Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ken G. Drouillard, Professor, Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research and Director of the School of the Environment, University of Windsor
A country’s population is affected by, and in turn affects, environmental and economic issues.(Shutterstock)
These two facets of population crises — explosions and declines — are occurring in different parts of the world, and have a global impact on the environment and on economies. Discussions about achieving economic and environmental sustainability must consider population changes, technology and the environment, given these concepts are closely interwoven.
Population explosions and declines are related to both environmental and economic instability; some countries make reactionary choices that trade off short-term domestic economic progress over the environment.
Like Malthus, Ehrlich was criticized for a crisis “that never happened” because human ingenuity, a byproduct of population, overcomes the worst fears of environmentalists. This counter-argument relies on technological advances making more efficient use of resources while lowering the environmental impacts.
Technological progress positively contributes to national economies over the long term. However, early adoption of green technology often relies on finance and government incentives that may imply short-term economic burdens. Yet when green technology is implemented and coupled to slowing population growth, it leads to decreasing national environmental footprints that pave a way towards joint environmental and economic sustainability.
The crisis of population declines
Declining populations cause inverted age pyramids with larger numbers of elderly people. These shifting demographics cause economic instability. They also constrain technological progress and social security.
The global population is predicted to peak between the mid-2060s to 2100, stabilizing at 10.2 billion from its present 8.2 billion.
In their book, Empty Planet, political scientist Darrell Bricker and political commentator John Ibbitson warn that zero population growth will happen even faster. They argue once a country decreases its fertility to below replacement (2.1 children per woman), the social reinforcements of increasing urbanization, costs of raising children and increased empowerment over family planning make it almost impossible to increase the birth rate.
For highly affluent countries, the per capita GDP is decreasing as the proportion of elderly in the population increases. Although this pattern doesn’t hold when less affluent countries are added, the figure demonstrates tangible economic impacts for countries grappling with aging populations.
A graph showing the percentage of elderly people in a country’s population, correlated with GDP and adjusted for inflation. (K. Drouillard), CC BY
Simultaneous explosions and declines
Affluent nations facing decline can react to economic instability in ways that counter global economic and environmental sustainability.
In the past, affluent nations were the drivers of green technology. However, economic instability from population declines can cause reluctance to invest, adopt and share green technology crucial for mitigating environmental damage at the global scale.
The issue is compounded by the fact that many countries overlook how their own decline in population growth contributes to economic instability. They instead focus on short-term solutions to their economic situation that may include unsustainable resource use.
Left unaddressed, the real issue of population decline becomes unresolved, allowing social anxieties against immigration and global trade to grow. This can exacerbate the issue halting technology sharing, slowing economic growth and increasing economic inequality and environmental damage.
Our research indicates that Canada and other affluent nations need to establish longer-term solutions to economic instabilities that mitigate environmental damage while promoting sustainable national and global economies.
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals offer pathways for economic, social and environmental sustainability. However, realizing these goals requires society to fully acknowledge the intertwined relationships between population growth, economy, environment and international technology-sharing in ways that transcend short-term national interests and reactionary policies.
Ken G. Drouillard receives funding from Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Canadian Water Agency, Environment and Climate Change Canada, St. Clair River Conservation Authority and North Shore of Lake Superior Remedial Action Plans.
Claudio N. Verani receives/has received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), Petroleum Research Fund (ACS-PRF), and the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
Marcelo Arbex has received funding from University of Windsor UW-SSHRC Explore.
Colossal’s so-called dire wolf is not a resurrected species. It’s a genetically modified grey wolf. Its creation is a publicity stunt designed to generate profit, with serious consequences.
TIME reports on claims that Colossal Biosciences has brought back the dire wolf.
Jenga approach to conservation
Conservation aims to safeguard ecosystems by preserving the networks of interaction between animals and their environment. Human activity has caused widespread habitat loss, driving extinction rates to levels estimated to be about 1,000 times higher than the natural background rate. We are living through a biodiversity crisis, and conservation remains our only real defence against further declines.
Colossal proposes de-extinction to combat this crisis, using a Jenga-block metaphor to explain their approach. The ecosystem is a Jenga tower, with each species representing a block — and losing a species weakens the structure, pushing it closer to collapse. Colossal Biosciences proposes that inserting a de-extinct species where a block was lost could help restore ecosystem stability and prevent collapse.
The premise isn’t entirely flawed; in some cases, introducing an animal into an unstable ecosystem to fill a lost ecological role can help restore balance. This is similar to reintroducing a species to an area where it once lived, which is a well-established conservation strategy.
Conservation and cloning
Likewise, cloning technology has the potential to aid in meaningful conservation projects. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has successfully used the technology to help restore the black-footed ferret, a species once considered extinct.
The flaw in Colossal’s plan is that the animals they focus on — Ice Age megafauna like the mammoth and dire wolf — no longer belong to any modern ecosystem. Most of the species they once interacted with disappeared, along with their habitats, roughly 10,000 years ago.
These synthetic animals are the wrong shape for our unstable Jenga tower. Forcing them into the gap might make the ecosystem more likely to collapse.
‘Frankensheep’: A cautionary tale
A warning tale of misused cloning technology comes from Montana rancher Arthur Schubarth, who illegally cloned hybrid bighorn sheep — “Frankensheep” — for trophy hunting. His operation not only exploited endangered species for profit, but also triggered outbreaks of infectious disease, demonstrating the risks that unchecked cloning technology poses to wildlife and ecosystems.
One of the most damaging aspects of Colossal’s announcement is the perpetuation of a decades-old myth that technology will save us. It would be comforting to believe we can genetically engineer our way out of the current biodiversity crisis, but that is not our reality.
Introducing Ice Age animals would have unpredictable and potentially damaging consequences. And even if we focused on more suitable animals — those whose ecosystems still exist and could benefit from de-extinction — we could never keep pace with the current rate of biodiversity loss.
Colossal’s de-extinction project also doesn’t tackle the forces driving extinction like climate change, habitat loss, exploitation, pollution and invasive species.
The Toronto Zoo and the Association of Zoos and Aquariums have issued warnings against participating in the development or display of de-extinct animals. Still, some zoos may jump at the opportunity to boost ticket sales by offering the public a glimpse of this sci-fi spectacle.
As Colossal profits from marketing its greenwashed construct and hints at the creation of “Pleistocene Parks,” it is still unclear what this technology really means for the future of conservation.
Proposed changes to the act would give industrial activities greater freedom to destroy the habitats endangered species depend on — at a time when habitat loss remains the leading threat to species. A project marketed to rescue biodiversity could, instead, help speed up its decay.
We are deeply concerned about the implications of Colossal’s announcement, but we hope this moment drives more public interest and funding toward the difficult and less glamorous work that needs to be done to protect habitat and conserve biodiversity. The fanfare around Colossal’s genetic engineering feat should not distract from the global biodiversity crisis, which remains truly dire.
David Coltman receives funding from NSERC, Genome Canada and Ontario Genomics.
Carson Mitchell, Liam Alastair Wayde Carter, and Tommy Galfano do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Craters in the lunar surface are visible in this photo taken during the Apollo 11 mission. NASA via AP
April 2025 was a busy month for space.
Pop icon Katy Perry joined five other civilian women on a quick jaunt to the edge of space, making headlines. Meanwhile, another group of people at the United Nations was contemplating a critical issue for the future of space exploration: the discovery, extraction and utilization of natural resources on the Moon.
As a space lawyer and co-founder of For All Moonkind, a nonprofit dedicated to protecting human heritage in outer space, I know that the Moon could be the proving ground for humanity’s evolution into a species that lives and thrives on more than one planet. However, this new frontier raises complex legal questions.
Space, legally
Outer space – including the Moon – from a legal perspective, is a unique domain without direct terrestrial equivalent. It is not, like the high seas, the “common heritage of humankind,” nor is it an area, like Antarctica, where commercial mining is prohibited.
Instead, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty – signed by more than 115 nations, including China, Russia and the United States – establishes that the exploration and use of space are the “province of all humankind.” That means no country may claim territory in outer space, and all have the right to access all areas of the Moon and other celestial bodies freely.
The fact that, pursuant to Article II of the treaty, a country cannot claim territory in outer space, known as the nonappropriation principle, suggests to some that property ownership in space is forbidden.
Can this be true? If your grandchildren move to Mars, will they never own a home? How can a company protect its investment in a lunar mine if it must be freely accessible by all? What happens, as it inevitably will, when two rovers race to a particular area on the lunar surface known to host valuable water ice? Does the winner take all?
As it turns out, the Outer Space Treaty does offer some wiggle room. Article IX requires countries to show “due regard” for the corresponding interests of others. It is a legally vague standard, although the Permanent Court of Arbitration has suggested that due regard means simply paying attention to what’s reasonable under the circumstances.
First mover advantage – it’s a race
The treaty’s broad language encourages a race to the Moon. The first entity to any spot will have a unilateral opportunity to determine what’s legally “reasonable.” For example, creating an overly large buffer zone around equipment might be justified to mitigate potential damage from lunar dust.
On top of that, Article XII of the Outer Space Treaty assumes that there will be installations, like bases or mining operations, on the Moon. Contrary to the free access principle, the treaty suggests that access to these may be blocked unless the owner grants permission to enter.
Both of these paths within the treaty would allow the first person to make it to their desired spot on the Moon to keep others out. The U.N. principles in their current form don’t address these loopholes.
The draft U.N. principles released in April mirror, and are confined by, the language of the Outer Space Treaty. This tension between free access and the need to protect – most easily by forbidding access – remains unresolved. And the clock is ticking.
The Moon’s vulnerable legacy
The U.S. Artemis program aims to return humans to the Moon by 2028, China has plans for human return by 2030, and in the intervening years, more than 100 robotic missions are planned by countries and private industry alike. For the most part, these missions are all headed to the same sweet spot: the lunar south pole. Here, peaks of eternal light and deep craters containing water ice promise the best mining, science and research opportunities.
Regions of the lunar south pole, left, and north pole, right, contain water in the form of ice (blue), which could be useful for space agencies hoping to set up lunar bases. NASA
In this excitement, it’s easy to forget that humans already have a deep history of lunar exploration. Scattered on the lunar surface are artifacts displaying humanity’s technological progress.
More recently, in 2019, China’s Chang’e 4 achieved the first soft landing on the Moon’s far side. And in 2023, India’s Chandrayaan-3 became the first to land successfully near the lunar south pole.
These sites memorialize humanity’s baby steps off our home planet and easily meet the United Nations definition of terrestrial heritage, as they are so “exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity.”
The international community works to protect such sites on Earth, but those protection protocols do not extend to outer space.
Astronaut footprints are still intact on the lunar surface because the Moon doesn’t have weather. But nearby spacecraft or rovers could kick up dust and cover them. AP Photo
The more than 115 other sites on the Moon that bear evidence of human activity are frozen in time without degradation from weather, animal or human activity. But this could change. A single errant spacecraft or rover could kick up abrasive lunar dust, erasing bootprints or damaging artifacts.
Protection and the Outer Space Treaty
In 2011, NASA recommended establishing buffer, or safety zones, of up to 1.2 miles (2 kilometers) to protect certain sites with U.S. artifacts.
Because it understood that outright exclusion violates the Outer Space Treaty, NASA issued these recommendations as voluntary guidelines. Nevertheless, the safety zone concept, essentially managing access to and activities around specific areas, could be a practical tool for protecting heritage sites. They could act as a starting point to find a balance between protection and access.
Building on this agreement, the international community could require specific access protocols — such as a permitting process, activity restrictions, shared access rules, monitoring and other controls — for heritage sites on the Moon. If accepted, these protective measures for heritage sites could also work as a template for scientific and operational sites. This would create a consistent framework that avoids the perception of claiming territory.
At this time, the draft U.N. principles released in April 2025 do not directly address the opposing concepts of access and protection. Instead, they defer to Article I of the Outer Space Treaty and reaffirm that everyone has free access to all areas of the Moon and other celestial bodies.
As more countries and companies compete to reach the Moon, a clear lunar legal framework can guide them to avoid conflicts and preserve historical sites. The draft U.N. principles show that the international community is ready to explore what this framework could look like.
Michelle L.D. Hanlon is affiliated with For All Moonkind, a not-for-profit organization committed to protecting human cultural heritage in outer space starting with the Apollo lunar landing sites.
Knowing the calorie content of foods does not help people understand which foods are healthier, according to a study I recently co-authored in the Journal of Retailing. When study participants considered calorie information, they rated unhealthy food as less unhealthy and healthy food as less healthy. They were also less sure in their judgments.
In other words, calorie labeling didn’t help participants judge foods more accurately. It made them second-guess themselves.
Across nine experiments with over 2,000 participants, my colleague and I tested how people use calorie information to evaluate food. For example, participants viewed food items that are generally deemed healthier, such as a salad, or ones that tend to be less healthy, such as a cheeseburger, and were asked to rate how healthy each item was. When people did not consider calorie information, participants correctly saw a big gap between the healthy and unhealthy foods. But when they considered calorie information, those judgments became more moderate.
In another experiment in the study, we found that asking people to estimate the calorie content of food items reduced self-reported confidence in their ability to judge how healthy those foods were − and that drop in confidence is what led them to rate these food items more moderately. We observed this effect for calories but not for other nutrition metrics such as fat or carbohydrates, which consumers tend to view as less familiar.
This pattern repeated across our experiments. Instead of helping people sharpen their evaluations, calorie information seemed to create what researchers call metacognitive uncertainty, or a feeling of “I thought I understood this, but now I’m not so sure.” When people aren’t confident in their understanding, they tend to avoid extreme judgments.
People’s calorie needs vary widely.
Because people see calorie information so often, they believe they know how to use it effectively. But these findings suggest that the very familiarity of calorie counts can backfire, creating a false sense of understanding that leads to more confusion, not less. My co-author and I call this the illusion of calorie fluency. When people are asked to judge how healthy a food item is based on calorie data, that confidence quickly unravels and their healthiness judgments become less accurate.
Why it matters
These findings have important implications for public health and for the businesses that are investing in calorie transparency. Public health policies assume that providing calorie information will drive more informed choices. But our research suggests that visibility isn’t enough – and that calorie information alone may not help. In some cases, it might even lead people to make less healthy choices.
This does not mean that calorie information should be removed. Rather, it needs to be supported with more context and clarity. One possible approach is pairing calorie numbers with decision aids such as a traffic light indicator or an overall nutrition score, which both exist in some European countries. Alternatively, calorie information about an item could be accompanied by clear reference points explaining how much of a person’s recommended daily calories it contains – though this may be challenging because of how widely daily calorie needs vary.
Our study highlights a broader issue in health communication: Just because information is available doesn’t mean it’s useful. Realizing that calorie information can seem easier to understand than it actually is can help consumers make more informed, confident decisions about what they eat.
What still isn’t known
In our studies, we found that calorie information is especially prone to creating an illusion of understanding. But key questions remain.
For example, researchers don’t yet know how this illusion interacts with the growing use of health and wellness apps, personalized nutrition tools or AI-based food recommendations. Future research could look at whether these tools actually help people feel more sure of their choices – or just make them feel confident without truly understanding the information.
The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.
Deidre Popovich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Jimmie Christian Duncan learned in April 2025 that a Louisiana judge had dismissed his capital murder conviction and he would no longer face the prospect of execution. In 1998, a jury convicted Duncan of murdering his girlfriend’s 23-month-old daughter, and he had been on death row ever since.
But the Bayou State is not the only death penalty state with a wrongful conviction problem. Death row exonerations – when someone is released after being sentenced – have become more common in the United States. More than 200 people have been freed in the past half-century.
DNA evidence has been involved in only a handful of those cases, but not Duncan’s. Most of the others have happened when defense lawyers discovered new evidence of faulty eyewitness identification, or when prosecutorial misconduct cast doubt on the legality of the conviction.
Duncan’s case stands out because it was the first successful use of Louisiana’s 2021 factual innocence statute. Under that law, reconsideration of convictions can be based on new facts rather than just constitutional or legal violations of a defendant’s rights.
As Louisiana District Judge Alvin Sharp explained in his April 2025 opinion in Duncan’s case, “To possibly be successful on a ‘factual innocence’ claim, a Petitioner shall present new, reliable, and non-cumulative evidence that would be legally admissible at trial and that was not known or discoverable at or prior to trial…”
In overturning Duncan’s conviction, Sharp highlighted new understandings about the unreliability of so-called bite mark analysis that played a key role in Duncan’s case. He also cited the testimony of “a very compelling witness” who testified that the child’s death was “accidental drowning,” not homicide.
It might seem odd that it took the factual innocence statute in 2021 to make what Sharp did possible. But as a death penalty scholar, I believe it’s the latest reminder that, even in capital cases, the quest for justice has not always been the United States’ highest value.
The shadow of Herrera v. Collins
States such as Louisiana have enacted factual innocence statutes because there is no nationwide, constitutional bar to executing people who are factually innocent. More than three decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court turned back a challenge to the constitutionality of executing people who might not have committed the crime for which they were sentenced to death.
In February 1992, 10 years after his conviction, Leonel Herrera filed a writ of habeas corpus – a legal action used to challenge the legality of a person’s imprisonment. Herrera said he had new evidence showing he had not committed the murder for which he had been sentenced to death.
Herrera’s lawyers argued that executing a factually innocent person would violate the Eighth Amendment, prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment. He also said it would violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of due process of law.
Herrera wanted the courts to consider affidavits given long after Herrera’s conviction. Those affidavits claimed that Raul Herrera, Leonel Herrera’s brother, had said before he died that he, not Leonel, was guilty of the killing for which Leonel had been convicted.
But the Supreme Court refused to consider that evidence.
A 6–3 majority concluded that evidence of actual innocence was “not relevant … absent some other constitutional violation.” This ruling means that so long as applicable legal procedures are followed, it doesn’t matter whether the outcome is correct.
In 1992, the Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the constitutionality of executing people who might not have committed the crime for which they were sentenced to death. AP Photo/Alex Brandon
The court allowed prisoners who can show proof of innocence to file a habeas petition even after the normal time limit for filing one. But it did not say that executing the innocent would violate the Constitution.
States have responded to this by enacting laws that allow people convicted of crimes to bring actual innocence claims, based on newly discovered DNA evidence.
In 2012, Massachusetts passed a law allowing prisoners to seek “forensic or scientific analysis” of evidence in support of a claim of “factual innocence of the crime for which the person has been convicted.”
Five other states – Louisiana, Maryland, Texas, Virginia and Utah – have passed laws allowing post-conviction actual innocence claims, even without DNA evidence.
