Source: The Conversation – USA – By Karen Jacobsen, Henry J. Leir Chair in Global Migration, Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, Tufts University
Haitian students use mobile phones to record an exercise during an English class in Springfield, Ohio, on Sept. 13, 2024. Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images
Former President Donald Trump and his running mate, U.S. Sen. JD Vance, have criticized the Biden administration’s decision to allow Haitian nationals who are in the U.S. to apply for permission to stay under a legal classification called Temporary Protected Status. Here is what this designation means and how it’s made:
TPS permits foreign nationals who are already in the United States – even if they did not enter the country through an official or legal means – to remain for six, 12 or 18 months at a time if the situation in their home country is deemed too dangerous for them to return. Threats that prompt TPS designations include ongoing armed conflict, natural disasters, epidemics and other extraordinary and temporary conditions.
The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security designates a foreign country for TPS when conditions there meet requirements spelled out in federal law. Once the secretary determines that the foreign country is safe for its nationals to return, their protected status expires and people who have been granted it are expected to return to their home country.
Congress created TPS as part of the Immigration Act of 1990. Since then, administrations have used it to protect thousands of people from dozens of countries. The first nations to be designated, in March 1991, were Kuwait, Lebanon and Liberia.
As of March 2024, there were 863,880 people from 16 countries under Temporary Protected Status in the U.S. Another 486,418 people had initial or renewal applications pending. An estimated 316,000 people may also be eligible under two new extensions since that date.
TPS beneficiaries may not be detained by federal officials over their immigration status or deported from the United States. They can obtain work permits and apply for authorization to travel outside the U.S. and return to it.
People who receive TPS don’t automatically become legal permanent residents. But they can petition for an adjustment of their immigration status, such as applying for permanent residency, a student visa or asylum. Applying for a change of immigration status does not necessarily mean their application will be approved.
Humanitarian measures
TPS is not the only tool administrations can use to protect people from countries facing disaster or conflict.
For example, a Haitian person currently living in the U.S. is eligible for TPS under a designation that lasts through Feb. 3, 2026. In contrast, a Haitian who travels through Mexico and applies for entry to the U.S. at the border is not likely to be admitted.
However, there is a third possibility for Haitians, known as parole. The federal government can give certain groups permission to enter or remain in the U.S. if it finds “urgent humanitarian or significant public benefit reasons” for doing so.
People who enter through parole programs must have an approved financial supporter in the U.S., undergo a robust security vetting and meet other eligibility criteria. They typically can stay for one to two years, and may apply for authorization to work.
One current parole program is for people from Latin American countries that are TPS designates. The U.S. government can grant advance permission to enter the U.S. to up to 30,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans each month. People fleeing these countries – all of which have been designated for Temporary Protected Status – can seek authorization to travel from their homes to the U.S. for urgent humanitarian reasons, and then stay for a temporary period of parole for up to two years.
Immigrant rights groups rally at the U.S. Capitol following a federal court ruling that threatened the legal standing of thousands with Temporary Protected Status, Sept. 15, 2020. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
I’ve studied global migration and asylum policy for 25 years. I see both TPS and parole as legal and carefully considered ways to support people from countries experiencing wrenching conflict, disorder and disaster who are seeking safety in the U.S. Doing away with these programs, as Trump sought to do during his term in office, would make it extremely difficult for people in great danger to escape.
Karen Jacobsen 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 – Africa – By Jacob Lewis, Assistant Professor, School of Politics, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Washington State University
Nigerians took to the streets in August 2024 to voice their frustration at a series of government policies. These policies had been ostensibly designed to make Nigeria more attractive for outside investment.
Many Nigerians rely on government subsidies to make ends meet. The economic policy changes have resulted in a big rise in inflation, adding to the challenges for ordinary Nigerians.
As economic conditions have worsened, the prominence of government corruption has risen. Protests and riots have exploded in the streets across the country in the form of #EndBadGovernance protests that call out government graft and poor governance.
Does government corruption drive protests and social movements? While some scholars have argued that it does, others have argued that corruption is often a catch-all term for frustration over broad economic and democratic grievances. Others have noted that in some cases, increased perceptions of corruption correlate with less protest.
