurred would regions isolate themselves to avoid blackouts.

With Energy Networks Australia, which represents energy distributors, warning power prices will have to rise to cover higher insurance costs as risks increase, accelerating the transition to microgrids deserves to be a key policy for any government concerned with energy security.

– ref. Go local: how to keep the power on when disaster hits – https://theconversation.com/go-local-how-to-keep-the-power-on-when-disaster-hits-130534

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elodie Paillard, Honorary Associate, Department of Classics and Ancient History, University of Sydney

Many will be familiar with the looming presence of Oedipus or Antigone in Classical Greek tragedy. But how many remember the so-called secondary characters (nurses, soldiers, pedagogues) with whom the great heroes of the past appeared on stage?

“Minor” characters of 5th century BC works have an important role in encouraging audience reflection.

Recent research has taken an interest in these roles. They reflect the reality of life for non-elite members of society — pinpointing biases and encouraging the less-privileged to defend themselves against prejudice.

Likewise, in modern theatre or Hollywood blockbusters, secondary characters often represent the unconscious biases of contemporary society, and are increasingly used as ways to denounce those biases.

We don’t need another hero

Classical scholars have historically been preoccupied with the study of heroes like Ajax and Oedipus, or characters belonging to mythological royal families, like Antigone or Creon.

Nineteenth century scholarship tended to see Classical Greek tragedy as an ideal, elevated literary genre, whose target audience was a restricted group of elite Athenian citizens.

For scholars who usually belonged to the social elite, only mythological heroes and elite citizens deserved to be studied.

More recently, with the opening of the field of Classical studies to more diverse students and scholars, a shift away from this restricted view of the past has taken place.

Recent studies have examined poverty in ancient societies and brought together literature, inscriptions, and archaeological evidence to examine expression among non-elites in Athens.

Scholars now acknowledge the ancient audiences of these works were more diverse than previously assumed and included spectators from lower socio-political backgrounds.

Suddenly, it makes sense to pay more attention to the minor, non-elite, characters onstage in Athenian theatres. Anonymous characters take on new significance with this frame. My book on Sophocles’ non-elite characters is part of this effort.

Growing influence

Our access to what was performed on stage in Classical Athens is limited. Among the hundreds of tragedies composed and performed at the time, only about 30 complete plays have survived, authored by the three great tragic poets of the 5th century BC: Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides.

The secondary characters in these surviving plays are much more than literary tools used to tell the audience about events that happened off stage. Many of them interact with the principal characters and try to influence the action.

Interestingly, non-elite figures are staged as much more active and efficacious in the later plays than in early ones. This phenomenon can be linked to the growing socio-political importance of non-elite citizens at the time they were written.

With the reinforcement of democracy in the second half of the 5th century BC, an increasing number of citizens from lower social status began to actively participate in the political life of their city. Socrates, in Xenophon’s Memorabilia, trying to encourage someone to speak in the political assembly of citizens, tells him that there is nothing to fear, because the assembly is now (at the beginning of the 4th century) full of fullers, cobblers, builders, smiths, farmers, and merchants. While the remark may be comic, a progression towards a widening participation of lower-status citizens by the end of the 5th century is clear.

When members of the audience saw that someone of a similar socio-political background to them was able to express their opinion even among people of a superior social status, their own political practice was encouraged. Their place within democracy was reinforced.

A good example of this dynamic is the guard in Sophocles’ play Antigone. When he arrives on stage for the first time, he addresses the king (Creon) in a clumsy way, as if he does not know how to speak in public or to someone who is higher on the social ladder. The king has a bullying attitude towards him, treating him almost as a slave.

When the same character returns in the second part of the play, he brings along Antigone (caught burying her brother, against the orders of the king), thus proving himself useful. This time, he not only succeeds in speaking clearly to Creon, but wins a debate between them.

By showing a simple guard as receiving a higher status by acquiring the ability to speak well and defend his opinions, the play encouraged non-elite spectators to do the same in their daily lives.

In dramatic terms, this character is the basis for a classic Hollywood trope: the underling who finds their power. See: The Devil wears Prada, Working Girl or darker versions in Swimming with Sharks and the upcoming The Assistant.

Theatre today

Although the conventions of modern theatre are different from those of Classical Greek theatre, it is worth paying attention to the way secondary characters are staged today.

Scholars note that translating Greek Tragedy to the modern stage is not just about the relationship between the text and the director but also the cultural context. Canadian film Antigone last year offered the story as a snapshot of the refugee crisis.

Re-stagings of Classical drama sometimes still use ancient secondary characters as a way of sending a message to the modern audience. A good example is the way in which the war captive is treated in the 2004 staging of Martin Crimp’s Cruel and Tender directed by Luc Bondy (inspired by Sophocles’ Women of Trachis). By showing her as seductive and manipulative, the play encourages the audience to reflect on some modern prejudices.

In 2015, Adena Jacobs restaged Euripides’ The Bacchae for the Melbourne Festival, with teenage girls driving the action rather than men relating events.

Broadway’s 14-time Tony Award-nominated hit musical Hadestown weaves together the Greek myths of Orpheus & Eurydice and Hades & Persephone. Three Fates – with show-stopping moves and tunes transcend their traditionally behind-the-stage roles and control the destinies of the main players.

So, next time you go to the theatre, whether to watch a contemporary play or one inspired by the Classics, pay attention to the secondary figures on the stage: they might teach you something about society or even encourage you to think more deeply about the difference each one of us can make.

– ref. As Fates would have it – what we learn from minor players in Greek tragedies and Hollywood films – https://theconversation.com/as-fates-would-have-it-what-we-learn-from-minor-players-in-greek-tragedies-and-hollywood-films-124155

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Colin Brown, Adjunct Professor, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University

Indonesian President Joko Widodo – Jokowi – has shown himself to be generally less interested in international affairs than his predecessor, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY). He has also been less committed to the Indonesia-Australia relationship.

Nonetheless, Australia’s invitation to Jokowi to address the parliament, and his acceptance of that invitation, suggests that the bilateral relationship is strong, at least at the governmental level.

Both Morrison and Jokowi referred in their parliamentary addresses to the fact that this year marks the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Australia and Indonesia. Morrison reflected backwards, noting that Australia had been an early supporter of Indonesian independence, and had been chosen by Indonesia to represent its interests on a UN committee involved with the Indonesia-Dutch dispute then underway.

Jokowi chose to look forward, to 2050 and the 100th anniversary of the start of diplomatic relations. He identified four major steps he suggested the two countries should take together to strengthen their bilateral relationship, and to contribute to regional peace and security.

Two of these steps were fairly predictable recitations of established policy.