Under the Louisiana statute that Duncan invoked, “A petitioner who has been convicted of an offense may seek post-conviction relief on the grounds that he is factually innocent of the offense for which he was convicted.”
In Louisiana, new evidence can be “scientific, forensic, physical, or nontestimonial documentary evidence.” Under some conditions, testimonial evidence is also admissible to prove innocence in post-conviction cases.
Someone seeking such relief must prove “by clear and convincing evidence that, had the new evidence been presented at trial, no rational juror would have found the petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
A prison warden discusses the gurney used for lethal injections at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola in September 2009. AP Photo/Judi Bottoni
Opposition to actual innocence
Many people oppose allowing convicted criminals to reopen their cases, even if they are, like Duncan, on death row.
In the Herrera case, for example, Chief Justice William Rehnquist said that doing so would have a “very disruptive effect … on the need for finality in capital cases.”
It looks like Louisiana will again be weighing the value of finality and justice in capital cases.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry wants to see its actual innocence law repealed, calling it a “woke, hug-a-thug policy” and arguing that “once a verdict has been finalized, there are no more ‘get out of jail free’ cards.”
A bill in the Louisiana Legislature to change the law has been introduced in the 2025 legislative session.
The stakes could not be higher.
As former Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun wrote in his Herrera dissent, “Just as an execution without adequate safeguards is unacceptable, so too is an execution when the condemned prisoner can prove that he is innocent. The execution of a person who can show that he is innocent comes perilously close to simple murder.”
Louisiana will soon have to decide how close it is willing to come to producing that tragic result.
Austin Sarat does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jacob Mchangama, Research Professor of Political Science and Executive Director of The Future of Free Speech, Vanderbilt University
Support among young people for allowing controversial or offensive speech has dropped sharply.J Studios/Getty Images
For much of the 20th century, young Americans were seen as free speech’s fiercest defenders. But now, young Americans are growing more skeptical of free speech.
According to a March 2025 report by The Future of Free Speech, a nonpartisan think tank where I am executive director, support among 18- to 34-year-olds for allowing controversial or offensive speech has dropped sharply in recent years.
In 2021, 71% of young Americans said people should be allowed to insult the U.S. flag, which is a key indicator of support for free speech, no matter how distasteful. By 2024, that number had fallen to just 43% – a 28-point drop. Support for pro‑LGBTQ+ speech declined by 20 percentage points, and tolerance for speech that offends religious beliefs fell by 14 points.
This drop contributed to the U.S. having the third-largest decline in free speech support among the 33 countries that The Future of Free Speech surveyed – behind only Japan and Israel.
Why has this support diminished so dramatically?
Shift from past generations
In the 1960s, college students led what was called the free speech movement, demanding the right to speak freely about political matters on campus, often clashing with older, more censorious generations.
Sociologist Jean Twenge has tracked changes in attitudes using data from the General Social Survey, a biennial survey conducted by the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center.
Since the 1970s, this survey has asked Americans whether controversial figures – racists, communists and anti-religionists – should be allowed to speak. Support for such rights generally increased from the Greatest Generation, born between 1900-1924, to Gen X, born between 1965-1979.
But Gen Z, those born between 1995-2004, has reversed that trend. Despite the fact that the Cold War, which pitted the communist Soviet Union and its allies against the democratic West, ended more than three decades ago, even support for the free speech rights of communists has declined.
Political drift and cultural realignment
At the same time, some data suggests that young Americans may be drifting rightward politically.
A Harvard Institute of Politics poll in late 2024 found that men ages 18–24 now identify as slightly more conservative than those ages 25–29. Another Gallup survey showed that Gen Z teens are twice as likely as millennials to describe themselves as more conservative than their parents were at the same age.
This shift may help explain changes in speech attitudes.
Today’s young Americans may be less likely to instinctively defend speech aligned with liberal or progressive causes. For example, support among 18- to 29-year-olds for same-sex marriage, generally considered a liberal or progressive cause, fell from 79% in 2018 to 71% in 2022, according to Pew Research.
Attitudes toward hate speech
The Future of Free Speech study found that younger Americans are especially hesitant to defend speech that offends minority groups.
Only 47% of those ages 18 to 34 said such speech should be allowed, compared with 70% of those over 55.
Similarly, tolerance for religiously offensive speech was 57% among younger respondents, down from 71% in 2021.
This concern over harmful or bigoted speech is not new. A 2015 Pew survey found that 40% of millennials believed the government should be able to prevent offensive speech about minorities.
More recently, a 2024 report by the nonpartisan free speech advocacy group FIRE found that 70% of U.S. college students supported disinviting speakers perceived as bigoted. Over a quarter said violence could be acceptable to stop campus speech in some cases.
Broader implications
Why does this matter?
The First Amendment protects unpopular speech. It does not just shield offensive ideas, but it safeguards movements that once seemed fringe. Whether it’s civil rights, LGBTQ+ rights or anti-war protests, history shows that ideas seen as dangerous or radical in one era often become widely accepted in another.
Today’s younger Americans will soon shape policies in universities, media, government, tech and the public square. If a growing share believes speech should be regulated to prevent offense, that could signal a shift in how free speech is interpreted and enforced in American institutions.
To be sure, support for free speech in principle remains strong. The Future of Free Speech report found that 89% of Americans said people should be allowed to criticize government policy. But tolerance for more provocative or offensive speech appears to be eroding, especially among young people.
This raises questions about whether these changes reflect a life-stage effect − will today’s young people become more speech-tolerant as they age? Or are we seeing a deeper generational shift?
The data suggests Americans across all generations still value free speech. But for younger Americans, especially, that support seems increasingly conditional.
Jacob Mchangama receives funding from The John Templeton Foundation. He is affiliated with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
Craters in the lunar surface are visible in this photo taken during the Apollo 11 mission. NASA via AP
April 2025 was a busy month for space.
Pop icon Katy Perry joined five other civilian women on a quick jaunt to the edge of space, making headlines. Meanwhile, another group of people at the United Nations was contemplating a critical issue for the future of space exploration: the discovery, extraction and utilization of natural resources on the Moon.
As a space lawyer and co-founder of For All Moonkind, a nonprofit dedicated to protecting human heritage in outer space, I know that the Moon could be the proving ground for humanity’s evolution into a species that lives and thrives on more than one planet. However, this new frontier raises complex legal questions.
Space, legally
Outer space – including the Moon – from a legal perspective, is a unique domain without direct terrestrial equivalent. It is not, like the high seas, the “common heritage of humankind,” nor is it an area, like Antarctica, where commercial mining is prohibited.
Instead, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty – signed by more than 115 nations, including China, Russia and the United States – establishes that the exploration and use of space are the “province of all humankind.” That means no country may claim territory in outer space, and all have the right to access all areas of the Moon and other celestial bodies freely.
The fact that, pursuant to Article II of the treaty, a country cannot claim territory in outer space, known as the nonappropriation principle, suggests to some that property ownership in space is forbidden.
Can this be true? If your grandchildren move to Mars, will they never own a home? How can a company protect its investment in a lunar mine if it must be freely accessible by all? What happens, as it inevitably will, when two rovers race to a particular area on the lunar surface known to host valuable water ice? Does the winner take all?
As it turns out, the Outer Space Treaty does offer some wiggle room. Article IX requires countries to show “due regard” for the corresponding interests of others. It is a legally vague standard, although the Permanent Court of Arbitration has suggested that due regard means simply paying attention to what’s reasonable under the circumstances.
First mover advantage – it’s a race
The treaty’s broad language encourages a race to the Moon. The first entity to any spot will have a unilateral opportunity to determine what’s legally “reasonable.” For example, creating an overly large buffer zone around equipment might be justified to mitigate potential damage from lunar dust.
On top of that, Article XII of the Outer Space Treaty assumes that there will be installations, like bases or mining operations, on the Moon. Contrary to the free access principle, the treaty suggests that access to these may be blocked unless the owner grants permission to enter.
Both of these paths within the treaty would allow the first person to make it to their desired spot on the Moon to keep others out. The U.N. principles in their current form don’t address these loopholes.
The draft U.N. principles released in April mirror, and are confined by, the language of the Outer Space Treaty. This tension between free access and the need to protect – most easily by forbidding access – remains unresolved. And the clock is ticking.
The Moon’s vulnerable legacy
The U.S. Artemis program aims to return humans to the Moon by 2028, China has plans for human return by 2030, and in the intervening years, more than 100 robotic missions are planned by countries and private industry alike. For the most part, these missions are all headed to the same sweet spot: the lunar south pole. Here, peaks of eternal light and deep craters containing water ice promise the best mining, science and research opportunities.
Regions of the lunar south pole, left, and north pole, right, contain water in the form of ice (blue), which could be useful for space agencies hoping to set up lunar bases. NASA
In this excitement, it’s easy to forget that humans already have a deep history of lunar exploration. Scattered on the lunar surface are artifacts displaying humanity’s technological progress.
More recently, in 2019, China’s Chang’e 4 achieved the first soft landing on the Moon’s far side. And in 2023, India’s Chandrayaan-3 became the first to land successfully near the lunar south pole.
These sites memorialize humanity’s baby steps off our home planet and easily meet the United Nations definition of terrestrial heritage, as they are so “exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity.”
The international community works to protect such sites on Earth, but those protection protocols do not extend to outer space.
Astronaut footprints are still intact on the lunar surface because the Moon doesn’t have weather. But nearby spacecraft or rovers could kick up dust and cover them. AP Photo
The more than 115 other sites on the Moon that bear evidence of human activity are frozen in time without degradation from weather, animal or human activity. But this could change. A single errant spacecraft or rover could kick up abrasive lunar dust, erasing bootprints or damaging artifacts.
Protection and the Outer Space Treaty
In 2011, NASA recommended establishing buffer, or safety zones, of up to 1.2 miles (2 kilometers) to protect certain sites with U.S. artifacts.
Because it understood that outright exclusion violates the Outer Space Treaty, NASA issued these recommendations as voluntary guidelines. Nevertheless, the safety zone concept, essentially managing access to and activities around specific areas, could be a practical tool for protecting heritage sites. They could act as a starting point to find a balance between protection and access.
Building on this agreement, the international community could require specific access protocols — such as a permitting process, activity restrictions, shared access rules, monitoring and other controls — for heritage sites on the Moon. If accepted, these protective measures for heritage sites could also work as a template for scientific and operational sites. This would create a consistent framework that avoids the perception of claiming territory.
At this time, the draft U.N. principles released in April 2025 do not directly address the opposing concepts of access and protection. Instead, they defer to Article I of the Outer Space Treaty and reaffirm that everyone has free access to all areas of the Moon and other celestial bodies.
As more countries and companies compete to reach the Moon, a clear lunar legal framework can guide them to avoid conflicts and preserve historical sites. The draft U.N. principles show that the international community is ready to explore what this framework could look like.
Michelle L.D. Hanlon is affiliated with For All Moonkind, a not-for-profit organization committed to protecting human cultural heritage in outer space starting with the Apollo lunar landing sites.
A decision by the Broadcasting Standards Authority to uphold a complaint against a 1News broadcast last November is a warning to news media, says the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa.
1News described violence in the streets of Amsterdam on November 7 and 8 following a soccer match as “disturbing” and ‘antisemitic’ and stated the graphic video of beatings were Maccabi Tel Aviv fans under attack just for being Jewish.
Videographers who took the footage which 1News had used, complained to their news agencies that this description was wrong. The violence had been perpetrated by the Israeli Maccabi Tel Aviv fans against those they suspected of being Arab or supporters of Palestine.
The visiting Israelis were the attackers — not the victims, said the PSNA statement, as widely reported by global media correcting initial reports.
Before the match these same Maccabi fans had gathered in large groups to chant “Death to Arabs” — a racist genocidal chant which if used with the races reversed (“Arabs” replaced by Jews”) “would have been rightly condemned in purple prose by Western news media such as TVNZ”, said PSNA co-chair John Minto in the statement.
“But no such sympathy for Palestinians or Arabs,” he added.
Requested broadcast correction PSNA said in its statement that it had immediately requested that TVNZ broadcast a correction. TVNZ refused, though admitting they had got the story wrong.
PSNA then referred a complaint to the BSA which upheld the complaint as failing to meet the accuracy standard.
Minto said in the statement that the BSA decision should be seen as a warning to news media to be aware that Israel was using “fabricated charges of antisemitism, to justify and divert attention from its genocide in Gaza and silence its critics”.
“Just because [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu and the then US President Joe Biden made statements turning Amsterdam attackers into victims, doesn’t mean TVNZ news should automatically parrot them,” Minto said.
“That’s effectively what the BSA concluded.”
Framing violence: How Israel shaped the narrative and the impact on Dutch politics Video: Al Jazeera
Minto also pointed to what he called a recent fabricated hysteria about antisemitism in Sydney, which the New South Wales police found to be completely based on hoaxes by a criminal gang.
“In the US, Trump is using the same charge as an excuse to close down university courses and expel anyone who protests against the Israeli genocide in Gaza,” Minto said.
“Of course, we strongly condemn the real antisemitism of anti-Jewish, Nazi-type Islamophobic groups,” Minto says.
Call for media ‘self education’ “It should be easy for professional reporters and editors to tell the difference between criticism of Israeli apartheid, ethnic cleansing and violence on one hand, and on the other hand Nazis and their fellow travellers who condemn Jews because they are Jews.
“The BSA is, in effect, demanding the news media educate themselves.”
In a half-hour report on 16 November 2024 headlined “Media bias, inaccuracy and the violence in Amsterdam”, Al Jazeera’s global mediawatch programme The Listening Post said “one night of violence revealed … Western media’s failings on Israel and Palestine”.
“In the wake of an ugly eruption of violence on the streets of Amsterdam, the media coverage of the story [was] put under the microscope with editors scrambling to revise headlines, rework narratives, and reframe video content.”
In an investigative documentary, The Full Report, on 22 January 2025, Al Jazeera’s Dutch correspondent Step Vaessen reported how Israel had framed the violence, shaped the narrative, manipulated the global media, and impacted on Dutch politics.
As researchers and directors of regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers, funded by the U.S. Geological Survey since 2011, we have seen firsthand the work these programs do to protect the nation’s natural resources and their successes in helping states and tribes build resilience to climate risks.
Here are a few examples of the ways federally funded climate adaptation science conducted by university and federal researchers helps the nation weather the effects of climate change.
Protecting communities against wildfire risk
Wildfires have increasingly threatened communities and ecosystems across the U.S., exacerbated by worsening heat waves and drought.
In the Southwest, researchers with the Climate Adaptation Science Centers are developing forecasting models to identify locations at greatest risk of wildfire at different times of year.
Knowing where and when fire risks are highest allows communities to take steps to protect themselves, whether by carrying out controlled burns to remove dry vegetation, creating fire breaks to protect homes, managing invasive species that can leave forests more prone to devastating fires, or other measures.
The solutions are created with forest and wildland managers to ensure projects are viable, effective and tailored to each area. The research is then integrated into best practices for managing wildfires. The researchers also help city planners find the most effective methods to reduce fire risks in wildlands near homes.
Wildland firefighters and communities have limited resources. They need to know where the greatest risks exist to take preventive measures. Ethan Swope/Getty Images
In Hawaii and the other Pacific islands, adaptation researchers have similarly worked to identify how drought, invasive species and land-use changes contribute to fire risk there. They use these results to create maps of high-risk fire zones to help communities take steps to reduce dry and dead undergrowth that could fuel fires and also plan for recovery after fires.
Protecting shorelines and fisheries
In the Northeast, salt marshes line large parts of the coast, providing natural buffers against storms by damping powerful ocean waves that would otherwise erode the shoreline. Their shallow, grassy waters also serve as important breeding grounds for valuable fish.
However, these marshes are at risk of drowning as sea level rises faster than the sediment can build up.
As greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels and from other human activities accumulate in the atmosphere, they trap extra heat near Earth’s surface and in the oceans, raising temperatures. The rising temperatures melt glaciers and also cause thermal expansion of the oceans. Together, those processes are raising global sea level by about 1.3 inches per decade.
Adaptation researchers with the Climate Adaptation Science Centers have been developing local flood projections for the regions’ unique oceanographic and geophysical conditions to help protect them. Those projections are essential to help natural resource managers and municipalities plan effectively for the future.
In the Northwest and Alaska, salmon are struggling as temperatures rise in the streams they return to for spawning each year. Warm water can make them sluggish, putting them at greater risk from predators. When temperatures get too high, they can’t survive. Even in large rivers such as the Columbia, salmon are becoming heat stressed more often.
Adaptation researchers in both regions have been evaluating the effectiveness of fish rescues – temporarily moving salmon into captivity as seasonal streams overheat or dry up due to drought.
In Alaska, adaptation scientists have built broad partnerships with tribes, nonprofit organizations and government agencies to improve temperature measurements of remote streams, creating an early warning system for fisheries so managers can take steps to help salmon survive.
Researchers in the Northeast and Southeast Climate Adaptation Science Centers have been working to identify and prioritize the risks from invasive species that are expanding their ranges. That helps state managers eradicate these emerging threats before they become a problem. These regional invasive species networks have become the go-to source of climate-related scientific information for thousands of invasive species managers.
The rise in the number of invasive species projected by 2050 is substantial in the Northeast and upper Midwest. Federally funded scientists develop these risk maps and work with local communities to head off invasive species damage. Regional Invasive Species and Climate Change Network
The Northeast is a hot spot for invasive species, particularly for plants that can outcompete native wetland and grassland species and host pathogens that can harm native species.
Without proactive assessments, invasive species management becomes more difficult. Once the damage has begun, managing invasive species becomes more expensive and less effective.
Losing the nation’s ability to adapt wisely
A key part of these projects is the strong working relationships built between scientists and the natural resource managers in state, community, tribal and government agencies who can put this knowledge into practice.
With climate extremes likely to increase in the coming years, losing adaptation science will leave the United States even more vulnerable to future climate hazards.
Bethany Bradley receives funding from the US Geological Survey as the University Director of the Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center.
Jia Hu has receives funding from the US Geological Survey as the University Director of the Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center.
Meade Krosby receives funding from the US Geological Survey as the University Director of the Northwest Climate Adaptation Science Center.
When does a kid become an adult? – Avery, age 8, Los Angeles
Not everyone grows up at the same pace, even though U.S. law holds that you reach adulthood when you turn 18. This is the age where you are treated like an adult in terms of criminal responsibility. However, states differ on the “civil age of majority,” which means that you don’t necessarily get all the rights and privileges reserved for grown-ups at that point.
Even physical signs of maturity don’t provide an easy answer to this question. Puberty brings about physical changes associated with adulthood like facial hair or breast development. It also marks the onset of sexual maturity – being able to have children.