These contradictory results reveal an important puzzle: why does corruption only sometimes seem to generate mass uprisings? If, for example, corruption is enough to generate citizen uprisings, then why do we only rarely see unified anti-police protests in countries like Nigeria, where police corruption is rampant?
I argue that one key to this puzzle is the way different types of corruption are associated with increased or decreased protest mobilisation.
I am a political scientist whose work focuses in part on African social movements and issues of corruption. I approach this by merging large statistical models with political psychological approaches.
I conducted research in 2021 on different types of corruption shaping protests. I found that elite corruption had the power to mobilise protest. But that other forms of corruption – such as corruption in the police force – were less likely to lead people to take protest action.
The implication of my findings is that anti-corruption protests are an imperfect signal for understanding everyday corruption experiences. The fact that people aren’t protesting doesn’t mean there’s nothing to complain about.
Why elite corruption sparks protest
To explain why corruption sometimes corresponds with protest movements and other times does not, I think it is useful to consider two types of corruption. Elite corruption refers to forms of graft and venality performed by political elites who seek to either enrich themselves or reshape the political system to their advantage.
Police corruption refers to acts of self-enrichment or abuse perpetrated by police officers, often during traffic stops or in the process of police procedure.
My findings show that citizens are generally more likely to mobilise in response to elite corruption than police corruption. Why?
First, elite corruption tends to be intertwined with macro-level economic crises and scandals.
Second, elite corruption provides a universal point of focus for protesters across an entire nation, rather than the highly localised experiences of police and bureaucratic graft.
Finally, anger over police corruption may be suppressed by the safety concerns associated with demonstrating against armed security forces.
I tested this argument using two methods. First, drawing from a 2017 household survey experiment that I conducted in five Nigerian states, I examined whether exposure to vignettes describing either elite corruption or police corruption shaped a respondent’s self-reported willingness to participate in a protest.
The elite corruption vignettes included self-dealing and system-changing forms of corruption perpetrated by political elites. The police corruption vignette focused on the solicitation of bribes and unfair detention of citizens by the police. I then asked respondents:
Many Nigerians join groups that engage in protests, strikes, or demonstrations. Now I would like to ask you about how willing you would be to join a protest or demonstration.
Respondents were able to select a response between 1 (“not at all willing”) to 5 (“very willing / I already do”).
I found that individuals who received the elite corruption vignette were statistically more likely to state that they would join a protest or demonstration.
I then expanded this analysis via a statistical regression that measured whether perceptions of elite and police corruption (sourced from the Afrobarometer dataset) correlated with different levels of observed conflict (sourced from the Social Conflict Analysis Database).
I thought it was best to test whether the results of my survey experiment, which capture a moment in time, reflected a broader reality, or whether it was just a fluke.
Using the Afrobarometer data, I identified regions where citizens expressed particularly high or low perceptions of elite and police corruption. Then, using the social conflict analysis data, I measured the number of protest events in those regions.
I found that while elite corruption perceptions were positively correlated with an increased number of observed protest events, police corruption perceptions were not.
Together, these methods suggest that it is not enough to argue that citizens will rise up against corrupt governments. Rather, the ways in which a government is corrupt matter.
Turning back to the August 2024 protests, one might ask: why now? Why did Nigerians spend ten days protesting against corruption when there had been rampant corruption for so long?
My research suggests that the nature of the corruption claims – specifically, anger over large-scale government graft – is what counts.
Recent developments seem to support this.
What’s changed
First, corruption perceptions have spiked. In 2021, Afrobarometer polled 1,600 Nigerians, asking them whether levels of corruption had risen, stayed the same, or decreased in the past year. At the time, just over 35% stated that corruption had “increased a lot”. One year later, that number had nearly doubled, jumping to just under 65%.
This drastic increase in perceived corruption reveals a broader lack of faith in the government and concern over the future of the country.
Second, tipping points help with mobilisation. The protests in early August arose as the financial crisis crystallised and as a series of economic policies brought into sharp relief the economic disparities between the rich and the poor.