The first was cooperation in furthering democracy, respect for human rights, counter-terrorism and anti-radicalisation strategies. He spoke against identity politics, disputing the idea that it was cultural clashes that divided the world. Implementation of these principles remains fraught with difficulties, but the parameters of the problems are well-known in Jakarta and Canberra.

Second, Jokowi argued for free and fair trade, both bilaterally and regionally, in the face of increasing protectionism. Here he welcomed the conclusion of the Indonesia Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, which he described as opening opportunities for economic growth in both countries.

Read more: It’s more than a free trade agreement. But what exactly have Australia and Indonesia signed?

But there were two other steps Jokowi wanted the two countries to take, which were perhaps different from what might have been expected.

First, he called for collaboration on protection of the environment. Some of his remarks were predictable, such as protection of forests and rivers. But he also argued for collaboration on lowering carbon emissions and handling climate change.

Jokowi did not explain what he had in mind with joint action to lower carbon emissions, or managing climate change. Indonesia is a major exporter of coal, and annual forest fires have substantially reduced forest cover. Its political and business leaders are even more divided than those in Australia on climate-related issues and how to deal with them.

What Australia and Indonesia seem to share, it might cynically be suggested, is internal disagreement over the nature of the problem being faced, and steps that might be taken to address it.

Second, Jokowi called for Australia and Indonesia to be “anchors for development programs” in the Pacific region.

Like Australia, Indonesia has recently been paying increased attention to the nations of the South Pacific. Last October, it established the Indonesian Agency for International Development, with a focus on the South Pacific. Speaking at the launch of the agency, Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi noted that assistance had already been provided to Tuvalu, Nauru, Solomon Islands, Kiribati and Fiji, as well as Myanmar and the Philippines.

Australia’s renewed interest in the South Pacific is linked to the increased Chinese presence in the region. But Indonesia’s concern is less with China than with the status of its easternmost provinces of West Papua and Papua. The movement seeking the independence of this region from Indonesia has its greatest support in the south Pacific, particularly in Vanuatu, though support has also come from Tuvalu and the Marshall Islands.

Read more: Can Scott Morrison deliver on climate change in Tuvalu – or is his Pacific ‘step up’ doomed?

Indonesia has formally denied that the establishment of the agency was aimed at countering international criticism of Indonesia’s position in Papua. But the suspicion that there is a link will be hard to shake off.

Australia’s formal position on the Papuan provinces is made clear in the 2006 Lombok Treaty, which committed each party to supporting the territorial integrity of the other, and not providing support to separatist movements. There is, though, considerable support for Papuan separatism in the Australian community, reflected in the parliament particularly by the Greens. The Greens’ new leader, Adam Bandt, is reported to have told Jokowi, after his address:

Thank you for your speech, thanks for your comments on climate change, now please get something done on West Papua.

There is nothing new in the dilemma facing the Australian government on Papua, but the increased Indonesian focus on the Pacific region could well provide more opportunities for the two countries to differ than to work together effectively.

Finally, Jokowi’s speech was notable for what he did not say.

There was no mention of China’s increasingly activist foreign and defence policy position, especially in the South China Sea. However, given that the issue was explicitly considered in the joint statement of the two leaders, the president may have deemed that sufficient.

The other significant omission was any mention of easing conditions for the issuing of visas to Indonesians to visit Australia. This had been widely discussed in Indonesia before the president left for Australia. Scott Morrison did commit to reviewing the visa situation, but Jokowi would be well advised not to hold his breath.

– ref. Jokowi’s visit shows the Australia-Indonesia relationship is strong, but faultlines remain – https://theconversation.com/jokowis-visit-shows-the-australia-indonesia-relationship-is-strong-but-faultlines-remain-131463

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

The Nationals’ internal turmoil has created further chaos in the Coalition, with rebel backbencher Llew O’Brien defying the government to win a House of Representatives vote for deputy speaker – a day after quitting his party.

In a highly astute tactical play, Labor nominated O’Brien, who defeated the government candidate, Nationals’ whip Damian Drum, 75-67.

Labor had 64 votes, with the other 11 votes in the secret ballot coming from a combination of crossbenchers – of whom there are six – and dissident Nationals. If all the crossbenchers voted for O’Brien, that meant he got five Nationals votes.

In the chamber, Scott Morrison and Nationals leader Michael McCormack were forced to swallow their fury at the government’s public humiliation and congratulate O’Brien.

“With two government members to choose from I’m pleased to see government members received the full confidence of all the members of the House”, Morrison said. McCormack said: “That’s democracy”.

McCormack, who held his position last week in face of Barnaby Joyce’s challenge, has been further weakened by the latest shenanigans.

With the minor party deeply split and its rebels out of control, and hard line Nationals and moderate Liberals exchanging shots over coal, the government is distracted and risks being destabilised.

Read more: View from The Hill: Michael McCormack’s battle to hold off a second shot from Joyce’s locker

O’Brien’s extraordinary 24 hours began with his indicating he was resigning from the Nationals, during a Sunday row with McCormack.

But he remains a member of the Queensland Liberal National Party. Under this arrangement he won’t attend the Nationals party room but will go to the Coalition party meetings.

A former policeman who holds the Queensland seat of Wide Bay, O’Brien said he did not know Labor would nominate him for the post of deputy speaker, which became vacant with the appointment of Kevin Hogan to the frontbench. Hogan, incidentally, quit the Nationals party room in the last parliament, when he sat on the crossbench.

O’Brien’s elevation brings him a pay rise of some $42,000, additional travel entitlement and an extra staffer.

After winning the ballot, O’Brien said he would be meeting the PM on Monday night and “firming up” his arrangements to stay within the government.

Asked whether he’d be crossing the floor on legislation, he said: “I consider legislation, all legislation when it comes before me. The people of Wide Bay have sent me here to do the right thing by them.

“I’ve got a strong track record when it comes to standing up – I was the person that told the Prime Minister in the last term that I would support a royal commission into the banks,” he told Sky.

In a sign of how dysfunctional McCormack’s party room has become, Ken O’Dowd – who is deputy whip and thus supposedly has a role in enforcing discipline – told the ABC he voted for O’Brien.

O’Dowd explained this by saying that like him, O’Brien was a Queenslander, and Queenslanders were under-represented on McCormack’s frontbench. “Fortune favours the brave. … Good on the underdog.”

O’Dowd ran unsuccessfully against Drum at Monday’s Nationals meeting to be the government’s nominee for the deputy speakership.

He said Joyce had been planning to nominate him for the position when the parliamentary vote came but he had told Joyce not to do so, in the name of unity. He also indicated he would like to see Joyce leader “one day, if the chips are right”.