Those changes don’t happen at the same time for everyone.
For example, girls typically start going through puberty and beginning to look like adults at an earlier age than boys. Some people don’t look like grown-ups until they’re well into their 20s.
In my view, as a professor of developmental psychology, what really matters in terms of becoming an adult is how people feel and behave, and the responsibilities they handle.
Even if you’ve developed a sophisticated palate by the time you turn 18, you still aren’t necessarily a full-fledged adult. nedomacki/Getty Images
Age at milestones may vary
Because everybody is unique, there’s no standard timeline for growing up. Some people learn how to control their emotions, develop the judgment to make good decisions and manage to earn enough to support themselves by the age of 18.
Others take longer.
Coming of age also varies due to cultural differences. In some families, it’s expected that you’ll remain financially dependent on your parents until your mid-20s as you get a college education or job training.
Even within one family, your personality, experiences, career path and specific circumstances can influence how soon you’d be expected to shoulder adult responsibilities.
Drew Barrymore attends a movie premiere at the age of 15 – one year after a judge declared her to be an adult in the eyes of the law through emancipation. Ron Galella, Ltd. via GettyImages
Some young people technically enter adulthood before they turn 18 through a process called “emancipation” – a legal status indicating that a young person is responsible for their own financial affairs and medical obligations.
Economic independence is hard to attain for young teens, however, because child labor is restricted and regulated in the U.S. by federal law, with states setting some of these rules. States also determine how old you have to be to get married. In most states, that’s 18 years old. But some states allow marriage at any age.
Differentiating between kids and adults
Understanding the differences between how children and adults think can help explain when a kid becomes an adult.
What’s more, children, especially little ones, tend to have more trouble controlling their emotions. They’re more prone to crying or screaming when they are frustrated or upset than adults.
One reason why being fully grown up by the time you turn 18 or even 21 might not be possible is because of our brains. The prefrontal cortex, which is a part of the brain that plays a crucial role in planning and weighing risks, doesn’t fully develop in most people before their 25th birthday.
Making choices that have lifelong consequences
The delay in the brain’s maturity can make it hard for young adults to fully consider the real-world consequences of their actions and choices. This mismatch may explain why adolescents and people in their early 20s often engage in risky or even reckless behavior – such as driving too fast, not wearing a seatbelt, using dangerous drugs, binge drinking or stealing things.
These still-developing parts of the brain also help explain why children are more susceptible to peer pressure. For instance, adolescents are more prone to confess to crimes they didn’t commit under police interrogation, partly because they can’t properly weigh the long-term consequences of their decisions.
In North America, some young people who by many standards are adults – in that they are over 20 years old, own a car and have a job – may not feel like they’re grown-ups regardless of what the law has to say about it. The psychologist Jeffrey Arnett coined the term “emerging adults” to describe Americans who are 21-25 years old but don’t yet feel like they’re grown-ups.
When someone becomes an adult, regardless of what the law says, really depends on the person.
There are 25-year-olds with full-time jobs and their own children who may still not feel like adults and still rely on their parents for a lot of things grown-ups typically handle. There are 17-year-olds who make all of their own doctor’s appointments, take care of their younger siblings or grandparents, and do all the grocery shopping, meal planning and laundry for their household. They probably see themselves as adults.
Growing up is about gaining experiences, making mistakes and learning from them, while also taking responsibility for your own actions. As there’s no single definition of adulthood, everyone has to decide for themselves whether or not they’ve turned into a grown-up yet.
Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.
And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.
Jonathan B. Santo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Julie M. Norman, Senior Associate Fellow on the Middle East at RUSI; Associate Professor in Politics & International Relations, UCL
Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, declared on May 5 that his government intends to intensify military operations and indefinitely reoccupy Gaza. The announcement has dashed hopes for a permanent ceasefire and the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas.
The plan, which was unanimously approved by Israel’s security cabinet, includes displacing Gaza’s 2.1 million inhabitants to a single “humanitarian area” on less than a quarter of Gaza’s territory. This will result in Palestinians leaving “in great numbers to third countries”, said Israel’s far-right finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.
It is tempting to view the plan as another move by Netanyahu to placate the hard-right members of his coalition. It can also be viewed as a pressure tactic on Hamas – a threat to force the militant group to agree to a short-term ceasefire ahead of the visit of the US president, Donald Trump, to the Middle East from May 13.
However, Netanyahu’s announcement is much more than rhetorical sabre-rattling. Israel’s recent operations in Gaza indicate that the plan should be taken literally and seriously. Since March, when the war in Gaza resumed following a temporary ceasefire, Israel has declared about 70% of the enclave either a military “red zone” or under evacuation.
The new plan affirms what many have long feared: that expanding territorial control is not merely a short-term military tactic but a long-term occupation. In my view, this will only bring more suffering for Palestinians, less security for Israel, and more instability to the region.
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza cannot be overstated. Many observers have described the current situation as the worst of any time during the past 18 months.
The flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza has been politicised and widely criticised throughout the war, often slowing to a trickle. However, at least some aid trucks were allowed to pass into the Strip from late October 2023, shortly after the war began. This was followed by a surge of aid during the ceasefire in January and February 2025.
But no food, fuel or medicines have entered Gaza since early March. This has led to near-famine conditions and the breakdown of the few remaining healthcare services.
Israel’s proposed plan would forcibly move Gazans, nearly all of whom have already been displaced multiple times, into militarised “sterile zones” in the south. Humanitarian aid would be managed there by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and private US companies.
Deteriorating humanitarian conditions, combined with further displacement, will only create more security challenges for Israel. Entrenched occupation fuels armed resistance and further mobilises insurgency.
The US saw this following its 2003 invasion of Iraq, which resulted in over 8,000 US military personnel and contractors being killed. Israel has repeatedly faced the rise of armed militant groups in response to prolonged military occupations in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.
Hamas has already dismissed further ceasefire talks in the wake of the new plan, and the group is seemingly having no trouble recruiting new members to its military wing. This has ensured a costly deployment for IDF ground troops.
It goes without saying that Hamas should release all of the remaining hostages – and should have done so long ago. But Hamas now sees little incentive to do so when Israeli ministers are calling for what appears to be the complete destruction of Gaza, with or without a hostage release.
A renewed occupation of Gaza will also further complicate regional dynamics. Arab states that have promised billions of dollars for Gaza’s reconstruction, alongside a credible plan for a two-state solution, will balk at subsidising Israeli military control.
The stalled US-backed normalisation deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which has long been sought both by the Trump and Biden administrations, will probably be pushed even further back. It may even be abandoned entirely if Israel retrenches in Gaza.
And any US involvement in Israel’s new Gaza plan could complicate negotiations between the US and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear programme. The Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, has already accused Netanyahu of dragging the US into a “disaster” in the Middle East by “attempting to brazenly dictate” what Trump can and cannot do in his diplomacy with Iran.
But perhaps most importantly, the reoccupation of Gaza – coupled with incursions, annexations and settlement expansion in the West Bank – communicates in no uncertain terms that the Israeli government is torpedoing any pathway to a two-state solution.
This has long been clear to Palestinians and many onlookers. Most realists accepted that any moves towards Palestinian self-determination would be non-starters in the aftermath of the October 7 attacks on southern Israel.
However, Israel’s friends in the international community, especially in Europe, have been holding on to the hope that Israel would eventually come back to the two-state framework. This latest plan calls their bluff.
France and the UK are already in discussion about possibly recognising Palestine as a state at a conference in June. The UK has long preferred recognition as part of a peace process towards two states, rather than a symbolic gesture.
But a retrenched “capture” of Gaza, combined with another massive civilian displacement, may speed up serious consideration of this recognition – while there is still Palestinian territory left to recognise.
Julie M. Norman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
From sleep aids and stress relief to vitamins and energy boosts, wellness patches are surging in popularity. These stick-on supplements promise to deliver nutrients and plant-based compounds directly through your skin and into your bloodstream – no pills, no needles, no fuss.
Inspired by medical patches that deliver hormones or nicotine, they certainly sound scientific. But do they work?
The short answer is: sometimes, but often not in the way they suggest. While the idea of nutrient delivery through the skin is firmly rooted in science, the reality of wellness patches is more complicated.
The skin, after all, is an excellent barrier. Its outermost layer, the stratum corneum, is like a brick wall. The “bricks” are dead skin cells and the “mortar” is a waxy mix of fats. This structure is incredibly good at blocking water, bacteria and most drugs.
Only a few types of molecules can easily sneak through this barrier. These tend to be small, fat-soluble molecules, such as nicotine, oestradiol (used in HRT) or certain painkillers – hence their established successful use.
Layers of the skin explained.
As a rule of thumb, small fatty molecules can cross, anything water soluble cannot. Vitamins are generally water soluble and therefore fail at the waterproof barrier.
Vitamin B12, magnesium and iron – all available in patch form – are typically too large or water-soluble to cross the skin in meaningful amounts. If nutrients need to be injected or taken in high oral doses to be effective, the likelihood of a patch delivering enough through the skin becomes very slim.
Spotting guff
Still, some wellness patches may hold more promise than others. So how can you tell the difference between a product with potential and one that’s mostly marketing?
First, look closely at the active ingredients. If the patch contains small, lipophilic (fat-loving) molecules – like melatonin, caffeine or certain cannabinoids – there’s at least a theoretical chance of absorption.
Larger or charged molecules like B12 or magnesium salts are far less likely to make it through the skin barrier without special assistance.
Second, check for transparent dosing. A trustworthy patch will state the amount of active ingredient it contains (in milligrams or micrograms), the duration of delivery, and ideally, the rate at which the compound is released. If it just says “infused with essential oils” and doesn’t tell you how much or how it works, take it with a pinch of salt.
Third, examine the delivery technology. Medical-grade patches use either a matrix system, where the active ingredient is distributed evenly throughout the patch, or a reservoir system, which controls release from a central chamber.
Some also use chemical enhancers to help increase absorption. Nicotine patches offer an excellent example of this enhanced delivery.
As ever, the key to delivery is overcoming the stratum corneum. Nicotine is small, lipophilic and uncharged – three features that make it particularly well suited to slip through the skin and into the bloodstream.
Once it diffuses through the stratum corneum, nicotine travels into the viable epidermis and dermis, where it can enter capillaries and circulate in the body.
Modern patches use specially designed adhesives and permeation enhancers – compounds that temporarily loosen the skin’s lipid matrix to improve absorption. A common example is oleic acid, a fatty acid that disrupts the tight lipid packing in the stratum corneum, allowing more nicotine to pass through.
This, combined with a controlled-release design, ensures a steady, low-level delivery of nicotine throughout the day, helping reduce withdrawal symptoms and cravings without the rapid spikes associated with smoking.
The same principle is applied to skin creams that penetrate the epidermis primarily through passive diffusion, moving between the cells of the stratum corneum via the lipid matrix.
Small, lipophilic, and uncharged molecules pass more easily, and formulations often include mild penetration enhancers, such as alcohols or glycols, to temporarily loosen the lipid structure and improve absorption into the viable epidermis. By contrast, if a wellness patch resembles a sticker soaked in oil or offers no explanation of its mechanism, you might want to question its effectiveness.
Finally, consider the evidence behind the claims. Few wellness patches are supported by independent studies or peer-reviewed research. That doesn’t mean they never work but it does mean you should treat them as unproven. If a patch promises to “detox your liver”, “burn fat”, or “cure fatigue overnight”, it’s probably leaning more on placebo than pharmacology.
That said, the placebo effect itself can be powerful. If a patch makes someone feel more in control of their sleep, stress or energy levels – and causes no harm – there may still be a benefit, but it’s important to understand where marketing ends and science begins.
Michelle Spear does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Amsterdam hit its self-imposed limit of 20 million overnight stays in 2023.4kclips/Shutterstock
In the controversial case of expansion at Heathrow airport, the UK government insists that the benefits of economic growth outweigh the environmental and wellbeing costs. But what if focusing on prosperity is a shortsighted approach? The debate about a third runway, placed in the context of exponential growth in travel and tourism, makes the impact on people and the environment clear to see.
Meanwhile, many tourism destinations are struggling to cope with growing numbers of visitors. Residents have protested at the impact of overtourism on their quality of life, with harms including overcrowding, loss of amenities for residents and a skewed property market.
London’s airport development plans (expansion is also mooted at Gatwick and Luton) aim to inject investment into a range of sectors beyond tourism. However, our research suggests that aligning tourism with other sectors and better cooperation of decision-making at different levels of government could lead to increased wellbeing, a healthier environment and greater benefits to the local economy.
This provides options to rethink what tourism could look like when the focus is not just economic growth.
It should be possible to look at new models that take a holistic approach to tourism development. This means putting the wellbeing of the community and the environment first. Falling under the umbrella term of “post-growth”, there are various approaches that all rethink the role of economic growth. They advocate prioritising human wellbeing within planetary boundaries.
“Degrowth” argues that limiting growth is essential for a sustainable future. On the other hand, “doughnut economics” and regenerative approaches are more agnostic about economic growth. They argue that human prosperity and wellbeing should be prioritised regardless of whether GDP is going up or down.
In the context of tourism and travel, these approaches provide a different perspective on the role of the sector and what it can bring to a place, beyond economic growth.
They also go further than most strategies being implemented in popular tourist cities to prioritise residents’ wellbeing, quality of life, and lower-carbon travel.
Taking the heat off tourist hotspots
As part of a net-zero emission pledge, and in an attempt to curb overtourism and the frustration of locals, some cities across Europe are enforcing restrictions on cruise ships. And Greece is applying a climate resilience tax on top of the tourism tax on all overnight stays.
One of the cities that has done the most to curb tourism is Amsterdam. After the start of the COVID pandemic, it adopted a citizen initiative to cap tourism at 20 million overnight stays per year.
This number was reached in 2023, and the city has put forward a wide range of measures since then. These include a tourist tax rate of 12.5%, strict rules on short-term rentals, limits on visitor numbers at large attractions and reducing the number of cruises. The city has also strengthened its environmental regulations.
Copenhagen, on the other hand, chooses not to restrict tourism. Rather, it now rewards visitors who engage in climate-friendly actions, with the “CopenPay” pilot project. Visitors who choose to cycle, use public transport or participate in volunteering are eligible for discounts or free access to 24 attractions.
Visitors to Greece pay a climate charge as well as a tourist tax. ecstk22/Shutterstock
While these initiatives are laudable, there are two reasons why they don’t go far enough.
The first is that the majority of the measures are based on financial disincentives, such as charging entrance fees to destinations and taxing the most polluting transport. They rest on the assumption that we do not need to address the underlying pursuit of growth that led to this unsustainability.
Likewise, arguments in favour of green growth are based on technological advances, such as sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). This underpins claims that air travel can continue to grow. However, both within and beyond the travel sector, it has been argued that green growth is a myth.
In the long run, these measures do not cut the ever-growing number of travellers. Nor do they effectively address climate issues.
Second, cities need support from higher levels of government if they want to encourage travel that is more environmentally friendly and contributes to the wellbeing of residents. In the case of Amsterdam, the ongoing expansion of Schiphol airport can be linked to overtourism, as well as noise and air pollution.
City leaders want to cut the maximum number of flights. But they cannot do much as long as economic growth is the focus of the Dutch government’s plans.
This highlights the deep complexities of controlling visitor numbers. And it also suggests that the economic benefits that come with the growth of London’s airports may come with societal and environmental costs. These will be felt by London and its residents, and cannot be solved with local policies.
Rather than going further and faster with growth, when it comes to travel and tourism we may need to go “closer by and slower”.
That might mean placing greater emphasis on promoting destinations to nearby markets, investment in low-carbon travel options and regenerative tourism activities. A post-growth approach should ensure that the economic benefits do not outweigh long-term ecological and societal growth. After all, these are the things we all need for a resilient society.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nicola Tempest, Senior Lecturer, Subspecialist in Reproductive Medicine and Consultant Gynaecologist, University of Liverpool
Linzagolix, which is sold under the brand name Yselty, can help manage the pain caused by endometriosis.Prostock-studio/ Shutterstock
A daily pill to treat endometriosis has just been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice). Once available on the NHS, linzagolix will provide a new treatment option for those who have been unable to manage the condition using other standard treatments.
Endometriosis affects one in ten women of reproductive age. The condition causes the lining of the womb (the endometrium) to grow outside the uterus – most commonly in the pelvis, bladder and bowel. This causes wide and varied symptoms, including heavy, painful periods, pelvic pain between periods, pain when using the toilet, painful sex, tiredness and difficulty getting pregnant. Up to half of women diagnosed with endometriosis experience infertility as a consequence of the condition.
Endometriosis currently has no cure. Available treatments include the use of painkillers, hormonal contraceptives and surgery to remove lesions. However, these treatment options are often inadequate and, in many cases, aren’t suitable for patients for many reasons – including existing medical conditions, pregnancy or because of the risk of side-effects or complications.
Endometrium growth (both inside and outside of the womb) is driven by the reproductive hormone oestrogen. As such, blocking oestrogen can help prevent or slow the growth of the abnormal endometrial tissue and help relieve symptoms in people with endometriosis.
This is what linzagolix aims to do. Linzagolix is a gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist, which works by suppressing oestrogen – inducing a “medical menopause”. Medical menopause refers to the cessation of periods as a result of a prescribed medical treatment. Menopausal symptoms are typically reversed as soon as the drug is no longer being used.
The hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis is vital in women. It regulates the hormones involved in the menstrual cycle (including the release of oestrogen). GnRH is produced by a brain region called the hypothalamus. Usually, GnRH would bind to receptors in the pituitary gland (a small, pea-sized gland found at the base of the brain in line with the top of the nose) leading to the release of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinising hormone (LH). FSH and LH then stimulate the ovaries to produce oestrogen and progesterone.
But linzagolix works by attaching to the pituitary gland GnRH receptors and preventing the GnRH from attaching. With no GnRH, FSH and LH are rapidly suppressed. This in turn leads to a decrease in oestrogen production from the ovary.
Linzagolix has been shown to cause a statistically significant reduction in painful periods and general pelvic pain in multiple trials. Patients saw the greatest benefits when taking a dose of 75mg or more. Significant relief from pelvic pain was noted by week 12 and maintained or even enhanced by weeks 24 and 52.
The side-effect from linzagolix that is most worrying is loss of bone mineral density due to the suppression of oestrogen. However, this was only really a concern when patients were taking doses of 200mg. In this instance, patients would need to be prescribed add-back hormone replacement therapy (HRT) – low doses of oestrogen and progesterone that help prevent the loss of bone mineral density while on a treatment that induces medical menopause. Add-back HRT can also help treat the crippling menopausal symptoms that women of reproductive age suffer with while in a medical menopause.