The removal of fuel subsidies is a particularly touchy subject in Nigerian politics. In 2012, Nigerians took to the streets over the same issue, leading to a week-long “occupation” of major Nigerian cities by protesters.
Implications
Protests are a highly visible signal that citizens are frustrated; however, it is easy to overlook the possibility that citizens may be widely upset about a broad array of issues, but only willing to speak out in response to some of those issues.
There is a knock-on consequence to this; namely, that police corruption has a more direct effect on the lives of Nigerians than elite corruption, but often goes unaddressed.
Jacob Lewis receives funding from the Department of Defense, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Carnegie Corporation of New York. He consults with the Anti-Defamation League on survey-based research.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Dennis Rodgers, Research Professor, Anthropology and Sociology, Graduate Institute – Institut de hautes études internationales et du développement (IHEID)
Among the project’s various activities, researchers collected 31 gang member life histories from 23 countries around the world, to help us better understand the motivations, drivers, and events that can shape gang members’ choices and trajectories. Taken together, the stories offer a panorama of triumph and defeat, of ruin and redemption, of discrimination and emancipation, and highlight the frequent persistence of human beings, even in the most difficult of circumstances. The 31 stories will be published in different forms – including as an Open Access edited volume with Bloomsbury Press, and in two journal special issues – over the coming years. In the meantime, this special series for The Conversation offers a preliminary selection, each illustrating a key issue that has emerged from GANGS project research.
Kieran Mitton tells us about the life of Gaz, a former Sierra Leonean gang member who became a poet and then a farmer. His remarkable trajectory is a testament to the way that gangster lives are by no means deterministic and that opportunities to leave the gang and change can present themselves in all sorts of ways at different moments in time.
Ellen Van Damme offers us a portrait of Jennifer, the first female Honduran gang leader. Her story illustrates the frequently gendered nature of gangs, and the way that machismo and patriarchy constrain Jennifer’s life, even as a gang leader, highlighting the frequently fundamentally masculine essence of street gangs.
Sally Atkinson-Sheppard worked closely with Sharif, who 10 years ago was her research assistant, to write the story of his journey from gang member in war-torn Bangladesh to human rights worker and advocate for street children’s rights today. His story is one of overcoming exceptional adversity and drawing on his past experiences to do good in the world today.
Steffen Jensen recounts the story of Marwan, whose life is in many ways a reflection of contemporary South African history, as he has had to navigate the violence of apartheid, prison, the Cape Flat drug wars, and more. Central to his narrative are the binary notions of damnation and redemption, with gangs frequently the sources of both at different points in his life, highlighting the different ways in which they can influence life trajectories.
Alistair Fraser and Angela Bartie present a portrait of 70-year-old Danny, a retired Glaswegian businessman who was a gang member in his youth, and that is based, uniquely, on interviews carried out over a 50-year period, in 1969, 2011, and 2022. They trace his changing self-reflexion about his past, highlighting how this mirrors the broader transformation of Glasgow from a “Mean City” in the 1950s to a thriving metropolis that was Europe’s Capital of Culture in 1990.
From a very young age, Soraya was involved in drug trafficking in the barrio Luis Fanor Hernández, a poor neighbourhood in Managua, the capital of Nicaragua, where Dennis Rodgers has worked for over 20 years. Known locally as “la Reina del Sur” (“the Queen of the South”), her story shows how rather than being empowering, her participation in the drugs trade reinforced forms of macho violence and patriarchal dynamics of domination.
Dennis Rodgers received an Advanced Grant (no. 787935) from the European Research Council (https://erc.europa.eu) for a project on “Gangs, Gangsters, and Ganglands: Towards a Global Comparative Ethnography” (GANGS).
The pied kingfisher helps the Nuer to find parts of the river where there’s an abundance of fish.Henrik Karlsson/Getty Images
The Nuer are a large pastoralist community living in western Ethiopia and South Sudan in east Africa. They rely on livestock keeping and have special beliefs and customs about how to live with nature. These are passed down from parents to children through the telling of stories.