Meanwhile the “coal wars” flared, fuelled by the government’s weekend confirmation of the feasibility study for a coal-fired power station in Queensland and the allocation of $4 million for it.

Liberals Dave Sharma and Trent Zimmerman said the government should not fund a coal-fired power station.

Queensland National Matt Canavan, who resigned from cabinet last week to support Joyce’s tilt at the leadership, tweeted, “I see some are saying that we should not help coal fired power stations provide jobs because we should leave it to the market. Well if that’s the view be consistent and argue against the billions we give to renewables every year!”

George Christensen, another National from Queensland, said in a blog, “Despite claims by one inner-city Liberal MP on Sky News this morning, the Morrison Liberal National Government is providing funding to coal-fired power projects, principally because they provide stable and reliable baseload supply.

“When the Collinsville clean coal-fired power project is ready to be constructed, it will be eligible for consideration under the Morrison Liberal National government’s Underwriting New Generation Investments program, which supports targeted investment that will lower prices, increase competition and increase reliability in the energy system.”

Just to add to the toxic day, Malcolm Turnbull – in Canberra for the Widodo speech to parliament – had a few succinct thoughts to contribute.

“The fundamental economic reality is this … there is no economic basis on which to build a coal-fired power station in Australia any longer. … Those people who are advocating that the government should fund coal-fired power are basically making a case for higher emissions and higher energy prices and that is nuts.”

He might have added that what’s going on inside the Nationals is pretty much nuts too.

– ref. View from The Hill: It turned into a profitable day at the office for Nat rat – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-it-turned-into-a-profitable-day-at-the-office-for-nat-rat-131489

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

Adam Bandt began his political journey in the Labor party, but the issue of climate change drew him to the Greens. Last week he became their leader, elected unopposed.

Asked about his ambitions for the party, Bandt aspires to a power-sharing situation with a Labor government, akin to the Gillard era.

“Ultimately Labor’s got to decide where it stands, and if Labor decides that it does want to go down the path of working with us on a plan to phase out coal and look after workers in communities, then great.

“If Labor prefers to work with the Liberals, maybe we’re going to see a situation like we do in Germany at the moment where there’s a grand coalition between the equivalent of the Labor and Liberal parties because they find that they’ve got more in common with each other than with us.”

Transcript (edited for clarity)

Michelle Grattan: The Greens last week changed their leader in what was a very smooth transition. There was no hint of arm twisting, let alone a challenge. Richard Di Natale’s explanation of family reasons for stepping down seemed convincing. Adam Bandt, the party’s sole lower house member, took the job without any opposition.

Adam Bandt is generally considered more radical than Di Natale, and he faces the challenging task of managing a senate party from the lower house. He joins us today to talk about how he’ll approach the job.

Adam Bandt, let’s start with your own political background, can you tell us something of your journey to the Greens?

Adam Bandt: When I was at high school, I actually joined the Labor Party in part because of my family history. Dad was the first one in his family to go to university. And we have always had a very sort of social justice focus at home. And so I joined the Labor Party. I left early on in university when I got involved in the education campaigns right in the thick of Labor’s, I guess, embrace of neo-liberalism and putting up the cost of education. And that wasn’t attractive to me. So I left.

For a number of years, I worked as an employment lawyer, industrial relations lawyer, representing low paid workers and their unions. And it was really climate change that for me prompted me to…I’d been handing out how to vote cards for Greens candidates and doing that for a number of years. But it was really the climate crisis and sort of that initial dawning of how little time we’ve got left to turn the ship around that prompted me to join the Greens back in the mid 2000s and I have been with them ever since.

MG: Now you’re seen as more radical than Richard Di Natale, do you see yourself that way? And in general, what differences will you bring to the leadership?

AB: I’ll let others make the comparisons. I’ve been very public and continue to be public that I think Richard did a great job and led us to our second best ever election result. And I think that’s quite a feather in his cap.

In terms of what I stand for, like I said before, in terms of my history, the two things that matter most for me are tackling inequality in Australia and tackling the climate crisis. And for me, they’re the two values that have underpinned my adult life. And I’ll keep pushing those. I mean, some have made that comment. I’m not quite sure what it means. I won’t say anything that I can’t back up with the science.

And I think on the climate front, for example, we attracted some criticism before the Christmas holidays for saying that Scott Morrison had played a role in increasing the risk of catastrophic fires like the ones we were seeing and that he had to take some responsibility for it. And I stand by that because objectively he has. And I think those who say perhaps there’s a bit too much strong language, I think fail to understand how angry and anxious people are feeling at the moment and especially a lot of young people in this country. And so I think the time for kind of soft pedalling and not telling the truth about how severe the climate emergency is, is now over.

MG: Just to take you up on this point about young people, while not downplaying the whole threat of climate change, do you feel some responsibility not to alarm people who are very young, 13, 14 year olds?

AB: I would say that they are already alarmed and anxious. And part of my responsibility is to say we hear that alarm and anxiety and a part of our role is to provide hope that there’s an exit strategy from it. And when, for example, last week I spoke to a student striker who’d come up to Canberra and she was 17 and she said, I can’t bring myself to think more than a year in advance about my future now. I used to be able to, but now I can’t. When I think five or 10 years ahead and think about what the climate emergency will do to me in my life, it all gets too much and I can’t think more than a year ahead.

Now, Scott Morrison might say that’s needless anxiety, but actually at one level, it’s a rational reaction to the things that people are learning about the state of the science. And I speak to a lot of school groups and school children about the state of climate change. And it is a difficult balancing act because on the one hand, you don’t want to tell people things that aren’t true. But on the other hand, we’ve got to provide a bit of hope. And that’s what I see my role as.

MG: But you are more alarmed than the average person, probably about climate change and yet you think obviously five or 10 years ahead. So isn’t there some responsibility to say to that young person, well, I can think a decade ahead and of course, you can think a decade ahead.

AB: Yes. And that’s why I’m pushing for a Green New Deal. Part of the motivation for outlining a green new deal is to say, look, there’s a different way of thinking about Australia. We could become a renewable energy superpower and tackle the climate crisis and tackle the anxiety that people are legitimately feeling about that. And so part of a Green New Deal is about dealing with the economic challenges that we face. But part of it is also about having an exit strategy from what I see as the climate crisis, a jobs crisis and an inequality crisis all coming in together at the moment in a way that could be quite paralysing for some people. So we need an exit strategy.

MG: We’ll come to the Green New Deal in a moment. But let me first take you to some of the Greens internal issues. You’ve had problems within the party, for example, claims of sexual harassment and the like. Are you concerned about the party’s culture and do you have some plan to deal with it?