Unfortunately, add-back HRT is not suitable for all patients – especially those who have other medical conditions.
Take-at-home treatment
Linzagolix will be prescribed to those that have failed usual hormonal treatments (such as the combined pill, progesterone-only pill or hormonal coil) or surgery.
Linzagolix will be the second take-at-home pill to become available on the NHS for treating endometriosis in those that have failed other treatments.
In March, Nice also approved relugolix. This drug works similar to linzagolix, but has add-back HRT included in the prescription. Since add-back HRT isn’t suitable for everyone, linzagolix has the advantage of being a more tailored treatment option for women with endometriosis.
Linzagolix also offers multiple advantages over GnRH agonists, which are also used to manage endometriosis. GnRH agonists fully suppress the release of oestrogen. This can lead to many side-effects, including hot flushes, loss of libido, vaginal dryness and bone mineral density loss. But because linzagolix is a GnRH antagonist, this means it can be tailored to only partially suppress oestrogen, leading to fewer side effects.
Linzagolix is taken orally, whereas GnRH agonists need an injection every month or three months to work.
Linzagolix is also rapidly reversible, whereas GnRH agonists have unpredictable reversibility, it can take months for ovarian function to return to normal when using GnRH agonists. This is clearly a problem for those wishing to conceive or stop the treatment due to side-effects. Linzagolix has a short half life which means it does not stay in a person’s system for very long.
The most commonly reported side-effect of linzagolix are hot flushes – though this usually only occurs when a patient is taking a higher dose of the drug. Bone mineral density loss can also occur at higher doses, which is why add-back HRT will be needed in these instances.
Endometriosis affects millions of women. Current treatment options are limited – and with no cure in sight, any additional treatments offer new hope for those affected. Linzagolix may soon offer a lifeline to those with endometriosis who haven’t been able to find relief using other treatments.
Nicola Tempest receives funding from the Wellbeing of Women.
It was May 4 1975. The Japanese Women’s Everest Expedition team had been living at a high altitude for six weeks, and were less than a week away from their scheduled bid for the summit of Mount Everest. Exhausted, having established camp five at just below 8,000m on the south side of the mountain, Junko Tabei and the team descended to camp two at 6,300m to rest.
Then – avalanche!
In the early hours, tons of ice and snow engulfed the camp, burying several of the teammates. Crushed by the snow and ice, Tabei was unable to move. It took the strength of four Sherpas, the elite Nepali climbing guides assisting the expedition, to pull her out. Suffering severe bruising, Tabei argued that she did not need to be returned to base camp to recover, and would remain at camp two.
“There was no way I was leaving the mountain,” she later recalled in her memoir.
It had taken five years for this group – the first all-women team – to get to Everest. The pressure on them to succeed was immense, given the limited number of annual international permits to climb Mount Everest issued by the Nepalese government. If they gave up, they might have to wait several years to make another attempt.
Meanwhile, on the Tibetan side of the mountain, Tabei’s team had competition. A 200-strong Chinese team was also working to place a woman on the summit at the same time.
From the late 1950s, Tibetan women were recruited to participate in state-sponsored Chinese mountaineering expeditions. In 1958, Pan Duo had been selected to participate in the successful Chinese 1960 Everest expedition – but was ordered to remain below 6,400 metres because above that height was “a man’s world”. Nonetheless, Pan Duo – referred to as “Mrs Phanthog” in some older accounts – was celebrated in her country and elected deputy captain of the 1975 Chinese Everest Expedition.
Unfortunately, the Chinese team suffered a climbing accident resulting in the death of a team member. They retreated to recover – only to be ordered by the Chinese government to “climb ahead of the Japanese women”.
They were too late. On May 16 1975, the all-women Japanese expedition worked together to place Tabei on the summit of Everest. Two team members – Tabei and Yuriko Watanabe – had been nominated to make the summit attempt. However, other teammates were suffering from altitude sickness, so Watanabe was assigned to help return them to camp two.
The ascent Tabei was making was arduous. Given her injuries, it took great tenacity to muster the strength to continue. But finally, she took her last steps to the summit, becoming the first woman and 40th person, according to the latest official record, to summit the peak. She was part of only the tenth successful Everest expedition, later recalling:
I felt pure joy as my thoughts registered: ‘Here is the summit. I don’t have to climb any more.’
Eleven days later, the Chinese team returned to the high slopes to make another attempt. Using minimal oxygen, Pan Duo was also successful, becoming the second woman to summit Everest – and the first to climb the harder northern side of the mountain.
Prior to these two successful expeditions, only 38 people had summited Everest – all of them men. News of Tabei’s feat travelled fast across Asia, leading to national celebrations in Japan, Nepal and India. But it made little impact in the west.
In my own career as both a mountaineer and researcher of adventure tourism, I had been struck by how few women I encountered on the mountainside. I wanted to understand why this might be, and what women had achieved. It was through this research that I discovered Tabei’s story.
I was astonished both by her achievements – she is also the first woman to complete the “Seven Summits”, climbing the highest peaks on every continent – and by how few prominent mountaineering organisations and mountaineers appeared to know about her.
Tabei’s bravery helped her lead record-setting all-women expeditions and overcome the mountain of sexism in this male-dominated space. Yet very few organisations, even in Japan, have thought to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the first ascent of Everest by a woman.
Breaking the mould
Historically, men have dominated the public record in mountaineering. In the last few years, the 70th anniversary of the first summit of Everest in 1953 by Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay has been marked, along with the centenary of the unsuccessful and fatal attempt by George Mallory and Andrew Irvine in 1924.
During that period, women were excluded from many mountaineering clubs. When they did join, they often faced prejudice, were discouraged and sometimes not permitted to publish records of their adventures. In 1975, women were finally admitted to the Alpine Club, the first and one of the most prestigious climbing institutions.
At a time when Japanese women were expected to remain at home, many members of the Japanese Women’s Everest Expedition, including Tabei, were working, with two of them also raising children. Tabei’s daughter, Noriko, was three at the time of her Everest summit. Tabei later revealed that the expedition encountered significant resistance:
Most of the men in the alpine community opposed our plan, claiming it would be impossible for a women-only expedition to reach Everest.
As a married woman and the assistant expedition leader, Tabei felt torn between motherhood and mountaineering, explaining: “Although I would never forfeit Everest, I felt pulled in the two directions of mountains and motherhood.”
Facing unsympathetic attitudes from team members when childcare conflicts arose, Tabei realised she needed to put in extra effort to prove herself as a leader.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Years before the Everest expedition, Tabei and other Japanese women were already logging major climbing achievements across the globe. These included the first ascent of the north face of the Matterhorn by an all-women’s team in 1967, and the first all-women’s Japanese expedition to the Himalayas in 1970 to climb Annapurna III. Tabei was both the first woman and Japanese person to ascend the peak.
This set the scene for the Japanese Women’s Everest Expedition. To locate and train suitable candidates for the expedition, Tabei helped establish the Joshi-Tohan Japanese Ladies Climbing Club, founded on the slogan: “Let’s go on an overseas expedition by ourselves.”
Tabei’s contribution to women’s high-altitude mountaineering was astounding. To reach Everest, she defied mid-20th-century social norms that tied Japanese women to domestic roles, later musing: “I tried to picture myself as a traditional Japanese wife who followed her husband. The idea never sat well with me.”
Throughout her career, Tabei contributed significantly to the emerging culture of women’s climbing and mountaineering expeditions. She felt strongly that climbing with other women was more rewarding because there was greater physical equality.
In 1992, she became the first woman to ascend the highest peaks on all seven continents. Using her celebrity, Tabei was also an activist for environmental change in high-altitude regions, having grown appalled by the degradation of fragile mountain glaciers that was being caused by the mountaineering industry.
Film by 4GTV Nepal.
With her friend and Everest teammate Setsuko Kitamura, Tabei established the first Mount Everest conference in 1995, inviting all 32 women who had by then successfully climbed Everest (not all attended). Under her leadership, this transnational exchange created a space to celebrate women’s mountaineering achievements.
Soon after her Everest achievement, Tabei had been a symbol of social progress and women’s emancipation at the UN International Women’s Year world conference. Yet her status as one of the greatest high-altitude mountaineers has since faded from the public eye. This has much to do with the stories we tell about man – and it’s almost always a man – vs. nature.
Telling her own story
Hillary’s much-lauded autobiography, High Adventure (1955), was published two years after his first successful ascent of Everest. In contrast, it was 42 years after her ascent before Tabei’s memoir, Honouring High Places, was published and translated.
The way Japanese women’s experiences were represented in the media did not, in Tabei’s view, represent the reality of women’s experiences. She was particularly perplexed by the inability of the press to see beyond her gender. She was repeatedly asked how it felt “as a woman” to climb at high altitudes.
Portrayals of Tabei focused on her stature as a small Japanese woman. This only reinforced the perception that women like her did not fit the norm of the heroic white, male mountaineer. She reflected:
When people meet me for the first time, they are surprised by my size. They expect me to be bigger than I am, more strapping, robust, like a wrestler … I was always puzzled by this, by people’s obsession with the physical appearance of a mountaineer.
To counter this narrative, Tabei brought a new approach to writing about Japanese women mountaineers’ achievements – challenging the tendency of traditional Japanese expedition publications to gloss over the harsh realities of expedition life.
Critical of the flowery and vain writing style of these reports, Tabei’s frank accounts reported on the “unkinder side of human behaviour”. Making tough choices was particularly difficult for women, she wrote, because of their social conditioning to be a “good person”:
It was unusual enough to be a female climber in that era of yesteryear, let alone to make a stand in front of your friends that would possibly upset them.
Transcending these social norms had a personal impact. Tabei lamented that, although “I remained strong-willed about Everest, tears of doubt fell down my cheeks at night”.
Her honesty was criticised by some in the established mountaineering community in Japan, particularly in her published account, Annapurna: Women’s Battle, which expressed the raw emotions and feelings experienced on their 1970 expedition. Tabei shared “the feelings of the team members when things failed to go in the direction they had envisioned … We put our honest experiences on paper”.
Reflecting on how she had to overcome social norms to lead the expedition – “In my day, we were strictly advised that being different was abnormal” – Tabei concluded that: “A person must be able to voice her opinion without worrying about criticism.”
A problem of representation
Ever since the late 1850s, women have made a significant yet often-hidden contribution to mountaineering. It retains a powerful legacy of male-dominated clubs and governing institutions founded on masculine norms such as risk-taking. This has often cast mountaineering achievements in a way that privileges men.
Clubs established traditions based on the first ascents of mountains – very few of which were made by women. Their absence from leading mountaineering clubs and lack of representation in published club journals meant their achievements were often attributed to male companions.
In 1872, the American climber Meta Brevoort felt it best, due to social prejudice, to publish her extraordinary first ascents in the European Alps under the name of her nephew, William A.B. Coolidge. Mountaineer and author David Mazel notes that Brevoort’s account was “carefully written to conceal the author’s sex”.
Mountain exploration and climbing have traditionally been framed as heroic endeavours dominated by men. Figures such as Hillary, Mallory and Reinhold Messner are celebrated for their bravery, strength and leadership — traits associated with masculinity.
Early mountaineering narratives often emphasised physical endurance, dominance over nature, and the ability to withstand extreme conditions – reinforcing ideas of masculine heroism. Mountains as towering, imposing and seemingly unconquerable landscapes have been metaphorically linked to power and challenge.
Traditions that have been passed down through generations – from ascent styles to route names – have also been synonymous with masculinity. In the words of mountaineering historian Walt Unsworth, climbing Everest “is the story of Man’s attempts to climb a very special mountain”.
This has had real-world consequences for mountaineering. Today, only 6% of British mountain guides are women, while globally, less than 2% of those registered to the International Federation of Mountain Guide Association (IFMGA) are women. If you don’t see your face reflected, it becomes a daunting prospect to imagine yourself in mountaineering – whether as a mountain guide, or an amateur mountaineer like me.
By 2024, women represented 13% of all Everest summiteers since 1953, yet their stories are seldom told. White, male, able-bodied and middle-class voices dominate representations in published records and popular portrayals of adventure on the world’s highest mountain.
As anthropologist Sherry B. Ortner attests, this is not surprising given mountaineering’s history as a western imperialist and colonising project that aimed to conquer nations and nature, built upon all-male institutions. Yet men and women have the same statistical odds of making a successful summit or dying on Everest.
Julie Rak, in her book False Summit, shows how some accounts can treat women’s achievements with ambivalence, and at worst question their authenticity. It has even been suggested that Tabei was effectively dragged up the mountain by her friend, the male Sherpa Ang Tsering.
Having suffered significant trauma following the avalanche that nearly wiped out their 1975 expedition, Tabei showed enormous courage and resilience to summit Everest just a few days later. She describes the ascent as difficult – and yes, accepted help from Ang Tsering – but this was her achievement, not a “stunt” to be denied by those who were not even present.
Diversity on the mountain
Since Tabei’s Everest summit, mountaineering has undergone changes as a sport, shifting from an elite, exploratory pursuit to a commercialised industry where wealthy clients can hire companies to reach summits with professional support.
From the late 1980s, high-altitude mountaineering became a valuable tourism commodity. Seizing the opportunity to boost tourism, the Nepalese government began to issue more permits, fuelling the growth of commercial companies offering clients the opportunity to be guided up 8,000-metre summits. In 2023, Nepal welcomed over 150,000 high-altitude trekking and mountaineering visitors, with 47 teams attempting to climb Everest.
Yet despite the popularity and commercialisation of the sport, mountaineering remains stubbornly resistant to diversity.
Scholar Jennifer Hargreaves argues that women have been excluded from being represented as the “sporting hero”. What constitutes our cultural identity, meaning and values almost exclusively solidifies heroic masculinity in most forms of sport, including mountaineering.
And much of this is due to the stories that are – not – told.
Delphine Moraldo’s research found that of the mountaineering autobiographies published in Britain and Europe from the late 1830s to 2013, only 6% were written by women.
Historically, literary representations of women mountaineers have often been met with ambivalence, their achievements portrayed as lesser. Women are stereotyped as weaker, bound to domesticity and lacking the hardiness required to be a “good mountaineer”.
These perceptions, coupled with a lack of representation, have reduced women’s opportunities to secure funding for expeditions, or to access female-specific clothing and equipment. Tabei and her team had to make their own expedition clothing because women’s sizes did not exist, a problem that remains today. When raising sponsorship for Everest, she was told: “Raise your children and keep your family tight, rather than do something like this.”
But while there is still a mountain to climb when it comes to attaining equality in adventure sports, there is a growing body of research and media celebrating women’s achievements – from campaigns such as Sport England’s This Girl Can to films charting the lives of some women mountaineers.
A hidden sisterhood
Junko Tabei and Pan Duo’s names may never be as well known as Edmund Hillary’s. But they are just two of many women whose achievements reach far beyond the peaks. I’ve written about many of them in my research.
Polish mountaineer Wanda Rutkiewicz was the third woman and first from Europe to summit Everest. When asked in 1979 by high-altitude record holder Maurice Herzog why she had climbed Everest, Rutkiewicz responded that she did it for “women’s liberation”. By the late 1980s, such activism was harnessed by large sponsors such as Tata Steel, who recruited Indian mountaineer Bachendri Pal, the fifth woman to summit Everest, to lead a women’s adventure programme.
Corporate sponsorship has, however, eluded many leading women mountaineers. Despite all her outstanding achievements – including holding a world-record ten Everest summits by a woman – Lhakpa Sherpa struggled for years to achieve recognition and the status of her male contemporaries. In 2019, writer Megan Mayhew Bergman asked why she didn’t have sponsors.
More recently, however, Lhakpa Sherpa’s mountaineering career was documented in the 2023 Netflix documentary Mountain Queen, which raised her profile and has led to new sponsorship opportunities.
Film by Netflix.
There is also work being done to change the exclusion of women from mountaineering. In Nepal and around the world, charitable organisations have been initiated by women mountaineers to help their fellow women climbers, including Empowering Women Nepal and 3Sisters Adventure Trekking.
My research has shown how women and mountaineers from other marginalised backgrounds can use their successes to become role models for and drivers of social change.
Tabei, for example, was appalled at the degradation mountaineering had caused to Mount Everest, and spoke out about the need for responsible mountaineering and conservation. She led cleanup expeditions and researched the environmental impact of tourism and climate change on both mountain ecosystems and local communities.
Tabei’s efforts helped bring global attention to the need for conservation in high-altitude environments, inspiring climbers to take a more responsible approach to their expeditions.
In research about Asian women’s contribution to climbing Everest, I examined how the struggle for women’s emancipation, empowerment and recognition is a phenomenon that is shared globally. A new generation of Asian women mountaineers such as Dawa Yangzum Sherpa, the first woman to achieve IFMGA status, and Shailee Basnet are defying gender norms and achieving status as internationally recognised mountaineers and mountaineering guides.
Basnet became one of ten women to scale Everest in 2008 as part of Sagarmatha Expedition, which was established to draw attention to climate change and gender equality, and to reclaim the Nepali name for the mountain: Sagarmatha. The expedition brought together ten women from six different religious, caste and ethnic backgrounds. All ten reached the summit, making it the most successful women’s expedition to date.
Following this, in 2014 Basnet led the formation of the first all-women Seven Summits project to climb the highest peak on every continent. Importantly, she harnessed the team’s newfound profile to undertake a large-scale social justice programme, visiting hundreds of schools, leading hikes and giving talks across the Kathmandu Valley. Their mission was to improve educational awareness concerning opportunities for women and girls, and also to protect the environment.
Since the mid-1950s, a hidden sisterhood has forged a route for women to access high-altitude mountaineering. Their impact has reached far beyond the expeditions they led.
Women have used their status as mountaineers to empower and support other women to achieve social, political and environmental justice, and raise awareness about poverty, sex trafficking, religious and ethnic marginalisation, environmental degradation and the impact of mass tourism.
Junko Tabei was a pioneer whose tenacity helped a whole generation of women in mountaineering. By not recognising their achievements, we deny an important part of our cultural heritage – and miss the opportunity to learn and share the inspirational work that women continue to undertake.
Tabei’s memoir is not simply a remarkable mountaineering account, it is, in the words of Julie Rak, a feminist text that challenges what society has always thought it means to be heroic, brave and adventurous.
Tabei died in 2016 at the age of 77. On the 50th anniversary of one of her many achievements, it’s fitting to end with these words from her memoir:
My approach was one of not worrying about the loss of a job or missing out on a promotion. I felt it was important to live a life we would never regret.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Jenny Hall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
A group of New Zealand academics at Otago University have drawn up a “Declaration on Palestine” against genocide, apartheid and scholasticide of Palestinians by Israel that has illegally occupied their indigenous lands for more than seven decades.