Uncommonly for east African pastoralists, the Nuer live in an expansive, low-lying floodplain. This Gambella region is shaped by the convergence of several rivers originating in the Ethiopian highlands. Its wetlands and lush greenery offer a unique habitat that supports both the Nuer and a wide variety of birds and other wildlife. The people have a centuries-old cultural connection with the local biodiversity.
Our collaborative study involved Ethiopian and European scientists from diverse fields (such as ornithology, ethno-ornithology, biodiversity and nature conservation). We conducted interviews and 15 group discussions with Nuer people to understand their interaction with and knowledge of birds. The study included two districts and 400 households. We found a significant and seldom studied relationship with birds, which serve a range of purposes in Nuer life.
Our study not only highlights the deep spiritual and cultural ties between the Nuer people and the avian world. It also underscores the importance of incorporating traditional ecological knowledge into contemporary conservation efforts.
The Nuer’s relationship to birds can be a valuable model for sustainable human-wildlife interactions. It can contribute to the conservation of bird diversity and promote a more harmonious coexistence between humans and nature.
The role of birds in Nuer life
Ethiopia, known for its rich biodiversity, is home to 821 bird species and over 80 indigenous ethnic groups. Among these, the Nuer community stands out for its unique admiration of birds, viewing them as sacred beings.
The Nuer use three interchangeable names for birds: gaatkuoth (sacred children of God), kuoth (bearers of spirit), and diit (symbols of human twins). These terms reflect spiritual beliefs and also influence cultural practices, such as naming twins after birds. This Nuer tradition connects the prolific nature of birds to human fertility.
In our study, participants recognised 71 bird species as having unique cultural roles. The birds that live near Nuer villages have seven distinct uses. Ten species are used as bushmeat. Five are for traditional medicine. Eight are fish indicators – by meticulously observing species like the African fish eagle, African pygmy kingfisher, pied kingfisher or malachite kingfisher, people can identify areas with high fish populations.
Seven birds serve as omens – they signal potential dangers like the presence of wild animals. Three are used to create protective amulets. Three are used to indicate the change of seasons – for instance the return of migratory western yellow wagtails is a reliable sign that the sunny, dry season will be replacing the rainy, wet season. And 45 are hailed for their aesthetic beauty, often linked with a sense of place. The vibrant plumage, melodious songs and elegant flight patterns of birds like the black-crowned crane, blue-naped mousebird and purple heron create a spectacle that significantly enhances Nuer life.
This intricate knowledge of birds is communal: over 90% of participants agreed on the uses of these bird species.
Indigenous knowledge and sustainability
One of the most striking things about the Nuer community is the sustainable practice embedded within their traditional systems. When birds are used as amulets, for example, only small, non-invasive parts of the bird, like feathers, are utilised. These are fashioned into necklaces or bracelets believed to offer protection from dangers like diseases. The birds are not killed or significantly harmed, which preserves their populations.
A Nuer village. fabio lamanna/Getty
There are strict limits on when and how birds can be used in Nuer society. The use of birds as bushmeat or for making traditional medicine is carefully controlled by elders and within family structures. Hunting is typically allowed only during severe food shortages. It’s often restricted to those in dire need, such as impoverished households. Families with a history of twins, who hold birds in special reverence, are not allowed to hunt them.
These cultural practices help prevent overexploitation of bird species, conserving them for future generations. They ensure that the use of natural resources remains sustainable.
It’s important to raise awareness about the conservation of birds, which are used for various purposes across Africa. Traditional medicine, bushmeat and the making of amulets has a direct impact on bird populations.
Nuer traditions balance human needs with the preservation of bird life. Our study therefore offers a compelling case and model for the conservation of avian and indigenous cultural diversity in Africa.
Why this matters
It is, however, essential to acknowledge that the Nuer’s cultural practices are not immune to the pressures of modern society. As globalisation and development continue to encroach on traditional lands, the Nuer people will face increasing challenges in maintaining their sustainable practices.
Threats such as habitat loss, climate change and illegal wildlife trading could jeopardise bird populations. In recent decades, the expansion of large-scale agriculture in the Gambella region has emerged as a driver of habitat loss and wildlife decline.
This makes the Nuer people’s traditional conservation practices even more relevant to future generations. By recognising and valuing their knowledge and practices, we can learn valuable lessons for broader conservation efforts.