AB: Look, I’m not concerned about where the party’s culture is at the moment. But I think in the past – and I think you’ve found Richard Di Natale is saying exactly the same thing – probably things weren’t dealt with as well as they could have been. And it’s a challenge for us as a volunteer based organisation where we’re wanting to bring people in and be active supporters in our campaign knowing that we don’t have the money that the others have got and so we’re much more reliant on people and…

MG: They’re not problems of money are they, really?

AB: Well no it’s problems of not having paid attention to having the right processes in place and putting in place the right culture and I think in the past we didn’t do as well as we could have for the women who came forward with those complaints. I think we have to accept that. And since then, I know certainly in my office we put in place structures to make sure that if anyone ever felt uncomfortable, they’d have a way to raise it and they’d be believed. And I know that in the national organisation, they’ve put in place some of those changes as well. So I feel that we’ve got to admit that in the past, we didn’t do it as well as we could, and I think the changes that have been made at the national organisation will stand us in good stead.

MG: Now, some Greens in your rank and file would like to have a say in the choice of leader. What do you think about that? Should future leaders be chosen, at least in part by the rank and file, as happens with the Labor Party? Or do you think the decision should rest with the parliamentary party?

AB: Yes so at the moment it rests with the parliamentary party. Some have been pushing for a change to say it should be solely selected by the members. My personal view is that I favour a mixed model where the party room continues to have a say but members also get to have a say via a vote. Now we’ve got a process in place in the party to resolve that at the May national conference, which we’ve got coming up. And so I hope that process is on track and I’ve got no reason to think it won’t be. And we’ll probably have a resolution of it by then on on the current timetable.

MG: It seems slightly indecent to talk about your successor but you’re saying your successor you think will be chosen by a mixed system?

AB: Well, I don’t know. It’s gonna be up to the party. But if I get a ballot paper, within the Greens, I as one individual member, will be taking the mixed model box. But I also think as a leader, it’s probably not my role to use my position now to influence things one way or the other. That’s got to be something the members decide.

MG: Let’s turn to the Green New Deal. Firstly, why did you choose that term, New Deal?

AB: We’ve been talking about that in the Greens for some time. We held a conference back in 2009 to promote a Green New Deal in Australia. And it’s a term that is gaining global currency as well. And I think increasingly…

MG: And has historical context of course from America.

AB: That’s right. And one of the things that it raises the question of because of its historical associations is what is the role of government? What is the role of government in the context of the current crises that we have at the moment? And I wanted to send a very clear message that for me, the Green New Deal is a government led plan of action and investment to grow new jobs and industries and create a clean economy in a caring society. And I think we are facing a number of crises and are at an impasse in Australia, in part because government has been unwilling to step in and deal with the challenges that we’ve got.

So this is about saying, well, what are the settings in place to grow new jobs and industries so that Australia becomes a renewable energy superpower, as we tackle some of these other jobs and inequality crises that we’re facing at the moment? So it’s a different way of thinking about government as helping usher in a new clean economy.

MG: So is it putting more emphasis on the economic side rather than the environmental side of climate change issues of energy transition?

AB: It’s about acknowledging that some of the big challenges that we’ve got are a mix of moral and economic, if you want to use those terms. So we’ve got a climate crisis that is being felt now very acutely in Australia. We’ve got a jobs crisis where it’s being particularly played out amongst young people where one in three young people either doesn’t have a job or doesn’t have enough hours of work. They’re underemployed. And we’ve got an inequality crisis where we’ve got inequality at a 70 year high and people still living in poverty.

What I’m arguing is that the solution to all of these is government stepping in and saying, right, we’ve got some problems and we’re going to fix them. And that then addresses both the economic questions and the moral questions.

I think also on one other note, I’ve been in the house of representatives and I’ve got a seat where we’ve got more public housing than any other seat in Victoria but we’ve also got more women in paid work than any other state in Victoria. And it’s consistent with my history, too, of representing a lot of working people over many years is that I firmly believe that you have to take people’s material concerns seriously and you have to listen to where people are at and what is important to them in their lives. And part of the reason we’ve been successful in Melbourne is that we’ve been able to say, yes, we want to talk about climate change as the Greens, but we also have a plan to deal with a lot of your material concerns. And in fact, if you elected us, you’d find that you’d be better off than under the other parties. And we’ve successfully grown our audiences by getting that message out.

So for me, it’s also part of the Green New Deal. It’s about saying issues of jobs, issues of growing a clean economy are important issues. And we’ve got a plan to deal with that as part of tackling the climate crisis.

MG: Of course, that’s all about environment as part of the wider issue. But nevertheless, you’re less from an environment background than, say, Christine Milne or Bob Brown, aren’t you?

AB: Look, the first demonstration that I went on was in high school in Western Australia, and it was against a nuclear powered warship that had pulled into port. And having done high school and university in Western Australia…it was in the milieu of the Greens in Western Australia – the anti-nuclear campaign which was quite a campaign then. My dad’s side of the family is that much more labor-ist side and mum’s was, I guess you would say, very practical environmentalist side and we were always getting from her mum Wilderness Society calendars for Christmas and they lived in Tasmania and had a very keen understanding that we’ve only got one planet. So those two things for me have always been sort of driving forces.

Yes, I went off and before coming to this job, spent time working, I guess you might say, on that social side of it. But it was the climate crisis that prompted me to chuck that all in and say, I’m going to throw my hat in the ring and start running in politics.

MG: You haven’t tried to intercept a bulldozer?

AB: No, I haven’t. But I’ve been at other demonstrations. But no I haven’t been arrested.

MG: So can we turn to your ambition for the Greens? What is your most optimistic scenario while keeping within the bounds of reality?

AB: I think one unassailable fact in recent history is that the only time pollution came down in this country in a sustained way was when the Greens, independents and Labor worked together and we introduced a carbon price. And when there was an understanding that we had to share power, but in accordance with the composition of the parliament that had been elected. I could see that happening again.

I think we’re in a very finely balanced parliament, and you know Scott Morrison is still only holding on effectively by one seat. And it wouldn’t take the dial shifting that much to be back in a situation akin to the 2010 parliament…

MG: Now are you talking post election?

AB: Yes, post-election. It may happen sooner. All it takes is one. In every term of parliament, there’s almost always a by-election. Someone resigns. And if it’s someone in the right seat who resigns and theie seat then changes to the independents or Greens or Labor, then we could be in a very interesting situation before the next election. But certainly at and after the next election, to summarise it, my goals would be to turf the government out, put Greens in balance of power and implement a Green New Deal.

MG: So you would see at your most optimistic a power sharing situation with a Labor government, with an Albanese government?