The document, which had already drawn more than 300 signatures from staff, students and alumni by the weekend, will be formally adopted at a congress of the Otago Staff for Justice in Palestine (OSJP) group on Thursday.
“At a time when our universities, our public institutions and our political leaders are silent in the face of the daily horrors we are shown from illegally-occupied Palestine, this declaration is an act of solidarity with our Palestinian whānau,” declared Professor Richard Jackson from Te Ao O Rongomaraeroa — The National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies.
“It expresses the brutal truth of what is currently taking place in Palestine, as well as our commitment to international law and human rights, and our social responsibilities as academics.
“We hope the declaration will be an inspiration to others and a call to action at a moment when the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is accelerating at an alarming rate.”
Scholars and students at the university had expressed concern that they did not want to be teaching or learning about the Palestinian genocide in future courses on the history of the Palestinian people, Professor Jackson said.
Nor did they want to feel ashamed when they were asked what they did while the genocide was taking place.
‘Collective moral courage’ “Signing up to the declaration represents an act of individual and collective moral courage, and a public commitment to working to end the genocide.”
The declaration commits its signatories to an academic boycott as part of the wider Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanction (BDS) campaign “until such time as Palestinians enjoy freedom from genocide, apartheid and scholasticide”, they had national self-determination and full and complete enjoyment of human rights, as codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The declaration says that given the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled there is a “plausible” case that Israel has been committing genocide, and that all states that are signatory to the Genocide Convention must take all necessary measures to prevent acts of genocide, the signatories commit themselves to an academic boycott.
BDS is a campaign, begun in 2005, to promote economic, social and cultural boycotts of the Israeli government, Israeli companies and companies that support Israel, in an effort to end the occupation of Palestinian territories and win equal rights for Palestinian citizens within Israel.
It draws inspiration from South African anti-apartheid campaigns and the United States civil rights movement.
The full text of the declaration:
The Otago Declaration on the Situation in Palestine
We, the staff, students and graduates, being members of the University of Otago, make the following declaration.
We fully and completely recognise that: – The Palestinian people have a right under international law to national self-determination; – The Palestinians have the right to security and the full enjoyment of all human and social rights as laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
And furthermore that: – Israel is committing a genocide against the Palestinian nation, according to experts, official bodies, international lawyers and human rights organisations; – Israel operates a system of apartheid in the territories it controls, and denies the full expression and enjoyment of human rights to Palestinians, according to international courts, human rights organisations, legal and academic experts; – Israel is committing scholasticide, thereby denying Palestinians their right to education;
We recognise that: – Given the International Court of Justice has ruled that there is a plausible case that Israel has been committing genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza, that all states that are signatory to the Genocide Convention, which includes Aotearoa New Zealand, have a responsibility to take all necessary measures to prevent acts of genocide;
We also acknowledge that as members of a public institution with educational responsibilities: – We hold a legal and ethical responsibility to act as critic and conscience of society, both individually as members of the University and collectively as a social institution; – We have a responsibility to follow international law and norms and to act in an ethical manner in our personal and professional endeavours; – We hold an ethical responsibility to act in solidarity with oppressed and disadvantaged people, including those who struggle against settler colonial regimes or discriminatory apartheid systems and the harmful long-term effects of colonisation; – We owe a responsibility to fellow educators who are victimised by apartheid and scholasticide;
Therefore, we, the under-signed, do solemnly commit ourselves to: – Uphold the practices, standards and ethics of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign in terms of investment and procurement as called for by Palestinian civil society and international legal bodies; until such time as Palestinians enjoy freedom from genocide, apartheid and scholasticide, national self-determination and full and complete enjoyment of human rights, as codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. – Adopt as part of the BDS campaign an Academic Boycott, as called for by Palestinian civil society and international legal bodies; until such time as Palestinians enjoy freedom from genocide, apartheid and scholasticide, national self-determination and full and complete enjoyment of human rights, as codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Otago Declaration congress meeting will be held on Thursday, May 15, 2025, at 12 noon at the Museum Lawn, Dunedin.
Fresh, stringent security measures have been imposed in New Caledonia following aborted political talks last week and ahead of the first anniversary of the deadly riots that broke out on 13 May 2024, which resulted in 14 deaths and 2.2 billion euros (NZ$4.2 billion) in damages.
On Sunday, the French High Commission in Nouméa announced that from Monday, May 12, to Friday, May 15, all public marches and demonstrations will be banned in the Greater Nouméa Area.
Restrictions have also been imposed on the sale of firearms, ammunition, and takeaway alcoholic drinks.
The measures aim to “ensure public security”.
In the wake of the May 2024 civil unrest, a state of emergency and a curfew had been imposed and had since been gradually lifted.
The decision also comes as “confrontations” between law enforcement agencies and violent groups took place mid-last week, especially in the township of Dumbéa — on the outskirts of Nouméa — where there were attempts to erect fresh roadblocks, High Commissioner Jacques Billant said.
The clashes, including incidents of arson, stone-throwing and vehicles being set on fire, are reported to have involved a group of about 50 individuals and occurred near Médipôle, New Caledonia’s main hospital, and a shopping mall.
Clashes also occurred in other parts of New Caledonia, including outside the capital Nouméa.
It adds another reason for the measures is the “anniversary date of the beginning of the 2024 riots”.
Wrecked and burnt-out cars gathered after the May 2024 riots and dumped at Koutio-Koueta on Ducos island in Nouméa. Image: NC 1ère TV
Law and order stepped up French authorities have also announced that in view of the first anniversary of the start of the riots tomorrow, law and order reinforcements have been significantly increased in New Caledonia until further notice.
This includes a total of 2600 officers from the Gendarmerie, police, as well as reinforcements from special elite SWAT squads and units equipped with 16 Centaur armoured vehicles.
Drones are also included.
The aim is to enforce a “zero tolerance” policy against “urban violence” through a permanent deployment “night and day”, with a priority to stop any attempt to blockade roads, especially in Greater Nouméa, to preserve freedom of movement.
One particularly sensitive focus would be placed on the township of Saint-Louis in Mont-Dore often described as a pro-independence stronghold which was a hot spot and the scene of violent and deadly clashes at the height of the 2024 riots.
“We’ll be present wherever and whenever required. We are much stronger than we were in 2024,” High Commissioner Billant told local media during a joint inspection with French gendarmes commander General Nicolas Matthéos and Nouméa Public Prosecutor Yves Dupas.
Dupas said that over the past few months the bulk of criminal acts was regarded as “delinquency” — nothing that could be likened to a coordinated preparation for fresh public unrest similar to last year’s.
Billant said that, depending on how the situation evolves in the next few days, he could also rely on additional “potential reinforcements” from mainland France if needed.
French High Commissioner Jacques Billant, Public Prosecutor Yves Dupas and the Gendarmerie commander, General Nicolas Matthéos, confer last Wednesday . . . “We are much stronger than we were in 2024.” Image: Haut-Commissariat de la République en Nouvelle-Calédonie
New Zealand ANZAC war memorial set alight A New Zealand ANZAC war memorial in the small rural town of Boulouparis (west coast of the main island of Grande Terre) was found vandalised last Friday evening.
The monument, inaugurated just one year ago at last year’s ANZAC Day to commemorate the sacrifice of New Zealand soldiers during world wars in the 20th century, was set alight by unidentified people, police said.
Tyres were used to keep the fire burning.
An investigation into the circumstances of the incident is underway, the Nouméa Public Prosecutor’s office said, invoking charges of wilful damage.
Australia, New Zealand travel warnings In the neighbouring Pacific, two of New Caledonia’s main tourism source markets, Australia and New Zealand, are maintaining a high level or increased caution advisory.
The main identified cause is an “ongoing risk of civil unrest”.
In its latest travel advisory, the Australian brief says “demonstrations and protests may increase in the days leading up to and on days of national or commemorative significance, including the anniversary of the start of civil unrest on May 13.
“Avoid demonstrations and public gatherings. Demonstrations and protests may turn violent at short notice.”
Pro-France political leaders at a post-conclave media conference in Nouméa last Thursday . . . objected to the proposed “sovereignty with France”, a kind of independence in association with France. Image: RRB/RNZ Pacific
Inconclusive talks Last Thursday, May 8, French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls, who had managed to gather all political parties around the same table for negotiations on New Caledonia’s political future, finally left the French Pacific territory. He admitted no agreement could be found at this stage.
In the final stage of the talks, the “conclave” on May 5-7, he had put on the table a project for New Caledonia’s accession to a “sovereignty with France”, a kind of independence in association with France.
This option was not opposed by pro-independence groups, including the FLNKS (Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front).
French Overseas Territories Minister Manuel Valls . . . returned to Paris last week without a deal on New Caledonia’s political future. Image: Caledonia TV screenshot APR
But the pro-France movement, in support of New Caledonia remaining a part of France, said it could not approve this.
The main pillar of their argument remained that after three self-determination referendums held between 2018 and 2021, a majority of voters had rejected independence (even though the last referendum, in December 2021, was massively boycotted by the pro-independence camp because of the covid-19 pandemic).
The anti-independence block had repeatedly stated that they would not accept any suggestion that New Caledonia could endorse a status bringing it closer to independence.
New Caledonia’s pro-France MP at the French National Assembly, Nicolas Metzdorf, told local media at this stage, his camp was de facto in opposition to Valls, “but not with the pro-independence camp”.
Metzdorf said a number of issues could very well be settled by talking to the pro-independence camp.
Electoral roll issue sensitive This included the very sensitive issue of New Caledonia’s electoral roll, and conditions of eligibility at the next provincial elections.
🔴 Mesures administratives 🔴
À l’approche de la date d’anniversaire du début des émeutes de 2024, le Haut-commissaire, en lien avec les élus et responsables du monde économique, annonce les mesures suivante du 12 au 15 mai 2025 :
— Haut-commissariat en Nouvelle-Calédonie 🇫🇷 (@HC98800) May 10, 2025
Direct contacts with Macron Both Metzdorf and Backès also said during interviews with local media that in the midst of their “conclave” negotiations, they had had contacts as high as French President Emmanuel Macron, asking him whether he was aware of the “sovereignty with France” plan and if he endorsed it.
Another pro-France leader, Virginie Ruffenach (Le Rassemblement-Les Républicains), also confirmed she had similar exchanges, through her party Les Républicains, with French Minister of Home Affairs Bruno Retailleau, from the same right-wing party.
As Minister of Home Affairs, Retailleau would have to be involved later in the New Caledonian issue.
Divided reactions Since minister Valls’s departure, reactions were still flowing at the weekend from across New Caledonia’s political chessboard.
“We have to admit frankly that no agreement was struck”, Valls said last week during a media conference.
“Maybe the minds were not mature yet.”
But he said France would now appoint a “follow up committee” to keep working on the “positive points” already identified between all parties.
During numerous press conferences and interviews, anti-independence leaders have consistently maintained that the draft compromise put to them by Minister Valls during the latest round of negotiations last week, was not acceptable.
They said this was because it contained several elements of “independence-association”, including the transfer of key powers from Paris to Nouméa, a project of “dual citizenship” and possibly a seat at the United Nations.
“In proposing this solution, minister [Valls] was biased and blocked the negotiations. So he has prevented the advent of an agreement”, pro-France Les Loyalistes and Southern Province President leader Sonia Backès told public broadcaster NC la 1ère on Sunday.
“For us, an independence association was out of the question because the majority of [New] Caledonians voted three time against independence,” she said.
More provincial power plan Instead, the Le Rassemblement-LR and Les Loyalistes bloc were advocating a project that would provide more powers to each of the three provinces, including in terms of tax revenue collection.
The project, often described as a de facto partition, however, was not retained in the latest phases of the negotiations, because it contravened France’s constitutional principle of a united and indivisible nation.
“But no agreement does not mean chaos”, Backès said.
On the contrary, she believes that by not agreeing to the French minister’s deal plan, her camp had “averted disaster for New Caledonia”.
“Tomorrow, there will be another minister . . . and another project”, she said, implicitly betting on Valls’s departure.
On the pro-independence front, a moderate “UNI” (National Union For Independence) said a in a statement even though negotiations did not eventuate into a comprehensive agreement, the French State’s commitment and method had allowed to offer “clear and transparent terms of negotiations on New Caledonia’s institutional and political future”.
The main FLNKS group, mainly consisting of pro-independence Union Calédonienne (UC) party, also said that even though no agreement could be found as a result of the latest round of talks, the whole project could be regarded as “advances” and “one more step . . . not a failure” in New Caledonia’s decolonisation, as specified in the 1998 Nouméa Accord, FLNKS chief negotiator and UC party president Emmanuel Tjibaou said.
Deplored the empty outcome Other parties involved in the talks, including Eveil Océanien and Calédonie Ensemble, have deplored the empty outcome of talks last week.
They called it a “collective failure” and stressed that above all, reaching a consensual solution was the only way forward, and that the forthcoming elections and the preceding campaign could bear the risk of further radicalisation and potential violence.
In the economic and business sector, the conclave’s inconclusive outcome has brought more anxiety and uncertainty.
“What businesses need, now, is political stability, confidence. But without a political agreement that many of us were hoping for, the confidence and visibility is not there, there’s no investment”, New Caledonia’s MEDEF-NC (Business Leaders Union) vice-president Bertrand Courte told NC La Première.
As a result of the May 2024 riots, more than 600 businesses, mainly in Nouméa, were destroyed, causing the loss of more than 10,000 jobs.
Over the past 12 months, New Caledonia GDP (gross domestic product) has shrunk by an estimated 10 to 15 percent, according to the latest figures produced by New Caledonia statistical institute ISEE.
What next? Crucial provincial elections As no agreement was found, the next course of action for New Caledonia was to hold provincial elections no later than 30 November 2025, under the existing system, which still restricts the list of persons eligible to vote at those local elections.
The makeup of the electoral roll for local polls was the very issue that triggered the May 2024 riots, as the French Parliament, at the time, had endorsed a Constitutional amendment to push through opening the list.
At the time, the pro-independence camp argued the changes to eligibility conditions would eventually “dilute” their votes and make indigenous Kanaks a minority in their own country.
The Constitutional bill was abandoned after the May 2024 rots.
The sensitive issue remains part of the comprehensive pact that Valls had been working on for the past four months.
The provincial elections are crucial in that they also determine the proportional makeup of New Caledonia’s Congress and its government and president.
The provincial elections, initially scheduled to take place in May 2024, and later in December 2024, and finally no later than 30 November 2025, were already postponed twice.
Even if the provincial elections are held later this year (under the current “frozen” rules), the anti-independence camp has already announced it would contest its result.
According to the anti-independence camp, the current restrictions on New Caledonia’s electoral roll contradict democratic principles and have to be “unfrozen” and opened up to any citizen residing for more than 10 uninterrupted years.
The present electoral roll is “frozen”, which means it only allows citizens who have have been livingin New Caledonia before November 1998 to cast their vote at local elections.
The case could be brought to the French Constitutional Council, or even higher, to a European or international level, said pro-France politicians.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
President Donald Trump has begun eroding the United States presence in Antarctica by announcing deep funding cuts to his nation’s science and logistics on the icy continent.
More cuts are foreshadowed. If carried through, US science and overall presence in Antarctica will be seriously diminished – at a time when China is significantly expanding its presence there.
Since 1958, the US has been a leader in both Antarctic diplomacy and science. Shrinking its Antarctic presence will diminish US capacity to influence the region’s future.
Why the US matters in Antarctica
The US has historically focused its Antarctic influence in three key areas:
1. Keeping Antarctica free from military conflict
The US has built considerable Antarctic geopolitical influence since the late 1950s. Under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, it initiated (and later hosted) negotiations that led to the development of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty.
It was also key to establishing the fundamental principles of the treaty, such as using the Antarctic region only for peaceful purposes, and prohibiting military activities and nuclear weapons testing.
2. Governing Antarctica together
The US was influential in developing the international legal system that governs human activities in the Antarctic region.
In the 1970s, expanding unregulated fishing in the Southern Ocean led to serious concerns about the effects on krill-eating species – especially the recovery of severely depleted whale populations.
The US joined other Antarctic Treaty nations to champion the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR), signed in 1980. It prioritises conservation of Southern Ocean ecosystems and all species, over maximum fish harvesting.
The US also contributed to the 1991 Protocol on Environmental Protection. Among other measures it prohibits mining and designates Antarctica as “a natural reserve, devoted to peace and science”.
3. Scientific research and collaboration
The US operates three year‑round Antarctic research stations: Palmer, Amundsen-Scott and McMurdo.
McMurdo is Antarctica’s largest research station. Amundsen-Scott is located at the South Pole, the geographic centre of Antarctica, and the point at which all Antarctic territorial claims meet. The South Pole station is thus important symbolically and strategically, as well as for science.
The US has the largest number of Antarctic scientists of any nation in the continent.
US scientific work has been at the forefront of understanding Antarctica’s role in the global climate system, and how climate change will shape the future of the planet. It has also played a major role in Southern Ocean ecosystem and fisheries research.
This research has underpinned important policies. For example, US input into models to predict and manage sustainable krill yields has been pivotal in regulating the krill fishery, and ensuring it doesn’t harm penguin, seal and whale populations.
The US influence in Antarctica extends beyond the list above. For example, the US has a significant Antarctic-based space program. And US citizens make up most Antarctic tourists, and the US plays a significant role in regulating tourism there.
The full extent of the Trump administration’s cuts is still to play out. But clearly, if they proceed as signalled, the cuts will be a major blow not to just US interests in Antarctica, but those of many other countries.
The US has the best-resourced logistics network in Antarctica. Its air transport, shipping and scientific field support has traditionally been shared by other countries. New Zealand, for instance, is closely tied with the US in resupply of food and fuel, and uses US air and sea logistics for many operations to the Ross Sea region.
And joint research programs with the US will be affected by reduced funding in Antarctica directly, and elsewhere.
For example, reported cuts to the climate programs of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) may hamper satellite coverage of the Antarctic and Southern Ocean. This would affect Australian scientists collecting data on ocean temperature, sea-ice state and other metrics used in climate research and weather forecasting.
Worrying times ahead
China has signalled its intention to be a key geopolitical player in Antarctica and has greatly expanded its Antarctic presence in recent years.
Both China and Russia, are increasingly active in their opposition to environmental initiatives such as marine protected areas.
A smaller US presence creates greater opportunities for others to shape Antarctica’s geopolitics. This includes pressure to erode decades-long protection of the Antarctic environment, a push for more intensive fish and krill harvesting, and potentially reopening debate on mining in the region.