Indigenous territories, despite their relatively small size, often harbour extraordinary biodiversity. Recognising this, the United Nations’ Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework places indigenous-occupied areas among conservation priority areas at the forefront of biodiversity preservation strategies.
It is crucial to help the Nuer community adapt to changing circumstances while preserving their cultural heritage and ensuring the sustainability of bird biodiversity.
Changkuoth Puok Diet, a lecturer at Gambella University in Ethiopia, contributed to this article.
Abebayehu Aticho works for both Jimma University and the Threatened Species Conservation Organisation (a small local NGO). He got funding for this study from the International Crane Foundation and Jimma University.
Andrew Gosler has received grant funding in the past from the Arts and Humanities Research Council for the Ethno-ornithology World Atlas.
Abebe Beyene, Desalegn Chala, Nils Christian Stenseth, and Shimelis Aynalem Zelelew 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 Daniel Gover, Senior Lecturer in British Politics, Queen Mary University of London
Labour backbench MP Kim Leadbeater has introduced a bill in the House of Commons that aims to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.
Leadbeater is not a member of the government, but has been able to introduce the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill after topping this session’s private members’ bill ballot in September.
It’s almost a decade since MPs last voted on assisted dying. Back then, the Conservatives had a majority. Now, the tables have turned and Labour has a large majority. However, it’s not yet clear whether the current cohort of MPs would back this momentous change.
Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.
Leadbeater’s bill faces additional procedural challenges. Private members’ bills – legislation sponsored by individual MPs rather than the government – face a precarious route onto the statute book. They are highly vulnerable to objections, even if only from a small number of MPs.
While private members’ bills go through the same basic process to become law as government-sponsored legislation, they are awarded only limited parliamentary time. There are only 13 Fridays per session (typically a year) when these bills are discussed in the House of Commons.
The first major test for this bill will be its second reading stage, due on November 29. For backbench bills, and especially those that are contentious, this stage can be tricky.
Private members’ bills aren’t “programmed” like government bills, which means there is no mechanism for allocating more time to their discussion if needed. So, it only takes a small numbers of MPs to frustrate a bill’s progress by talking at length to run down the clock.
To prevent this, supporters can attempt to move the “closure” – a motion to end the debate and make a decision. This, however, requires at least 100 MPs to vote in support – a difficult feat on Fridays, when most MPs are in their constituencies. This problem was illustrated earlier this year on a bill to outlaw conversion therapy. However, on a bill of this profile, there is a good chance of passing the closure.
For Leadbeater’s bill, simply getting a vote at this stage would be an important accomplishment. It would mean that for the first time since 2015 – also on a backbench bill – the opinion of the Commons could be tested on assisted dying.
Challenge 2: public evidence?
Assuming the assisted dying bill passes the second reading stage, it would then be sent to a public bill committee for detailed consideration.
Unlike for government bills, this committee cannot, by default, hold public evidence sessions on backbench bills. For a reform of this significance, though, we should expect pressure from some MPs for an exception to be made to allow outside bodies – such as campaign groups, religious organisations and medical professionals – to submit evidence. This would delay the bill’s passage a little, though this need not be lengthy.
Challenge 3: report stage
The bill’s biggest test is likely to be at report stage – most likely on April 25 next year. This is when the bill returns to the House of Commons chamber.
Conventional wisdom is that this stage is often fatal for contentious backbench bills, since opponents can propose large numbers of amendments to the legislation, requiring many separate decisions to be made and time to be drained. Even if supporters attempt to move the closure, with enough amendments they may still run out of time. Something like this nearly happened on an EU referendum bill in 2013.
Yet, this conventional wisdom may be outdated. The speaker of the house routinely groups report-stage amendments together, reducing the number of separate decisions – and in recent years the norm has been a single group. Since 2019, there has never been more than one group of amendments up for consideration on any private member’s bill. If the speaker follows this recent practice, it may be easier to get the bill through report stage.
Challenge 4: out of time?
It is quite possible the assisted dying bill could overcome all these procedural hurdles. But if not, ministers may need to step in to set aside some of the government’s own parliamentary time to discuss the bill further.