AB: I think that is a path to achieving change in this country. And I think it’s a realistic path. We elected a senator in every state at the last election. So it shows that we can do that. Of course, the dynamics in the house of representatives, there’s probably a few more moving parts there with independents running. But the good thing about the current house of representatives is that, with the exception of Bob Katter, there is a great willingness amongst the independents to act on climate change. And we’ve worked very closely together on things like the medivac bill, but also on the climate emergency motion that I moved and Zali Steggall seconded.

MG: And now she’s got private members bill…

AB: And now she’s got a private member’s bill as well. So we might have different views about the best policy mechanism to do it. But I think there is now a broad based desire amongst sections of the crossbench to take action on climate. And you’ve got government members losing seats to people like Zali Steggall on the basis of an ambitious climate policy. And so after the next election, if it ended up in a situation similar to 2010, I think there’d be a lot of scope for climate ambition and the ability for Greens, Labor and independents to work together.

MG: Mind you, Labor’s rhetoric isn’t very nice to the Greens. They say some extremely unpleasant things about you.

AB: Yea, and I think Labor’s got to decide whether they want to help us take on the government over climate change or not. I’ve been disappointed that Labor has chosen to adopt exactly the same rhetoric on coal that Tony Abbott did and that the government did. That’s not hyperbole. Like they actually are now using the same language of our coal apparently being cleaner and we can continue to we to open up new coal mines and they won’t rule out building new coal fired power stations either. That makes our job of holding Morrison to account harder.

So ultimately Labor’s got to decide where it stands and if Labor decides that it does want to go down the path of working with us on a plan to phase out coal and look after workers in communities, then great. If not, if Labor prefers to work with the Liberals, maybe we’re going to see a situation like we do in Germany at the moment where there’s a grand coalition between the equivalent of the Labor and Liberal parties because they find that they’ve got more in common with each other than with us.

MG: So are you more disappointed in Anthony Albanese than you were with Bill Shorten on this coal question?

AB: Well, I think that Labor risks fighting the last election again rather than the next one. And there’s this move from Labor and Liberals to embrace coal. I think it misreads the election result. I think especially after the summer that we’re we’ve had at the moment, I don’t think people want to see an embrace to coal.

MG: And you think Albanese is embracing coal?

AB: Yes. And he would say he is. And he’s using the same, as I say, the same rhetoric as Tony Abbott. They’re both saying, well, we’ve got to sell it otherwise, they’ll buy it from somewhere else…

MG: Tony Abbott or Scott Morrison?

AB: That’s what Tony Abbott said. It’s what Scott Morrison says and it’s what Anthony Albanese is now saying as well…

MG: So they’re in a pro coal alliance, Morrison and Albanese, would you say that?

AB: Well, I don’t know if they’re in… I mean, take a step back and look at the Queensland results at the last election. There’s this sense that somehow coal won the election and that therefore everyone has to be pro coal now. I think it completely misreads the results.

If you look at what happens in some of those coal seats, the Liberal Party vote or the LNP vote, the change you know, barely troubled the scorer like they got a very small change. Some went slightly down, I think – I stand to be corrected, some might have gone up slightly. What happened was that a lot of Labor voters, women voted for One Nation and then the preferences came back to the Liberals.

And what I think that speaks of is that on this question of a transition out of coal, people see through you when you try and have it both ways. And what is needed in those coal communities is a transition plan where we’re not trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes. And if Labor thinks it can continue to walk both sides of the fence, then I think they’re going to stay in opposition for a very long time, because the script that we saw playing out at the last election will just play itself out at the next election. Last election, it was the Adani coal mine. Next election, it could be the new mine that Clive Palmer or Gina Rinehart wants to open up.

So I think that there’s a risk of misreading what the electoral result actually meant on the question of coal. And also forgetting, I think, that Clive Palmer helped buy the election. I understand that Labor has gone through the process of working out where they think they went wrong but I think a lot of weight needs to be put on that. So I think electoral donations reform is an essential component if we’re to ever have a change of government.

MG: Now, you’ve been very critical of Labor, but you’re also saying that your aspiration would be to work with the Labor government. What sort of personal contact, if any, do you have with the Labor leadership? I mean, do you have a beer or a cup of coffee with Anthony Albanese or do you not talk to them at all?

AB: Well, during the power sharing parliament, Anthony Albanese was leader in the house and we met regularly. We would meet at least once or twice a week to discuss the business of the place. And I think ultimately history is going to be a lot kinder to that period of parliament than perhaps some currently think about it because I mean, Julia Gillard can hold her head high. And Anthony Albanese played a part of helping put in place laws that brought down pollution. In terms of ongoing contact, even during this parliament, things like coming within a vote of getting a no confidence motion progressed with respect to Peter Dutton and things like the medivac legislation, I’ve worked closely with Labor and the crossbenchers in the business of Parliament to actually try to make things happen.

MG: So how’s your relationship with Albanese. Do you have a sort of personal rapport or is it just a matter of convenience when it’s needed to talk?

AB: Well look so far it’s been a good working relationship but I think the the question for them now is what approach they want to take and if they want to be backing in Scott Morrison more and appearing more like him then perhaps they’ll want to work with with us. Ball’s in their court really.

MG: Now you hold an inner city seat, but the Greens have not been able to capture other federal house of representatives seats. There was one way back, but that special circumstances. Do you think that you do have any prospect in the future or have you sort of missed the opportunity? There was speculation, for example, during the Batman by election.

AB: Yea I would hope to see us grow in the house of representatives, as well as the senate and I think we have to. Where those opportunities are, for me, that’s gonna be driven by where we’re at closer to the next election. I took some heart from how close we came in states like Higgins and Kooyong at the last election and I feel a main reason we didn’t break through in those seats was that the government came to town and spent millions of dollars to hold them. And those millions of dollars were spent convincing people that the government all of a sudden cared about climate change.

Now people say, oh well, it’s the climate election but look at the result. Well, you know, Scott Morrison got that result by telling people he cared about climate change. I could see that in Higgins and in Kooyong. Those are seats near mine and I could see it happening every day. The question will be whether having seen the summer that we’ve had and seeing what happens over the next couple of years, whether Morrison is successful in that greenwashing and continuing to say it’s okay I’ve climate crisis under control. When you’ve got Melbourne and Sydney and Canberra ranking amongst the world’s most polluted cities over a course of a couple of months, he might not be that successful in doing it, but they’re places that we will be continuing to spend a bit of time in.

MG: Just finally you’re in the house of representatives. But you’re managing essentially a Senate party. How’s that going to work out in practice? I know you’ve said that there’ll be a bit of power sharing and so on, but it’s quite difficult to follow what is often quite fast play in the upper house if you’re not actually sitting on one of those red seats.