Lynda Goldsworthy and Tony Press co-authored the chapter Power at the Bottom of the World in the new book Antarctica and the Earth System.
Lynda Goldsworthy, research associate with IMAS, UTAS, undertakes occasional contract work with the Deep Sea Conservation, is a member of AFMA’s SouthMac advisory group ) and of CSIRO National Benefit Advisory Committee.
Tony Press receives funding from the Australia-Japan Foundation (Department of .Foreign Affairs and Trade)
A new Auckland-based kava business has found itself at the heart of a cultural debate, with critics raising concerns about appropriation, authenticity, and the future of kava as a deeply rooted Pacific tradition.
Vibes Kava, co-founded by Charles Byram and Derek Hillen, operates out of New Leaf Kombucha taproom in Grey Lynn.
The pair launched the business earlier this year, promoting it as a space for connection and community.
Byram, a Kiwi-American of Samoan descent, returned to Aotearoa after growing up in the United States. Hillen, originally from Canada, moved to New Zealand 10 years ago.
Both say they discovered kava during the covid-19 pandemic and credit it with helping them shift away from alcohol.
“We wanted to create something that brings people together in a healthier way,” the pair said.
However, their vision has been met with growing criticism, with people saying the business lacks cultural depth, misrepresents tradition, and risks commodifying a sacred practice.
Context and different perspectives Tensions escalated after Vibes Kava posted a promotional video on Instagram, describing their offering as “a modern take on a 3000-year-old tradition” and “a lifestyle shift, one shell at a time”.
On their website, Hillen is referred to as a “kava evangelist,” while videos feature Byram hosting casual kava circles and promoting fortnightly “kava socials.”
The kava they sell is bottled, with tag names referencing the effects of each different kava bottle — for example, “buzzy kava” and “chill kava”.
Their promotional content was later reposted on TikTok by a prominent Pacific influencer, prompting an influx of online input about the legitimacy of their business and the diversity of their kava circles.
The reposted video has since received more than 95,000 views, 1600 shares, and 11,000 interactions.
In the TikTok caption, the influencer questioned the ethical foundations of the business.
“I would like to know what type of ethics was put into the creation of this . . . who was consulted, and said it was okay to make a brand out of a tradition?”
Criticised the brand’s aesthetic Speaking to RNZ Pacific anonymously, the influencer criticised the brand’s aesthetic and messaging, describing it as “exploitative”.
“Their website and Instagram portray trendy, wellness-style branding rather than a proud celebration of authentic Pacific customs or values,” they said.
“I feel like co-owner Charles appears to use his Samoan heritage as a buffer against the backlash he’s received.
“Not to discredit his identity in any way; he is Samoan, and seems like a proud Samoan too.
“However, that should be reflected consistently in their branding. What’s currently shown on their website and Instagram is a mix of Fijian kava practice served in a Samoan tanoa. That to me is confusing and dilutes cultural authenticity.”
Fiji academic Dr Apo Aporosa said much of the misunderstanding stems from a narrow perception of kava as simply being a beverage.
“Most people who think they are using kava are not,” Aporosa said.
‘Detached from culture’ “What they’re consuming may contain Piper methysticum, but it’s detached from the cultural framework that defines what kava actually is.”
Aporosa said it is important to recognise kava as both a substance and a practice — one that involves ceremony, structure, and values.
“It is used to nurture vā, the relational space between people, and is traditionally accompanied by specific customs: woven mats, the tanoa bowl, coconut shell cups (bilo or ipu), and a shared sense of respect and order.”
He said that the commodification of kava, through flavoured drink extracts and Western “wellness” branding, is concerning, and that it distorts the plant’s original purpose.
“When people repackage kava without understanding or respecting the culture it comes from, it becomes cultural appropriation,” he said.
He added that it is not about restricting access to kava — it is about protecting its cultural integrity and honouring the knowledge Pacific communities have preserved for upwards of 2000 years.
Fijian students at the Victoria University of Wellington conduct a sevusevu (kava ceremony) to start off Fiji Language Week. Image: RNZ Pacific/Koroi Hawkins
‘We can’t just gatekeep — we need to guide’ Dr Edmond Fehoko, is a renowned Tongan academic and senior lecturer at Otago University, garnered international attention for his research on the experiences and perceptions of New Zealand-born Tongan men who participate in faikava.
He said these situations are layered.
“I see the cultural appreciation side of things, and I see the cultural appropriation side of things,” Fehoko said.
“It is one of the few practices we hold dearly to our heart, and that is somewhat indigenous to our Pacific people — it can’t be found anywhere else.
“Hence, it holds a sacred place in our society. But, we as a peoples, have actually not done a good enough job to raise awareness of the practice to other societies, and now it’s a race issue, that only Pacific people have the rights to this — and I don’t think that is the case anymore.”
He explained that it is part of a broader dynamic around kava’s globalisation — and that for many people, both Pacific and non-Pacific, kava is an “interesting and exciting space, where all types of people, and all genders, come in and feel safe”.
“Yes, that is moving away from the cultural, customary way of things. But, we need to find new ways, and create new opportunities, to further disseminate our knowledge.
‘Not the same today’ “Our kava practice is not the same today as it was 10, 20 years ago. Kava practices have evolved significantly across generations.
“There are over 200 kava bars in the United States . . . kava is one of the few traditions that is uniquely Pacific. But our understanding of it has to evolve too. We can’t just gatekeep — we need to guide,” he said.
Dr Edmond Fehoko . . . “Kava practices have evolved significantly across generations.” Image: RNZ Pacific/ Sara Vui-Talitu
He added that the issue of kava being commercialised by non-Pacific people cannot necessarily be criticised.
“It’s two-fold, and quite contradictory,” he said, adding that the criticism against these ventures often overlooks the parallel ways in which Pacific communities are also reshaping and profiting from the tradition.
“We argue that non-Pacific people are profiting off our culture, but the truth is, many of us are too,” he said.
“A minority have extensive knowledge of kava . . . and if others want to appreciate our culture, let them take it further with us, instead of the backlash.
“If these lads are enjoying a good time and have the same vibe . . . the only difference is the colour of their skin, and the language they are using, which has become the norm in our kava practices as well.
“But here, we have an opportunity to educate people on the importance of our practice. Let’s raise awareness. Kava is a practice we can use as a vehicle, or medium, to navigate these spaces.”
Vibes Kava co-founder Charles Byram . . . It’s tough to be this person and then get hurt online, without having a conversation with me. Nobody took the time to ask those questions.” Image: Brady Dyer/BradyDyer.com/RNZ Pacific
‘Getting judged for the colour of my skin’ “I completely understand the points that have been brought up,” Byram said in response to the criticism.
Tearing up, he said that was one of the most difficult things to swallow was backlash fixated on his cultural identity.
“I felt like I was getting judged for the colour of my skin, and for not understanding who I was or what I was trying to accomplish. If my skin was a bit darker, I might have been given some more grace.
“I was raised in a Samoan household. My grandfather is Samoan . . . my mum is Samoan. It’s tough to be this person and then get hurt online, without having a conversation with me. Nobody took the time to ask those questions,” he said.
The pair also pushed back on claims they are focused on profit.
“We went there to learn, to dive into the culture. We went to a lot of kava bars, interviewed farmers, just to understand the origin of kava, how it works within a community, and then how best to engage with, and showcase it,” Byram said.
“People have criticised that we are profiting — we’re making no money at this point. All the money we make from this kava has gone back to the farmers in Vanuatu.”
Representing a minority Hillen thinks those criticising them represent a minority.
“We have a lot of Pasifika customers that come here [and] they support us.
“They are ecstatic their culture is being promoted this way, and love what we are doing. The negative response from a minority part of the population was surprising to us.”
Critics had argued that the business showcased confusing blends of different cultural approaches.
Byram and Hillen said that it is up to other people to investigate and learn about the cultures, and that they are simply trying to acknowledge all of them.
Byram, however, added that the critics brought up some good points — and that this will be a catalyst for change within their business.
“Yesterday, we joined the Pacific Business Hub. We are [taking] steps to integrate more about the culture, community, and what we are trying to accomplish here.”
They also addressed their initial silence and comment moderation.
‘Cycle so self-perpetuating’ “I think the cycle was so self-perpetuating, so I was like . . . I need to make sure I respond with candor, concern, and active communication.
“So I deleted comments and put a pause on things, so we could have some space before the comments get out of hand.
“At the end of the day . . . this is about my connection with my culture and people more than anything, and I’m excited to grow from it. I’m learning, and I’m utilising this as a growth point. We’re just doing our best,” Byram said.
Hillen added: “You have to understand, this business is super new, so we’re still figuring out how best to do things, how to market and grow along with not only the community.
“What we really want to represent as people who care about, and believe in this.”
Byram said they want to acknowledge as many peoples as possible.
“We don’t want to create ceremony or steal anything from the culture. We really just want to celebrate it, and so again, we acknowledge the concern,” he added.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kewei Bian, Postdoctoral Associate, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Western University
During Game 1 of the Maple Leafs’ ongoing playoff series against the Florida Panthers, Leafs goaltender Anthony Stolarz was struck in the head by Panthers forward Sam Bennett.
Although Stolarz remained in the game for several minutes following the hit, he eventually skated to the bench, vomited and exited the ice. He was later stretchered out of the arena and taken to a hospital. Stolarz rejoined his teammates the following day, but will not play in Game 2 and isn’t expected to return for the series.
As researchers specializing in brain injury biomechanics, we use both experimental (laboratory-based) and computational methods to investigate the biomechanical mechanisms of concussion and explore effective prevention strategies.
Cases like this underscore the importance of concussion detection, management and prevention, particularly in high-impact sports like hockey where head injuries remain a significant risk.
Concussions and TBI in ice hockey
Traumatic brain injury (TBI), including concussion, is a growing public health concern worldwide. These injuries result from direct or indirect impacts to the head and can have both immediate and long-term health consequences.
From a biomechanical perspective, a concussion occurs when the head experiences an external impact. Since the skull is very stiff and the brain has inertia, the skull moves immediately while the brain initially remains in its original position. The brain eventually catching up with the skull’s motion.
In straight-line, or translational, impacts, the skull compresses the brain at the point of contact, creating localized positive pressure. At the same time, on the opposite side of the brain, the skull’s movement creates negative pressure.
In rotational impacts — when the head is spun — the skull’s movement causes shear forces within the brain tissue, causing it to deform. Since the brain consists of different regions responsible for different functions, this tissue deformation can affect specific brain functional regions, leading to the range of symptoms associated with concussion.
Understanding concussion symptoms
Concussions can impact a range of functions, including physical, cognitive, emotional and cognitive abilities.
Typical symptoms include headache, dizziness, trouble with balance, vomiting, blurry vision, confusion, sleep issues, memory problems and even loss of consciousness.
These symptoms are commonly seen in athletes, including those in ice hockey. Among NHL athletes, the most commonly reported post-concussion symptoms, in order of frequency, are headaches, dizziness, nausea, neck pain, low energy or fatigue, blurred vision, light sensitivity, nervousness or anxiety, irritability and vomiting.
A CityNews segment about how Stolarz’s head injury sparked a conversation around concussion awareness.
While the short-term effects typically include headache, vomiting and dizziness, the long-term effects may cause symptoms such long-term memory loss, depression and increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
Concussion assessment and management
Diagnosing concussions is challenging because they are not visible on traditional imaging techniques like CT scans. Instead, concussion assessments rely on clinical evaluation of symptoms.
The NHL has a concussion protocol in place that requires players to be immediately removed from the game for evaluation if one is suspected. The decision is based on observed physical, cognitive, emotional and sleep-related symptoms.
Other evaluation methods, such as the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), are also employed to assess TBIs and concussion. The GCS assesses the severity of TBI by evaluating eye opening, verbal response and motor response on a scale. The GCS score of 13-15 is classified as mild TBI, or concussion.
Reducing sport-related concussion rates requires a multi-faceted approach, including policy changes, stricter enforcement of rules and increased education and awareness.
Protective equipment also plays a key role. Helmets, in particular, are effective at protecting the head from injury. One study found wearing a helmet in ice hockey can reduce head linear acceleration, rotational velocity and the brain strain resulting from external impacts. Continuous improvements in ice hockey helmet design can further reduce injury risks.
To better understand and predict concussions, biomechanical researchers have developed injury metrics based on head kinematics and brain strain. Head kinematics-based injury metrics, such as peak linear acceleration and peak rotational acceleration, are derived from sensor-captured movement.
Ultimately, addressing concussions in ice hockey requires continued interdisciplinary research to better understand and address concussions in ice hockey. Protecting players from concussion is paramount to ensuring the game evolves as safely as it does competitively.
Haojie Mao receives funding from NSERC to investigate brain biomechanics and helmet safety.
Carter Goan, Emilie Anne Potts, Kewei Bian, and Sakib Ul Islam do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Political language is sometimes used to describe the orientations of the Vatican. When the late Pope Francis defended migrants, it was suggested that he was a “left-wing” pope. Today, people are wondering whether Pope Leo XIV will adopt a “progressive” path or, on the contrary, a philosophy on immigration different from that of Francis.
To answer this question, it is helpful to look at what successive popes have said about welcoming foreigners. We can see that they have defended not only migrants but also a right of immigration. Their approach has been universalist and it rejected all discrimination. Could it change?
Supporting the right of immigration
During the period between the second world war and the election of Leo XIV, the Vatican had six popes. The first, Pius XII (1939-1958), seems to have been more in favour of immigration than the United Nations. In 1948, when the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, emigration was enshrined as a fundamental right: “Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own.”
This wording does not mention the right to enter a country that is not one’s own, and Pius XII called this vagueness into question. In his 1952 Christmas message, he argued that it resulted in a situation in which “the natural right of every person not to be prevented from emigrating or immigrating is practically annulled, under the pretext of a falsely understood common good”.
Pius XII believed that immigration was a natural right, but linked it to poverty. He therefore asked governments to facilitate the migration of workers and their families to “regions where they could more easily find the food they needed”. He deplored the “mechanisation of minds” and called for a softening “in politics and economics, of the rigidity of the old framework of geographical boundaries”.
In the Apostolic Constitution on the Exiled Family, also in 1952, he wrote about why migration was essential for the Church.
Pope John XXIII (1958-1963) extended this argument in two encyclicals: Mater et magistra in 1961 and Pacem in terris in 1963. Whereas Pius XII had thought that the natural right to emigrate only applied to people in need, John XXIII included everyone: “among man’s personal rights we must include his right to enter a country in which he hopes to be able to provide more fittingly for himself and his dependents” (Pacem in terris 106).
A refusal of discrimination
For Paul VI (1963-1978), the Christian duty to serve migrant workers must be fulfilled without discrimination. In a 1965 encyclical, he maintained that “a special obligation binds us to make ourselves the neighbour of every person without exception and of actively helping him when he comes across our path, whether he be an old person abandoned by all, a foreign labourer unjustly looked down upon, a refugee… ” He also stated the requirement “to assist migrants and their families” (Gaudium et spes).
John Paul II (1978-2005) made numerous statements in favour of immigration. For example, his speech for World Migration Day in 1995 was devoted to undocumented migrants. He wrote: “The Church considers the problem of illegal migrants from the standpoint of Christ, who died to gather together the dispersed children of God (cf Jn 11:52), to rehabilitate the marginalized and to bring close those who are distant, in order to integrate all within a communion that is not based on ethnic, cultural or social membership.”
Benedict XVI (2005-2013) acknowledged the “feminization of migration” and the fact that”female emigration tends to become more and more autonomous. Women cross the border of their homeland alone in search of work in another country.“ (Message, 2006)
Pope Francis (2013-2025) embraced this globally inclusive tradition. His encyclical on “Fraternity and Social Friendship” calls for “recognizing that all people are our brothers and sisters, and seeking forms of social friendship that include everyone” (Fratelli tutti, 2020).
He insisted that “for a healthy relationship between love of one’s native land and a sound sense of belonging to our larger human family, it is helpful to keep in mind that global society is not the sum total of different countries, but rather the communion that exists among them” (Fratelli tutti, 2020).
On the question of migration, Francis maintained that “our response to the arrival of migrating persons can be summarized by four words: welcome, protect, promote and integrate” (Fratelli tutti, 2020).
Not a political preference
It appears that the pontificate of Leo XIV will reflect a similar commitment. However, this cannot be explained by political preference, or by personal and family history (the US-born pope is the grandson of immigrants and became a naturalized citizen of Peru). Popes do not defend immigrants because they are left-wing or progressive, but because they are at the head of an institution whose raison d’être is “to act in continuity with the mission of Christ”.
For Christians, welcoming foreigners is meant to be a fundamental duty, a condition of salvation. In the gospel, Matthew has Jesus say that this is one of the criteria for the Last Judgement. Those who welcome the stranger will receive the kingdom of God “as an inheritance”. Others will receive eternal punishment: “For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger, and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me” (Matthew, 25:42-43).
The stranger is at the heart of the New Testament revolution. Of course, the imperatives of hospitality are found in both the Old and New Testaments. It is a hospitality that is demanding (“You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt” [Leviticus 19:34]) and unconditional (“Show hospitality without complaining” [Peter 4:9]).
But the New Testament revolution endows Christianity with a universal aspiration: human beings, by virtue of their origin, all become brothers. Belonging to Christianity itself is reflected by faith in this universality: “We know that we love the children of God when we love God” [John 5:2]. With this message, Christianity blurs the distinction between strangers and relatives: “You are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of God’s household” [Ephesians 2:19].
According to the Letter to Diognetus, this is what makes Christians unique: “They reside each in his own country, but as dwelling strangers. Every foreign land is a homeland to them, and every homeland is a foreign land to them.”
In his very first homily, Leo XIV suggested that the Christian faith might seem “absurd, reserved for the weak or the less intelligent”. But the institution of which he declared himself a “faithful administrator” has been preaching “universal mercy” for over 2,000 years.
Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.
Israel is in a weak position and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s extremism knows no bounds. The only other way around an eventual regional war is the ousting of the Israeli prime minister.
US President Donald Trump has closed his line of communication with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, according to various reports citing officials.
This comes amid alleged growing pressure on Israel regarding Gaza and the abrupt halt to American operations against Ansarallah in Yemen. So, is this all an act or is the US finally pressuring Israel?
On May 1, news broke that President Donald Trump had suddenly ousted his national security advisor Mike Waltz. According to a Washington Post article on the issue, the ouster was in part a response to Waltz’s undermining of the President, for having engaged in intense coordination with Israeli PM Netanyahu regarding the issue of attacking Iran prior to the Israeli Premier’s visit to the Oval Office.