Government time for backbench bills has been rare in recent years, although it did occur in 2019 during the passage of a bill to strengthen the laws around female genital mutilation. But there are some striking historical precedents.
In the 1960s, private members’ bills were used to pass major social reforms on the laws around homosexuality and abortion, and to abolish the death penalty. In all three cases, the government stepped in to dedicate extra time in the face of attempts to slow these bills’ progress.
Challenge 5: up to the Lords
If the bill makes it past these stages, then it also has a good chance of completing its final House of Commons (third reading) stage. But it would then need to complete a similar process in the House of Lords. While there are not quite the same time pressures in this chamber – notably, it does not have the same system of 13 Fridays – there is also no programming for any bills.
It is hard to predict exactly how the Lords would respond to an assisted dying bill. There have been multiple previous attempts to legislate on this matter over the years. The last time one reached committee stage, in 2015, it got bogged down with amendments and made it no further.
Leadbeater’s bill will be helped by another bill on assisted dying, started in the House of Lords by Labour peer Charlie Falconer. This is scheduled for debate in the coming months and may help identify and resolve some of the detailed points of contention – though this is not guaranteed.
It would be unusual, though not impossible, for the Lords to fail to pass a private member’s bill agreed by the House of Commons. Since 2010, there appear to have been only two that were actively held up in the Lords – as opposed to just running out of time. Even so, a small number of determined opponents to assisted dying could make life difficult.
Were this to happen – at this point an extreme hypothetical – one option available to MPs would be to re-introduce the bill in the subsequent session, perhaps from the new crop of ballot bills. Under the provisions of the Parliament Act(s), this bill might then be eligible to become law without the assent of the Lords. Such a situation very nearly occurred this year on another backbench bill, on hunting trophies, though the timing of the general election intervened.
Despite these procedural hurdles, the assisted dying bill has a reasonably good chance of passing into law. In the end, much will depend on whether MPs are willing to back this change, and how determined they are to do so.
Daniel Gover 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.
Projects on the Indus River in Pakistan are helping to tackle biodiversity loss. Salik Javed/Shutterstock
When negotiations at Cop15 – the UN’s biodiversity conference – ended in December 2022, many delegates breathed a sigh of relief.
Threatening snowstorms outside the convention centre in Montreal, Canada seemed to lift just as the political weather changed and the long-awaited Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework was agreed. It’s mission: to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 in order to achieve the ultimate goal of a society living in harmony with nature by 2050.
Fast forward two years and governments, businesses, representatives of Indigenous people and local communities, experts from environmental groups such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and scientists will gather for the follow-up Cop16 meeting in Cali, Colombia, from October 21. Many due to attend, including myself, wonder whether the promise made to “halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030” is achievable.
Initial signs are not promising. For starters, no international targets for biodiversity have ever been met.
Only a handful of countries, including China, Canada and France, have submitted new national biodiversity plans demonstrating how they will implement the promises made two years ago. Most countries, including the UK, (that’s more than 80% in total) haven’t submitted their full plans.
Countries can also submit updates for the 23 targets listed in the framework. The UK and others have submitted targets such as promising to reduce the impact of pollution on nature and ensuring that 30% of land is effectively protected in line with the framework.
But crucial questions remain about how those goals will be reached. To make Cop16 effective, three things need to happen.
1. Decide on a plan
When delegates gather in Cali, questions of implementation will be front and centre of the negotiations. The first challenge is that the approach for monitoring progress on all 23 targets – including issues such as improving access to nature in cities, reducing harmful subsidies and restoring 30% of degraded ecosystems – is yet to be agreed.
For some, the approach that has been developed so far lacks ambition in crucial areas. Indicators suggested for monitoring progress on reducing the impacts of consumption on nature remain very weak for example. For others, it may prove too challenging.
For example, countries with limited access to data might not be able to track alien species or assess how critical services provided by nature to make societies more resilient might be affected by climate change. Getting agreement at the Cop16 negotiations will be vital in order to hold countries to account as the 2030 deadline set to achieve all of the targets approaches.