AB: We’ll now have a position of leader in the senate that Larissa Waters will hold and she’ll be supported by a deputy, Nick McKim, and a team that knows how to read the play in the Senate and deal with it as it happens. And look, the other parties have their leaders in the house and have a senate team that’s ably led and is able to deal with things as they arise in the senate. But also, look in this period of parliament, where the government’s got people like One Nation that they can work with to get their agenda through the senate, part of what we’ve got to do is work with those social movements that are building up at the moment to put some pressure on the government.

And so we’ll be spending a bit of our time in the community talking to the people who are going on the school strikes for climate and so on. And I feel that if we do it right, it could be reminiscent of the Franklin Dam campaign where we have that interaction between the social movement of what’s happening in politics. Where if the voices from the people are strong enough, we can use that in parliament to push for change. And so that approach is probably not so much about which house you’re in. It’s about having as much an outward facing approach as focusing on the business of parliament.

MG: Adam Bandt, thank you very much for talking with The Conversation today.

New to podcasts?

Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Politics with Michelle Grattan on Pocket Casts).

You can also hear it on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Politics with Michelle Grattan.

Additional audio

A List of Ways to Die, Lee Rosevere, from Free Music Archive.

Image:

AAP/Mick Tsikas

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Adam Bandt on Greens’ hopes for future power sharing – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-adam-bandt-on-greens-hopes-for-future-power-sharing-131466

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Silke, Leader, Infection, Inflammation and Immunity theme, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute

Just over 20 years ago, people from three generations of an American family were referred to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Washington DC with an unknown disease.

They were ten to 82 years old and had symptoms including monthly episodes of unexplained high fevers (up to 41℃), lasting two to seven days.

They also had painful swollen lymph nodes, enlarged spleens and livers, abdominal pain, mouth ulcers, joint pain, and a patchwork of other symptoms.

The symptoms, which they’d had since shortly after birth, seemed like an inflammatory reaction. However, doctors could not trace the episodes to an infection.

Read more: Explainer: what is inflammation and how does it cause disease?

We now know these symptoms are typical of autoinflammatory diseases – rare conditions with seemingly unprovoked episodes of fever and inflammation.

Because the inflammatory episodes occur regularly, the diseases are also known as “periodic fever syndromes”. In addition to being painful and debilitating, some of the conditions can damage vital organs, such as the heart and lungs.

What causes autoinflammatory disease?

Autoinflammatory diseases are caused by abnormal activation of the innate immune system, the body’s first-line defence against invading pathogens.

The innate immune system is a hard-wired response that can quickly mobilise to fight foreign invaders. Among its many roles is the release of cytokines.

These are immune messengers critical for alerting and recruiting other cells to the fight, increasing blood circulation and inducing fever. More about cytokines later.

However, in autoinflammatory diseases, invading microbes don’t cause the fever and inflammation. Instead, genetic changes (mutations) lead to the innate immune system being activated for what appears to be no reason, causing uncontrolled inflammation.

Read more: Explainer: what is the immune system?

Autoinflammatory diseases typically begin in childhood, often from birth, and are lifelong conditions. The genetic mutations can be passed from parents to their children, leading to multiple cases of disease in an extended family.

Autoinflammatory diseases are different from autoimmune diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, which are caused by defects in the adaptive immune system, a different arm of the immune response.

Read more: Explainer: what are autoimmune diseases?

There are a number of different autoinflammatory diseases, often caused by different genetic mutations.

How do we treat autoinflammatory disease?

Autoinflammatory diseases cannot be cured, and treatment is usually to relieve symptoms during an attack. Patients are often treated with high doses of corticosteroids, a broad-brush approach to suppress the immune system.

Autoinflammatory diseases are also quite rare, which in the past has made it difficult to develop specific treatments.

Because autoinflammatory diseases are typically associated with excess production of cytokines, they are sometimes treated with so-called biologics – antibodies that mop up these excess cytokines.

These are usually antibodies to the cytokines tumour necrosis factor (TNF) or interleukin-1.

However biologics are expensive, and can have significant side-effects.

Without knowing the cause of an inflammatory disease, treatment is a trial and error process; a drug that works for one person may not work for another.

Can genetic testing help?

The discovery of mutations in genes causing autoinflammatory diseases has led to the development of genetic tests to help diagnosis.

However, some people with autoinflammatory disease do not have a change in one of the known disease-causing genes.

So our researchers have established the Australian Autoinflammatory Disease Registry to help identify other genetic causes of autoinflammatory diseases.

How we found out about the underlying mechanism

While the NIH researchers were looking for a cause of the American family’s disease, another strand of the story was playing out in Australia.

We were looking at the role of the master cytokine TNF, which controls many aspects of the body’s inflammatory response, and its partner RIPK1.

Usually, the body has many checks and balances to ensure these molecules are tightly controlled.

But we worked with the US scientists who found a critical mutation in the gene coding for RIPK1. We found this mutation, leading to changes in just one amino acid, was enough to supercharge its partner TNF into an elite killer.

This is what triggered the uncontrolled inflammation behind the American family’s disease.

Our team named this condition CRIA syndrome (cleavage-resistant RIPK1-induced autoinflammatory syndrome).

So what does this mean?

Understanding the molecular mechanism by which CRIA syndrome causes inflammation gives us an opportunity to get to the root of the problem, and to offer an alternative to existing treatments.

For this American family, treatment with an agent that inhibits the faulty RIPK1 might be a tailored option.

Lastly, the discovery of CRIA syndrome now confirms RIPK1 can play an important role in regulating inflammation in humans. So it may also play a role in far more common human illnesses, such as colitis (inflammation of the colon), rheumatoid arthritis and the skin condition psoriasis.

Read more: What is rheumatoid arthritis, the condition tennis champion Caroline Wozniacki lives with?

– ref. What is autoinflammatory disease, the rare immune condition with waves of fever? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-autoinflammatory-disease-the-rare-immune-condition-with-waves-of-fever-128696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vanessa Haverd, Principal research scientist, CSIRO

The alarming rate of carbon dioxide flowing into our atmosphere is affecting plant life in interesting ways – but perhaps not in the way you’d expect.

Despite large losses of vegetation to land clearing, drought and wildfires, carbon dioxide is absorbed and stored in vegetation and soils at a growing rate.

This is called the “land carbon sink”, a term describing how vegetation and soils around the world absorb more carbon dioxide from photosynthesis than they release. And over the past 50 years, the sink (the difference between uptake and release of carbon dioxide by those plants) has been increasing, absorbing at least a quarter of human emissions in an average year.