Some analysts, considering that Waltz has been pushing for a war on Iran, argued that his ouster was a signal that the Trump administration’s pro-diplomacy voices were pushing back against the hawks.
This shift also came at a time when Iran-US talks had stalled, largely thanks to a pressure campaign from the Israel Lobby, leading US think tanks and Israeli officials like Ron Dermer.
Then, seemingly out of nowhere, Trump publicly announced the end to a campaign designed to destroy/degrade Yemen’s Ansarallah-led government in Sana’a on May 6.
Israeli leadership shocked According to Israeli media, citing government sources, the leadership in Tel Aviv was shocked by the move to end operations against Yemen, essentially leaving the Israelis to deal with Ansarallah alone.
After this, more information began to leak, originating from the Israeli Hebrew-language media, claiming that the Trump administration was demanding Israel reach an agreement for aid to be delivered to Gaza, in addition to signing a ceasefire agreement.
The other major claim is that President Trump has grown so frustrated with Netanyahu that he has cut communication with him directly.
Although neither side has officially clarified details on the reported rift between the two sides, a few days ago the Israeli prime minister released a social media video claiming that he would act alone to defend Israel.
On Friday morning, another update came in that American Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth would be cancelling his planned visit to Tel Aviv.
Can Trump and Netanyahu remake the Middle East? Video: Palestine Chronicle
Is the US finally standing up to Israel? In order to assess this issue correctly, we have to place all of the above-mentioned developments into their proper context.
The issue must also be prefaced on the fact that every member of the Trump government is pro-Israeli to the hilt and has received significant backing from the Israel Lobby.
Mike Waltz was indeed fired and according to leaked AIPAC audio revealed by The Grayzone, he was somewhat groomed for a role in government by the pro-Israel Lobby for a long time.
Another revelation regarding Waltz, aside from him allegedly coordinating with Netanyahu behind Trump’s back and adding journalist Jeffrey Goldberg to a private Signal group chat, was that he was storing his chats on an Israeli-owned app.
Yet, Waltz was not booted out of the government like John Bolton was during Trump’s first term in office, he has instead been designated as UN ambassador to the United Nations.
The UN ambassador position was supposed to be handed to Elise Stefanik, a radically vocal supporter of Israel who helped lead the charge in cracking down on pro-Palestine free speech on university campuses. Stefanik’s nomination was withdrawn in order to maintain the Republican majority in the Congress.
If Trump was truly seeking to push back against the Israel Lobby’s push to collapse negotiations with Iran, then why did Trump signal around a week ago that new sanctions packages were on the way?
He announced on Friday that a third independent Chinese refiner would be hit with secondary sanctions for receiving Iranian oil.
Israeli demands in Trump’s rhetoric The sanctions, on top of the fact that his negotiating team have continuously attempted to add conditions the the talks, viewed in Tehran as non-starters, indicates that precisely what pro-Israel think tanks like WINEP and FDD have been demanding is working its way into not only the negotiating team, but coming out in Trump’s own rhetoric.
There is certainly an argument to make here, that there is a significant split within the pro-Israel Lobby in the US, which is now working its way into the Trump administration, yet it is important to note that the Trump campaign itself was bankrolled by Zionist billionaires and tech moguls.
Miriam Adelson, Israel’s richest billionaire, was his largest donor. Adelson also happens to own Israel Hayom, the most widely distributed newspaper in Israel that has historically been pro-Netanyahu, it is now also reporting on the Trump-Netanyahu split and feeding into the speculations.
As for the US operations against Yemen, the US has used the attack on Ansarallah as the perfect excuse to move a large number of military assets to the region.
This has included air defence systems to the Gulf States and most importantly to Israel.
After claiming back in March to have already “decimated” Ansarallah, the Trump administration spent way in excess of US$1 billion dollars (more accurately over US$2 billion) and understood that the only way forward was a ground operation.
Meanwhile, the US has also moved military assets to the Mediterranean and is directly involved in intensive reconnaissance over Lebanese airspace, attempting to collect information on Hezbollah.
An Iran attack imminent? While it is almost impossible to know whether the media theatrics regarding the reported Trump-Netanyahu split are entirely true, or if it is simply a good-cop bad-cop strategy, it appears that some kind of assault on Iran could be imminent.
Whether Benjamin Netanyahu is going to order an attack on Iran out of desperation or as part of a carefully choreographed plan, the US will certainly involve itself in any such assault on one level or another.
The Israeli prime minister has painted himself into a corner. In order to save his political coalition, he collapsed the Gaza ceasefire during March and managed to bring back his Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir to his coalition.
This enabled him to successfully take on his own Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar, in an ongoing purge of his opposition.
However, due to a lack of manpower and inability to launch any major ground operation against Gaza, without severely undermining Israeli security on other fronts, Netanyahu decided to adopt a strategy of starving the people of Gaza instead.
He now threatens a major ground offensive, yet it is hard to see what impact it would have beyond an accelerated mass murder of civilians.
The Israeli prime minister’s mistake was choosing the blocking of all aid into Gaza as the rightwing hill to die on, which has been deeply internalised by his extreme Religious Zionism coalition partners, who now threaten his government’s stability if any aid enters the besieged territory.
Netanyahu in a difficult position This has put Netanyahu in a very difficult position, as the European Union, UK and US are all fearing the backlash that mass famine will bring and are now pushing Tel Aviv to allow in some aid.
Amidst this, Netanyahu made another commitment to the Druze community that he would intervene on their behalf in Syria.
While Syria’s leadership are signaling their intent to normalise ties and according to a recent report by Yedioth Ahronoth, participated in “direct” negotiations with Israel regarding “security issues”, there is no current threat from Damascus.
However, if tensions escalate in Syria with the Druze minority in the south, failure to fulfill pledges could cause major issues with Israeli Druze, who perform crucial roles in the Israeli military.
Internally, Israel is deeply divided, economically under great pressure and the overall instability could quickly translate to a larger range of issues.
Then we have the Lebanon front, where Hezbollah sits poised to pounce on an opportunity to land a blow in order to expel Israel from their country and avenge the killing of its Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah.
Trigger a ‘doomsday option’? Meanwhile in Gaza, if Israel is going to try and starve everyone to death, this could easily trigger what can only be called the “doomsday option” from Hamas and other groups there. Nobody is about to sit around and watch their people starve to death.
As for Yemen’s Ansarallah, it is clear that there was no way without a massive ground offensive that the movement was going to stop firing missiles and drones at Israel.
What we have here is a situation in which Israel finds itself incapable of defeating any of its enemies, as all of them have now been radicalised due to the mass murder inflicted upon their populations.
In other words, Israel is not capable of victory on any front and needs a way out.
The leader of the opposition to Israel in the region is perceived to be Iran, as it is the most powerful, which is why a conflict with it is so desired. Yet, Tehran is incredibly powerful and the US is incapable of defeating it with conventional weapons, therefore, a full-scale war is the equivalent to committing regional suicide.
Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specialising in Palestine. He contributed this article toThe Palestine Chronicleand it is republished with permission.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kewei Bian, Postdoctoral Associate, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Western University
During Game 1 of the Maple Leafs’ ongoing playoff series against the Florida Panthers, Leafs goaltender Anthony Stolarz was struck in the head by Panthers forward Sam Bennett.
Although Stolarz remained in the game for several minutes following the hit, he eventually skated to the bench, vomited and exited the ice. He was later stretchered out of the arena and taken to a hospital. Stolarz rejoined his teammates the following day, but will not play in Game 2 and isn’t expected to return for the series.
As researchers specializing in brain injury biomechanics, we use both experimental (laboratory-based) and computational methods to investigate the biomechanical mechanisms of concussion and explore effective prevention strategies.
Cases like this underscore the importance of concussion detection, management and prevention, particularly in high-impact sports like hockey where head injuries remain a significant risk.
Concussions and TBI in ice hockey
Traumatic brain injury (TBI), including concussion, is a growing public health concern worldwide. These injuries result from direct or indirect impacts to the head and can have both immediate and long-term health consequences.
From a biomechanical perspective, a concussion occurs when the head experiences an external impact. Since the skull is very stiff and the brain has inertia, the skull moves immediately while the brain initially remains in its original position. The brain eventually catching up with the skull’s motion.
In straight-line, or translational, impacts, the skull compresses the brain at the point of contact, creating localized positive pressure. At the same time, on the opposite side of the brain, the skull’s movement creates negative pressure.
In rotational impacts — when the head is spun — the skull’s movement causes shear forces within the brain tissue, causing it to deform. Since the brain consists of different regions responsible for different functions, this tissue deformation can affect specific brain functional regions, leading to the range of symptoms associated with concussion.
Understanding concussion symptoms
Concussions can impact a range of functions, including physical, cognitive, emotional and cognitive abilities.
Typical symptoms include headache, dizziness, trouble with balance, vomiting, blurry vision, confusion, sleep issues, memory problems and even loss of consciousness.
These symptoms are commonly seen in athletes, including those in ice hockey. Among NHL athletes, the most commonly reported post-concussion symptoms, in order of frequency, are headaches, dizziness, nausea, neck pain, low energy or fatigue, blurred vision, light sensitivity, nervousness or anxiety, irritability and vomiting.
A CityNews segment about how Stolarz’s head injury sparked a conversation around concussion awareness.
While the short-term effects typically include headache, vomiting and dizziness, the long-term effects may cause symptoms such long-term memory loss, depression and increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
Concussion assessment and management
Diagnosing concussions is challenging because they are not visible on traditional imaging techniques like CT scans. Instead, concussion assessments rely on clinical evaluation of symptoms.
The NHL has a concussion protocol in place that requires players to be immediately removed from the game for evaluation if one is suspected. The decision is based on observed physical, cognitive, emotional and sleep-related symptoms.
Other evaluation methods, such as the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), are also employed to assess TBIs and concussion. The GCS assesses the severity of TBI by evaluating eye opening, verbal response and motor response on a scale. The GCS score of 13-15 is classified as mild TBI, or concussion.
Reducing sport-related concussion rates requires a multi-faceted approach, including policy changes, stricter enforcement of rules and increased education and awareness.
Protective equipment also plays a key role. Helmets, in particular, are effective at protecting the head from injury. One study found wearing a helmet in ice hockey can reduce head linear acceleration, rotational velocity and the brain strain resulting from external impacts. Continuous improvements in ice hockey helmet design can further reduce injury risks.
To better understand and predict concussions, biomechanical researchers have developed injury metrics based on head kinematics and brain strain. Head kinematics-based injury metrics, such as peak linear acceleration and peak rotational acceleration, are derived from sensor-captured movement.
Ultimately, addressing concussions in ice hockey requires continued interdisciplinary research to better understand and address concussions in ice hockey. Protecting players from concussion is paramount to ensuring the game evolves as safely as it does competitively.
Haojie Mao receives funding from NSERC to investigate brain biomechanics and helmet safety.
Carter Goan, Emilie Anne Potts, Kewei Bian, and Sakib Ul Islam do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ken G. Drouillard, Professor, Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research and Director of the School of the Environment, University of Windsor
A country’s population is affected by, and in turn affects, environmental and economic issues.(Shutterstock)
These two facets of population crises — explosions and declines — are occurring in different parts of the world, and have a global impact on the environment and on economies. Discussions about achieving economic and environmental sustainability must consider population changes, technology and the environment, given these concepts are closely interwoven.
Population explosions and declines are related to both environmental and economic instability; some countries make reactionary choices that trade off short-term domestic economic progress over the environment.
Like Malthus, Ehrlich was criticized for a crisis “that never happened” because human ingenuity, a byproduct of population, overcomes the worst fears of environmentalists. This counter-argument relies on technological advances making more efficient use of resources while lowering the environmental impacts.
Technological progress positively contributes to national economies over the long term. However, early adoption of green technology often relies on finance and government incentives that may imply short-term economic burdens. Yet when green technology is implemented and coupled to slowing population growth, it leads to decreasing national environmental footprints that pave a way towards joint environmental and economic sustainability.
The crisis of population declines
Declining populations cause inverted age pyramids with larger numbers of elderly people. These shifting demographics cause economic instability. They also constrain technological progress and social security.
The global population is predicted to peak between the mid-2060s to 2100, stabilizing at 10.2 billion from its present 8.2 billion.
In their book, Empty Planet, political scientist Darrell Bricker and political commentator John Ibbitson warn that zero population growth will happen even faster. They argue once a country decreases its fertility to below replacement (2.1 children per woman), the social reinforcements of increasing urbanization, costs of raising children and increased empowerment over family planning make it almost impossible to increase the birth rate.
For highly affluent countries, the per capita GDP is decreasing as the proportion of elderly in the population increases. Although this pattern doesn’t hold when less affluent countries are added, the figure demonstrates tangible economic impacts for countries grappling with aging populations.
A graph showing the percentage of elderly people in a country’s population, correlated with GDP and adjusted for inflation. (K. Drouillard), CC BY
Simultaneous explosions and declines
Affluent nations facing decline can react to economic instability in ways that counter global economic and environmental sustainability.
In the past, affluent nations were the drivers of green technology. However, economic instability from population declines can cause reluctance to invest, adopt and share green technology crucial for mitigating environmental damage at the global scale.
The issue is compounded by the fact that many countries overlook how their own decline in population growth contributes to economic instability. They instead focus on short-term solutions to their economic situation that may include unsustainable resource use.
Left unaddressed, the real issue of population decline becomes unresolved, allowing social anxieties against immigration and global trade to grow. This can exacerbate the issue halting technology sharing, slowing economic growth and increasing economic inequality and environmental damage.
Our research indicates that Canada and other affluent nations need to establish longer-term solutions to economic instabilities that mitigate environmental damage while promoting sustainable national and global economies.
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals offer pathways for economic, social and environmental sustainability. However, realizing these goals requires society to fully acknowledge the intertwined relationships between population growth, economy, environment and international technology-sharing in ways that transcend short-term national interests and reactionary policies.
Ken G. Drouillard receives funding from Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Canadian Water Agency, Environment and Climate Change Canada, St. Clair River Conservation Authority and North Shore of Lake Superior Remedial Action Plans.
Claudio N. Verani receives/has received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), Petroleum Research Fund (ACS-PRF), and the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
Marcelo Arbex has received funding from University of Windsor UW-SSHRC Explore.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Judy Illes, Professor of Neurology and Director of Neuroethics Canada; Vice Chair, Bioethics Council for Canada, University of British Columbia
Advances in neurotechnology, including AI applications, need to be regulated.(Shutterstock)
With Canada’s federal election behind us, we can now focus on a renewed commitment to our values and to economic growth. Both entail a commitment to the health and well-being of Canadians.
Brain health in particular has taken on new meanings over the past years, and has garnered substantial recent attention from major international organizations such as UNESCO and the World Health Organization.
Once centred on finding treatments for conditions that affect the nervous system such as movement disorders and epilepsy, neurotechnology is evolving.
The market in non-invasive and wearable devices is also growing. These technologies aim to address mental health disorders and improve quality of life for people suffering from conditions like chronic depression and post-traumatic stress disorders.
The finalized version of the UNESCO ethics recommendation for neurotechnology will be negotiated during the week of May 12. This will prepare the way for its formal adoption this fall by the 194 member states.
The recommendation carefully considers how neurotechnology can respect human dignity and the human rights of privacy, freedom of thought, data authenticity and protection, and justice. Other concerns pertaining to Indigeneity, marginalization, disability and vulnerability are touched upon.
If Canada adopts the recommendation, it could have far-reaching implications for Canadian citizens. It will influence — if not directly affect — federal funding and resource priorities and relevant government ministries. These include Health Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Canadian principles
In 2024, drawing upon the work of both Health Canada and the Working Party on Biotechnology, Nanotechnology and Converging Technologies of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a group of Canadian experts from medicine, law and public health delivered guidance for responsible innovation in neurotechnology.
These experts — including two of the authors of this article — strategically revised the original nine principles offered by the OECD into five tailored for Canada. These were: physical and personal safety and trust; societal deliberation and stewardship; global collaboration; strong oversight; and inclusivity and Indigeneity.
In April 2025, Indigenous and non-Indigenous members of the original UNESCO expert group published considerations to further safeguard against the risk of neurotechnology becoming an instrument of colonialism. These considerations include access to neurotechnologies for the relief of neurological conditions, as well as for their adoption in research, industry and daily life guided by the values and rights of Indigenous Peoples about brain health and wellness.
They included strategies for informed consent processes that align with Indigenous perspectives, and transparency about the use, storage and collection of neural data. Recommendations were also made for investments in digital infrastructure and literacy, and paths to intellectual property protections suitable to holistic and collective knowledge.
Trust in science
The behind-the-scenes efforts that led to the UNESCO ethics recommendation must come to the forefront.
In October 2024, a Bioethics Council for Canada/Le Conseil canadien de bioéthique (BCC-CCB) was legally constituted to provide independent advice to the Canadian government and public. Building on the lessons learned from 140 bioethics councils worldwide, Canada’s new BCC-CCB is poised to ensure that the public’s trust in science is central to the federal government’s mission.
Trust must be a renewed theme in matters pertaining to brain health and brain data, alongside other advances that will affect future generations. This trust will mitigate the noise and confusion surrounding us in a time of rapid technological progress, and foster leadership that an informed Canada can provide.
Judy Illes served as a Member of the Ad Hoc Expert Advisory Group on the Ethics of Neurotechnology Recommendation at UNESCO.
Jennifer Chandler is an external advisory board member for InBrain Neuroelectronics.
Vardit Ravitsky is President and CEO of The Hastings Center for Bioethics, a research center based in NY, USA.
Bartha Knoppers and Ross Upshur do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In the 1954 essay The Crisis in Education, German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt argued that crisis can act as an opportunity to revisit questions that have produced presumed and outdated answers.
Arendt was concerned with how the loss of tradition and authority in larger social and political spheres was reflected in the adoption of child-centred learning in public schooling in the United States.
She argued that, in education, educators must maintain their authority, which ultimately rested on their taking responsibility for the world and for children. Arendt urged people grappling with “why Johnny can’t read” to leave behind their pre-judged answers, and instead return to the very “essence of education.” For Arendt, this centred on how the human-constructed world can be passed on and “set right” with each new generation and across time.
The rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) presents a new crisis for the world and for education. Following Arendt, the crises that AI portends is a new vantage — or a rupture — to return to the question of what education is for.
Rupture of AI
Technologies have always mediated our understandings and practices of education: not only hardware or pencils, but writing itself can be understood as a technology. In our time, however, AI represents a qualitative rupture in contemporary practices and understandings of education.
As Yuval Noah Harari has argued, AI should be better understood as an agent than a tool. As an agent, it is designed and evolving as a self-learning entity able to make independent decisions; it alters past interdependencies of humans and technology.