The sink is getting larger because of a rapid increase in plant photosynthesis, and our new research shows rising carbon dioxide concentrations largely drive this increase.

So, to put it simply, humans are producing more carbon dioxide. This carbon dioxide is causing more plant growth, and a higher capacity to suck up carbon dioxide. This process is called the “carbon dioxide fertilisation effect” – a phenomenon when carbon emissions boost photosynthesis and, in turn, plant growth.

What we didn’t know until our study is just how much the carbon dioxide fertilisation effect contributes to the increase in global photosynthesis on land.

But don’t get confused, our discovery doesn’t mean emitting carbon dioxide is a good thing and we should pump out more carbon dioxide, or that land-based ecosystems are removing more carbon dioxide emissions than we previously thought (we already know how much this is from scientific measurements).

And it definitely doesn’t mean mean we should, as climate sceptics have done, use the concept of carbon dioxide fertilisation to downplay the severity of climate change.

Read more: How to design a forest fit to heal the planet

Rather, our findings provide a new and clearer explanation of what causes vegetation around the world to absorb more carbon than it releases.

What’s more, we highlight the capacity of vegetation to absorb a proportion of human emissions, slowing the rate of climate change. This underscores the urgency to protect and restore terrestrial ecosystems like forests, savannas and grasslands and secure their carbon stocks.

And while more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does allow landscapes to absorb more carbon dioxide, almost half (44%) of our emissions remain in the atmosphere.

More carbon dioxide makes plants more efficient

Since the beginning of the last century, photosynthesis on a global scale has increased in nearly constant proportion to the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Both are now around 30% higher than in the 19th century, before industrialisation began to generate significant emissions.

Carbon dioxide fertilisation is responsible for at least 80% of this increase in photosynthesis. Most of the rest is attributed to a longer growing season in the rapidly warming boreal forest and Arctic.

So how does more carbon dioxide lead to more plant growth anyway?

Higher concentrations of carbon dioxide make plants more productive because photosynthesis relies on using the sun’s energy to synthesise sugar out of carbon dioxide and water. Plants and ecosystems use the sugar both as an energy source and as the basic building block for growth.

When the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air outside a plant leaf goes up, it can be taken up faster, super-charging the rate of photosynthesis.

Read more: CO₂ levels and climate change: is there really a controversy?

More carbon dioxide also means water savings for plants. More carbon dioxide available means pores on the surface of plant leaves regulating evaporation (called the stomata) can close slightly. They still absorb the same amount or more of carbon dioxide, but lose less water.

The resulting water savings can benefit vegetation in semi-arid landscapes that dominate much of Australia.

We saw this happen in a 2013 study, which analysed satellite data measuring changes in the overall greenness of Australia. It showed more leaf area in places where the amount of rain hadn’t changed over time. This suggests water efficiency of plants increases in a carbon dioxide-richer world.

Young forests help to capture carbon dioxide

In other research published recently, we mapped the carbon uptake of forests of different ages around the world. We showed forests regrowing on abandoned agricultural land occupy a larger area, and draw down even more carbon dioxide than old-growth forests, globally. But why?

In a mature forest, the death of old trees balances the amount of new wood grown each year. The old trees lose their wood to the soil and, eventually, to the atmosphere through decomposition.

A regrowing forest, on the other hand, is still accumulating wood, and that means it can act as a considerable sink for carbon until tree mortality and decomposition catch up with the rate of growth.

Read more: Forest thinning is controversial, but it shouldn’t be ruled out for managing bushfires

This age effect is superimposed on the carbon dioxide fertilisation effect, making young forests potentially very strong sinks.

In fact, globally, we found such regrowing forests are responsible for around 60% of the total carbon dioxide removal by forests overall. Their expansion by reforestation should be encouraged.

Forests are important to society for so many reasons – biodiversity, mental health, recreation, water resources. By absorbing emissions they are also part of our available arsenal to combat climate change. It’s vital we protect them.

– ref. Yes, more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere helps plants grow, but it’s no excuse to downplay climate change – https://theconversation.com/yes-more-carbon-dioxide-in-the-atmosphere-helps-plants-grow-but-its-no-excuse-to-downplay-climate-change-130603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rosalie Gillett, Research Associate in Digital Platform Regulation, Queensland University of Technology

The dating app Tinder has faced increasing scrutiny over abusive interactions on the service. In November 2019, an Auckland man was convicted of murdering British woman Grace Millane after they met on Tinder. Incidents such as these have brought attention to the potential for serious violence facilitated by dating apps.

Amid ongoing pressure to better protect its users, Tinder recently unveiled some new safety features.

The US version of the app added a panic button which alerts law enforcement to provide emergency assistance, in partnership with the safety app Noonlight. There is also a photo verification feature that will allow users to verify images they upload to their profiles, in an effort to prevent catfishing.

“Does This Bother You?” is another new feature, which automatically detects offensive messages in the app’s instant messaging service, and asks the user whether they’d like to report it. Finally, a Safety Center will give users a more visible space to see resources and tools that can keep them safe on the app.

These features are an improvement, but they won’t end the harassment of women via the platform.

Previously unsafe

My PhD research investigated experiences that make women feel unsafe on Tinder. It showed the app’s previous attempts to curb harassment have been inadequate.

In 2017, Tinder launched a feature to allow users to send animated messages, called “Reactions”, in reply to unacceptable messages they received. The negative images, which only women could send, included an eye roll and throwing a drink in someone’s face. Tinder claimed Reactions would give users a fun and easy way to “call out” the “douchey” behaviour of men.

Read more: Right-swipes and red flags – how young people negotiate sex and safety on dating apps

The main critique of Reactions is that it puts the onus on women, rather than the app itself, to police the abusive behaviour of men. The effect was to distance Tinder from its users’ behaviour, rather than engage meaningfully with it.

A swipe in the right direction

Tinder’s latest safety mechanisms are an improvement. The newly released tools suggest Tinder is taking the harassment of women more seriously, and a button that alerts law enforcement might actually protect users from physical abuse.

But the panic button is only available in the United States. Given the service operates in more than 190 countries, Tinder should consider rolling it out worldwide.

The new “Does This Bother You?” feature could also prove useful in preventing overt harassment. Using machine learning, it will prompt users to report inappropriate messages they receive through the service. Research and a range of social media pages show that harassing and abusive messages are commonly facilitated through the platform’s instant messaging service.

‘De-normalising’ abuse

Because a great deal of harassment and abusive behaviour is normalised, it is unclear how much Tinder’s new measures will protect women. My research showed that many women using Tinder experienced behaviour that made them feel uncomfortable, but they didn’t think it met the threshold of abuse.