For example, we try to tweak our practices of assessment in the face of new AI technologies like ChatGPT. A major concern is students “cheating” on assessments and unfairly or illegitimately advancing through school. This knee-jerk approach by educators to tackle the use of AI reflects a dominant, taken-for-granted answer about the purpose of education: that schooling is a mechanism to filter and sort young generations for a merit-based society.
Concern around how AI is affecting student assessment and potential student cheating reflects assumptions about school as a place that filters students into different groups. (Shutterstock)
Generally, there is a lot of agreement on the need to go in the direction that Daley recommends.
For example, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has most recently included “global competence” into its global standardized testing of students. The OECD acknowledges the importance of learning processes, as well as outcomes, and of critical thinking and values like individual responsibility.
Both of these more learner-centred visions for education, however, remain founded on these “filtering” uses of education. The IB’s very growth and sustainability and distinction lies in the positional advantage it affords its users. The OECD, more directly, reflects neoliberal, “human capital” conceptions of education that imply students are resources to be developed for the growth of a country’s economy.
I believe we must go further than (better) assessments of higher-order thinking and processes of learning designed to filter students more creatively and/or efficiently for work. We must nurture an educational orientation over an instrumental one.
High stakes
The stakes are high beyond education, because AI portends great disruptions to political economy, work and the organization of human societies. AI and automation might mean that human labour becomes an ever-lower percentage of overall labour and economic productivity. Will our political processes be largely determined by wealthy owners and partners of the AI industry, or by more democratic processes?
These possible transformations demand a reorientation of educational purpose to inform both school policies pertaining to uses of AI and data, and school curricula and teaching in classrooms.
Many teachers want to foster critical thinking and student participation over grade chasing in schools. This remains an important goal. But, more fundamentally, schools need to become educational spaces where the concept of cheating, or unfairly beating someone else, becomes senseless.
In this altered scenario, teachers and students would spend their time together in school examining, as Arendt said, “what the world is like,” how they are located within it and how it might be renewed and passed on across generations.
A shelter for thinking
Educators might take the opportunity to reconsider the function of schooling as educating children and youth to come to know, and participate in, a common world facing multiple crises. They are to be introduced to this world, in all its complexity, so that they develop understanding and care for the world and thereby choose to take responsibility for renewing and re-setting it, as adults.
In his view, education provides a place, a “unique human dwelling, where we can maintain and give shelter to a thinking and engagement with ‘something more’ that sustains the hope and affirmation of nevertheless living on with significance.” It offers “a place for passing time together, for sheltering a repertoire of worldly artefacts, common visions, interpretations and aspirations.”
“These,” he writes, “can be brought into meaningful configurations gathered from the meaningful patterns of the past to help us tend, mend and repair the sense and pull of the world that wears down from generation to generation.”
Paul Tarc receives funding from Social Science and Humanities Research Council Insight Grant Program and Faculty of Education, Western University
If there are few speakers left of a language, how does a community revive it? In our current era, 3,000 languages are at risk of extinction due to the pressures of colonization, globalization, forced cultural assimilation, environmental devastation and other factors.
According to Canada’s Commission for Indigenous Languages, “research shows that no Indigenous language in Canada is safe and that all are in varying stages of endangerment.”
Our society is also being shaped by the rapid rise of artificial intelligence. Can AI be used for the benefit of Indigenous language survival in Canada and elsewhere?
According to the World Economic Forum, most AI chatbots are trained on 100 of the world’s 7,000 languages. English is the main driver of most large language models.
This scenario leaves the bulk of the world’s languages in the dust. In the coming years, will AI contribute to language revitalization, or language oppression?
A language in a box
In a 2023 TEDx talk, Northern Cheyenne computer engineer Michael Running Wolf shared his design of a cedar box that looks both ancient and contemporary. He described the dragonfly-adorned device as a “cedar-enclosed, offline Edge AI that contains the inner workings of a minimal voice-based language curricula — in other words, a language in a box.”
He proposed that conversational AI technology, much like Amazon Alexa or Google Home, could help language learners improve their fluency.
Running Wolf is the technical director of the First Languages AI Reality initiative at the Québec Institute for Artificial Intelligence. The program propels Indigenous scholars and technologists towards creating innovative solutions regarding language loss.
A TEDx Talk by Michael Running Wolf on how AI can assist Indigenous langauge learning.
Voice-controlled tools trained via machine learning could serve as AI assistants for speakers who wish to hear unfamiliar sounds pronounced accurately, and practice their own pronunciation. This technology could establish a new means for facilitating oral transmission, which is crucial when there are few fluent speakers left.
At the heart of Running Wolf’s project is Indigenous data sovereignty, which ensures that Indigenous people retain control over their data.
A place in the digital world
Around the world in the Philippines, AI scholar and politician Anna Mae Yu Lamentillo is on a quest to support the Indigenous languages of her home country. She created NightOwlGPT, a new AI-powered translation app.
In an email to me, Lamentillo wrote:
“In the Philippines alone, we are working on nine languages, many of which are endangered. Our goal is to ensure that these languages — not just the dominant ones — have a place in the digital world.”
NightOwlGPT creator Anna Mae Yu Lamentillo. (Arwin Doloricon)
When it comes to the survival or extinction of languages, it is important to question the power behind AI tools. Who controls them, and who benefits from them?
When I asked about the democratization of AI, Lamentillo noted the need for inclusivity:
“AI’s rapid advancement could parallel historical patterns of colonization. If AI is truly a black swan event — a disruptive moment in history — then what happens when 99 per cent of languages are left behind? This is more than just a linguistic issue; it’s a serious matter of accessibility, representation and digital equity.
If we don’t change who is leading AI development, we risk creating a new form of colonization — one where only a small fraction of the world has the tools to thrive.”
Diversity of voices
Linguistics professor Emmanuel Ngué Um. (Emmanuel Ngué Um)
They are currently using Mozilla’s Common Voice platform to create open-source datasets containing thousands of words and audio recordings in 31 African languages.
The platform aims to make speech recognition and voice-based AI more inclusive by crowd-sourcing a massively multilingual speech corpus. But this process is not without significant challenges in Africa.
Ngué Um noted that building datasets for languages with many dialects is not straightforward. There may not be a standardized spelling or pronunciation that should be used by AI as the accepted norms for the language.
Because of postcolonial changes, many African languages do not have one unified or agreed-upon writing system. This issue can slow the creation of teaching tools, but many local efforts backed by UNESCO are underway to change this.
So, how do automatic speech recognition tools deal with dialectical diversity? And how do text-to-speech models handle competing writing systems?
As Ngué Um wrote in an email to me:
“AI has been instrumental in delivering services that applied linguists have promised but are slow to deliver. This is not due to a lack of will or means on the part of linguists, but rather, because of the linguistic reality in Africa.
Despite the impact of colonization and the imposition of a monolithic ideal on language reality, Africa reflects the plurality, fluidity and resourcefulness that drive human communication…If AI is informed by these intricacies at all phases of its implementation, it will adequately address the diversity of voices…in Africa.”
It is clear that AI engineers and computational linguists need to integrate thoughtful approaches that take into account unique circumstances of languages.
In the not-too-distant future, using AI tools to learn and communicate in under-resourced languages may become the norm. However, that shift depends on financial backing, accurate training data for machine learning, and community desire to embrace AI. Ultimately, data sovereignty and equitable access must be at the core of AI tools.
Anna Luisa Daigneault volunteers for Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages, a non-profit organization whose work is not connected to contents of this article.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Mark Yenson, King’s University College, Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Vice-President and Academic Dean (Interim), Western University
The 133 cardinal electors sequestered in the Sistine Chapel elected a new pope May 8. The choice was a surprise — Chicago-born Cardinal Robert Prevost, who has carried out most of his ministry in Peru, before being elevated to Vatican roles by Pope Francis.
When applied to individual Catholics, the terms “liberal” and “conservative” can mean very different things. One could be conservative in regard to liturgy and church practice while being strongly committed to anti-racism and environmentalism.
Or one might be considered a social conservative on issues such as marriage, sexuality and gender while holding clearly left-wing, social democratic views on the role of government.
Even if Catholics are comfortable self-identifying as liberal or conservative Catholics, we should not treat these terms as if their meaning were obvious — especially since even as purely political terms the meaning of “liberal” or “conservative” is contested.
Papacy as institution
Things become all the more complicated when we are talking about the pope, the supreme head of the Catholic Church. The papacy as an institution is conservative by definition.
The pope is considered the successor of the Apostle Peter, and his job description is precisely to maintain the unity and catholicity (“wholeness”) of the Church’s life, not only in space but through time — that is, to ensure continuity.
But because of this role to maintain the fullness of a tradition and the unity of the Church, the pope cannot be conservative (or liberal) in a political sense.
Instead of trying to impose political categories, it makes more sense to try to uncover the internal dynamics and motivations of a pope’s teaching and ministry. For example, Pope Francis’s 2015 encyclical letter,Laudato si’, was a landmark in Catholic teaching on ecology. Far from being a political manifesto, the letter presents a vision of the human being within creation, informed by the Bible, theological reflection and modern Catholic social teaching. Francis frequently references the social thought of his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, who himself affirmed that the Church “must defend not only earth, water and air as gifts of creation that belong to everyone.”
As the British theologian Anna Rowlands astutely notes, Catholic social teaching “functions as a social philosophy that never fully baptizes a liberal philosophy or sentiment. It remains locked in a complex dialogue … with liberal democracy.”
Another example that subverts the liberal/conservative dichotomy was the well-known response of Pope Francis to a journalist’s question about homosexuality in the priesthood: “Who am I to judge?” Francis did not overturn “conservative” teachings in sexual ethics.
But he did speak as a member of the Jesuit religious order and as a pastor, who knows that the general law must be applied in specific cases that introduce complexities and require nuanced concrete responses.
There was also a tacit appeal to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65), that an individual is bound to follow their conscience.
For his part, Benedict XVI (as then-Cardinal Ratzinger), in a 1991 address to American bishops in Dallas, alluded to “the classical principle of moral tradition that conscience is the highest norm which [the human person] is to follow even in opposition to authority.” According to this principle, while church teaching authority would inform conscience, “conscience … would retain the final word.”
There is no doubt that LGBTQ+ Catholics were able to hear something different in Francis’s language than they had heard in Benedict’s. However, both Benedict and Francis could appeal to shared principles, which were theological rather than political, and not reducible to liberal versus conservative categories.
In the American context at the moment, “conservative Catholic” in its most radical form blends theological traditionalism — devotion to the traditional Latin mass, emphasis on doctrinal orthodoxy and opposition to Francis’s reformist papacy — with support for the Republican party and MAGA movement.
As professor of moral philosophy Massimo Borghesi has argued, this radical conservative opposition to Francis has its genesis in the pro-capitalist Catholic neo-conservatism of the 1980s and 90s, and is a predominantly American phenomenon.
In addition, as writer and editor James T. Keane noted in a 2021 article in the Jesuit magazine America, the political polarizations that have seeped into the American Catholic Church should not set the map for the rest of the world, least of all the papacy. It is important to remember this fact as the first North American pope begins his pontificate.
Choice of name Leo
Cardinal Robert Prevost, who has become Pope Leo XIV, has given indications of being critical of the Trump administration on issues of peace and migration, very much in line with Francis.
His choice of the name Leo harkens back to Pope Leo XIII, the pope credited with initiating modern Catholic social teaching, and signals an emphasis on the Church’s advocacy for peace and justice. The new pope’s first Urbi et Orbi (“To the City and to the World”) address from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica signalled continuity with Francis — peace, dialogue, encounter, bridge-building.
And Pope Leo’s career as a missionary, bishop and Vatican cardinal outside of the U.S. means that his context is not confined to the polarizations of the U.S. Catholic Church and its bishops.
Will the new Pope, Leo XIV, be liberal or conservative? Pope Francis did not fit neatly into these categories: I hope Pope Leo won’t either.
Mark Yenson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
As scholars of global economic governance, we are sceptical of this claim. Here are our main reasons.
The G20 is insufficiently representative of the 193 member states of the United Nations plus the small number of non-member states.
It is a self-selected group of 19 countries and the European and African Unions.
It has no mandate to act or speak on behalf of the international community.
It has no transparent or formal mechanisms through which it can communicate with actors who do not participate in the G20 but have a stake in its deliberations and their outcomes.
The growing tensions in the world make it more urgent to improve the efficacy of the G20. Firstly, because there is growing evidence of the loss of interest in global cooperation. Secondly, because rich states are cutting their official development assistance and are failing to meet their commitments to help countries deal with loss and damage from climate impacts and make their economies more resilient to shocks.
And thirdly, because rich countries are also reluctant to discuss financing sustainable and inclusive development in forums like the upcoming Fourth Financing for Development Conference or the UN, where all states can participate. They prefer exclusive forums like the G20.
Here, after briefly describing the structure of the G20, we argue that its lack of representation is a major problem. We offer a solution and argue that, as chair of the G20 this year, South Africa is well placed to promote this solution.
What is the G20 and how does it function?
The G20 was established in the late 1990s in the wake of the East Asian financial crisis. Its members were invited by the US and Germany based on a proposal from the Canadian government. Initially only finance ministers and central bank governors of major advanced and emerging economies were involved. After the financial crisis of 2008-2009 it was upgraded to summit level with the same membership.
A summit is held annually, under the leadership of a rotating presidency.
The group accounts for 67% of the world’s population, 85% of global GDP, and 75% of global trade. The membership comprises 19 of the “weightiest” national economies plus the European Union and the African Union. The 19 national economies are the G7 (US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada), plus Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina. These countries are permanently “in”. The remaining 90% of countries in the world are excluded unless invited as “special guests” on an ad hoc basis.
Representatives of a select group of international organisations including the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organization also participate, together with those from some UN entities.
The G20’s work is managed by a troika consisting of the current president with the assistance of the past president and the incoming president. In 2025 this troika consists of South Africa as the current chair, Brazil as the past chair and the US, which will become the G20 president in 2026. The G20 has no permanent secretariat.
The consistency in G20 membership has proven to be an advantage because it helps foster a sense of familiarity, understanding and trust at the technical level among the permanent members. This is helpful in times of crisis and in dealing with complex problems.
But its exclusivity and informal status have limited its ability to address major challenges such as the global response to the economic and health consequences of the COVID pandemic. This is because an effective response required agreement and coordinated action by all states and not just those in the G20.
The Financial Stability Board was established under the umbrella of the G20 in 2009. Its job is to coordinate international financial regulatory standard-setting, monitor the global financial system for signs of stress, and to make recommendations that can help avert potential financial crises.
It is also an exclusive club. Its membership consists of the financial regulatory authorities in the G20 countries plus those in a few other countries that are considered financially systemically important.
However, unlike the G20, the Financial Stability Board has made a systematic effort to learn the views of non-members. It has established six Regional Consultative Groups, one each for the Americas, Asia, Commonwealth of Independent States, Europe, Middle East and North Africa, and sub-Saharan Africa.
The objective is to expand and formalise the Financial Stability Board’s outreach activities beyond its membership and to better reflect the global character of the financial system.
The regional consultative groups operate in a framework which promotes compliance within each region with the Financial Stability Board’s policy initiatives. The framework enables the group members to share among themselves and with the board their views on common problems and solutions and on the issues on the board’s agenda.
Importantly, each regional group is co-chaired by an official from a Financial Stability Board member and an official from a non-member institution.
Applying this model to the G20 would allow the current G20 membership to continue, while obliging the members to establish a consultation process with regional neighbours. This would create a limited form of representation for all the world’s states.
It would also empower the smaller and weaker members of the G20 because it would enable them to speak with more confidence and credibility about the challenges facing their region.
This arrangement would also establish a limited form of G20 accountability towards the international community.
Next steps
As chair of the G20 chair for 2025, South Africa is well placed to promote this solution to the group’s representation problem. It should work with the African Union to establish an African G20 regional consultative group. South Africa and the African Union could invite each African regional organisation to select one representative to serve on the initial consultative group.
South Africa could also commit to convey the outcomes of G20 regional consultative group meetings to the G20.
South Africa can then use this example to demonstrate to the G20 the value of having a G20 regional consultative group and advocate that other regions should adopt the same approach.
Danny Bradlow, in addition to his position at the University of Pretoria, is the Senior G20 Advisor, South African institute of International Affairs.
Robert Wade does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The Aotearoa Philippines Solidarity national assembly has condemned the National Party-led Coalition government in New Zealand over signing a “deplorable” visiting forces agreement with the Philippine government
“Given the Armed Forces of the Philippines’ appalling human rights record and continuing attacks on activists in the Philippines, it is deplorable for the New Zealand government to even consider forging such an agreement,” the APS said in a statement today.
Activists from Filipino communities and concerned New Zealanders gathered in Auckland yesterday to discuss the current human rights crisis in the Philippines and resolved to organise solidarity actions in Aotearoa New Zealand.
The visiting forces agreement (VFA), signed in Manila last month, allows closer military relations between the two countries, including granting allowing each other’s militaries to enter the country to participate in joint exercises.
“By entering into a VFA with the Philippines, the coalition government is being complicit in crimes against humanity being perpetrated by the AFP and the regime of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. against the Filipino people,” the statement said.
Having such an agreement in place with the Philippine military tarnished New Zealand’s global reputation of respecting human rights and having an independent foreign policy.
“The APS reiterates its call to the New Zealand government to junk the VFA with the Philippines and to end all ties with the Philippine military,” the statement said.
Mid-term general election tomorrow “Assembly participants also discussed the mid-term general election campaign in the Philippines “and the violence borne out of it”.
“Elections are typically a bloody affair in the country, but the vote set to occur on Monday [May 12] is especially volatile given the high stakes,” the statement said.
“The country’s two dominant political factions, the Marcos and Duterte camps, are vying for control of the country’s political arena and there is no telling how far they would go to obtain power.”
The statement said there were reports of campaigners going missing, being extrajudicially killed and also being detained without due process.
“We expect electoral fraud and violence will again be committed by the biggest political dynasties especially against the progressive candidates representing the most marginalised sectors.
“The Philippine government must do everything it can to avoid further bloodshed and violent skirmishes that aim to preserve power for the competing political dynasties.”
The statement said that the APS called for the immediate and unconditional freedom for Bayan Muna campaigner Pauline Joy Panjawan.
“Her abduction, torture and continuing detention on trumped up charges speak volumes about the reality of the ongoing human rights crisis in the Philippines.
With yesterday’sassembly, the APS renewed its commitment to raise awareness over the human rights crisis in the Philippines and to do everything it could to raise solidarity with the Filipino people struggling to “achieve a truly just and democratic society”.
.jpg){kind=link}