Sometimes, abusive behaviours can be initially interpreted as romantic or caring. One woman I interviewed reported receiving an overwhelming number of lengthy text messages and phone calls from a Tinder user who was pressuring her into having dinner with him. At first, the woman considered the man’s behaviour “sweet”, viewing it as an indication that he really liked her. But after the number of his messages became torrential, she feared for her safety.

Read more: It’s not about money: we asked catfish why they trick people online

For experiences like this, Tinder’s “Does This Bother You?” feature would be ineffective since the messages were sent via SMS. The limitations of the in-app messaging feature, such as the inability to send photographs, led many of the women I interviewed to talk to prospective dates through other digital media. But Tinder cannot identify communication on other services. The inability to send photos, however, does prevent users from receiving unsolicited images within the app.

Even if the man’s messages were sent in-app, it is unclear whether the “Does This Bother You” algorithm would prompt users to report messages that are seemingly romantic in content.

Taking users seriously

For the “Does This Bother You?” feature to be effective, Tinder needs to be better at responding to users’ reports. Some of the women I interviewed stopped reporting other users’ bad behaviour, because of Tinder’s failure to act.

One woman described reporting a man who had sent her harassing messages, only to see his profile on the service days later. This points to a big problem: Tinder does little to enforce its Terms of Use, which reserves the right to delete accounts that engage in harassment.

Tinder’s failure to respond to user reports sends a messages that they’re not justified, leaving users with the impression that harassment is tolerated. The app’s new safety features will only help users if Tinder does better to address user reports.

While Tinder’s new safety mechanisms are an improvement, the platform will need to do more to address normalised abuse. It can begin to do this by listening to women about what makes them feel uneasy, uncomfortable, and unsafe on the app.

– ref. Tinder’s new safety features won’t prevent all types of abuse – https://theconversation.com/tinders-new-safety-features-wont-prevent-all-types-of-abuse-131375

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Assistant Professor, School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

In 2017, Toni Watson was busking on the streets of Byron Bay. A couple of years later, using the moniker Tones and I, her song about that experience would become the world’s most played track.

Dance Monkey has now been streamed a billion times. It was the most popular track last week in Israel, Malaysia and Switzerland and has been in Spotify’s top ten in over 50 markets.

Yet, this kind of global chart success is largely confined to English lyric hits. Despite the changes to music access, pop songs lag behind other industries in globalisation – particularly in terms of the language in which they are sung.

Dancing in the Streets

As economist John Maynard Keynes noted, stable international relations lead to trade globalisation. This is evident in a number of leisure fields.

Annual global tourism increased from under 1 billion to 1.5 billion arrivals over the past decade. Football club Manchester United claims to have 9 million Chinese followers. Globalisation can also be seen in diverse food offerings on menus around the world.

While once music only ever moved as fast and far as musicians could travel, technology has uncoupled music from live performance. Musical notation, recording and now streaming platforms have rendered music and its flow limitless and instantaneous; characteristics only intensified by music’s digitisation.

Yet, the flow is something of a one-way street. English language acts are popular globally but songs in languages other than English rarely chart in the Anglophone countries.

There are plenty of hitmakers from non-English-speaking countries – Abba, Ace of Base, A-Ha, Aqua and Avicii are just the artists starting with A from Scandinavia who had number one hits in both Australia and the UK. But they primarily sing in English.

There have even been more UK number ones in Latin than in most modern languages, thanks to Enigma’s 1991 hit Sadeness (Part 1) and their album MCMXC a.D.

In the UK only ten of the over 1,300 number one singles since 1953 have been sung in a language other than English. Serge Gainsbourg and Jane Birkin’s sultry song Je t’aime…moi non plus was the first in 1969, despite being banned as too risqué on some radio stations.

The most recent was Psy’s Gangnam Style mostly in Korean in 2012; and Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee’s (with Justin Bieber) Despacito partly in Spanish in 2017.

Australia has been even more monolingual, with only eight number one singles in languages other than English. Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s playlist appears to be quite typical.

The ostensibly cooler Triple J audience once again found no room for international tracks not sung in English in this year’s Hottest 100 – but there were two by Baker Boy who employs some of his Indigenous language Yolŋu Matha.

There has been one chart-topping album in Australia in an Indigenous language – Geoffrey Yunupingu’s Djarimirri in 2018 – and a notable (but not number one) single in Yothu Yindi’s Treaty in 1991.

While more Australians speak Asian languages than speak French or Spanish, songs in Mandarin, Cantonese or Japanese remain relatively unknown on Australian music charts.

By contrast, in Switzerland the Beatles, Abba, Madonna, Eminem and Rhianna have all made it to number one more than five times.

Sticky music

Asian language albums are starting to chart more in the West and pop music can be a portal to gain understanding of Asian cultures. The success of Gangnam Style opened charts for more typical K-Pop, with English snippets or a dance hook.

South Korean boy band BTS, who sing mostly in Korean, topped the album charts in Australia, the UK, Canada, New Zealand and the US with Map of the Soul: Persona. BTS performed (briefly) with US stars at the recent Grammys.

Though no BTS, Korean girl group BlackPink made the listings with their album Kill This Love. Japan’s Babymetal brought their mix of J-Pop and heavy metal on Metal Galaxy to the Anglophone album charts.

But all these acts were outshone and outsold by US singer Billie Eilish, whose debut album When We All Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go? not only topped the album charts in the Anglosphere but also in 15 non-Anglophone markets.

Read more: Billie Eilish and the female singers challenging James Bond’s machismo

Radio Ga Ga

There are now many more ways to consume music than buying singles, albums or listening serendipitously to the radio. While there may be the potential for a diversification of music consumption, the one-way street seems to continue.

Dance Monkey is near the top of the most played music videos from YouTube – which now represents a significant means of music distribution in its own right. There is also a linguistic asymmetry evident here. The top ten videos are all in English in the UK, and almost all in Australia, New Zealand and the US. But music fans in many non-English speaking countries find room for artists such as Tones and I, Billie Eilish, Eminem and Justin Beiber.

Pop music has a long way to go to be reflective of global diversity. But a balance is needed. Too much convergence and national musical cultures may be undermined; too little musical exchange would mean being unable to enjoy musical sounds from around the globe.

Spotify claims to herald “music’s most radically democratic era”. But the way it directs customers to songs similar to those they already like may encourage monolingual consumption of pop music rather than reverse this trend.

– ref. BTS are winning hearts the world over – but we are still wary of language diversity – https://theconversation.com/bts-are-winning-hearts-the-world-over-but-we-are-still-wary-of-language-diversity-130133