2. Find the funds
Another crucial issue is funding: who will pay for the action required? The global biodiversity framework fund (GBFF) was established in 2023 to provide financial support.
Yet so far, it has only attracted contributions of around US$230 billion (£176 billion) from a small group of countries including Canada, the UK, Germany, Japan and Spain. Leaders gathering in Cali, and especially those from developing countries, are calling for more funding and for greater control over how it is allocated.
The next UN biodiversity conference will be held in Cali, Columbia from October 21 to November 1. Tudoran Andrei/Shutterstock
In Montreal, countries agreed to make sure that the impacts on nature were considered across different policy areas (such as building new roads or developing new energy sources) and in economic sectors, from fishing to agriculture and mining to tech.
They agreed that groups most likely to be affected by the loss of nature, including Indigenous people and local communities, women and youth, should help make key decisions. While targets such as protecting 30% of the land and sea for nature are crucial, progress will only happen if nature is put on everyone’s bottom line.
Delivering real change
The urgent need for action is not lost on delegates gathering in Cali. There is a real risk that the promise countries made in Montreal to deliver “transformative action by governments, and regional and local authorities, with the involvement of all of society” won’t be met.
But there are some hopeful signs of transformative change to conserve and restore nature and ensure its sustainable use.
Take, for example, the Tree Equity Partnership in Detroit, US. This partnership between the city, US-based charity American Forests and the local non-profit charity Greening of Detroit aims to plant 75,000 trees. This will create places of beauty, biodiversity and climate resilience in underserved neighbourhoods and generate 300 new jobs in the city.
In Pakistan, the Living Indus initiative is an umbrella organisation that has identified 25 projects involving local and regional governments, businesses and communities working together to restore the ecological health of the Indus river.
Businesses are also calling for real change. More than 170 investors have signed a pledge developed by a coalition of financial institutions called the Finance for Biodiversity Foundation to take action for nature across their portfolios.
New science-based standards are being developed to drive the mainstreaming of biodiversity action through their companies and associated supply chains. Cop16 is expected to see increased interest from the private sector and a focus on tackling climate change and biodiversity together.
These projects are successfully tackling the root causes of global biodiversity loss. They integrate solutions and deal with social and environmental issues – poverty and exploitation, climate risks and land use change. Tackling these problems is just as vital as the need for sustainable production and consumption plus investment that works for, not against, nature.
Projects such as these are the ones that give scientists and conservationists like me – and organisations like WWF that I work with – hope. We want to see more projects that take action on nature, climate and social justice together. If Cop16 can make even a small step in this direction, the world will be travelling towards making real progress by the end of this decade.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Harriet Bulkeley receives funding from the European Commission and currently serves as an advisor to the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Every year the Spanish ministry of culture awards prizes for different artistic disciplines. From next year onwards, the country’s national bullfighting award will be withdrawn. The current Spanish minister of culture, the Barcelona-born Green politician Ernest Urtasun, supports the prohibition of what has long been known as Spain’s “national fiesta”.
At the awards ceremony held at the Reina Sofia Museum last week, the minister refused to applaud this year’s winner for “sustained excellence in bullfighting”, Julián López El Juli, the recently retired Madrid-born matador. El Juli retorted to the slight by holding out his hand and publicly calling out the minister’s lack of respect as evidence that he was unfit to hold office.
Bullfighting predates football as a form of mass entertainment, and has been a source of inspiration for artists and intellectuals for centuries. It still has its followers in the present day, but young urban Spaniards are increasingly sensitive to the undeniable cruelty involved. Bullfighting was banned in Catalonia in 2011. Bullfights, known as corridas, are still staged in much of the rest of Spain, but it can be career suicide for artists, politicians or intellectuals to be associated with them.
So I, like many in Spain and the Basque Country, didn’t expect the jury of the 72nd San Sebastian Film Festival to award its highest accolade, the Concha de Oro (Golden Shell), to a bullfighting documentary. The director of Tardes de Soledad (Afternoons of Solitude) is Albert Serra, an iconoclastic filmmaker from Gerona, a fiercely pro-independence province of Catalonia.
The trailer for Tardes de Soledad.
For five years, Serra and his crew have been following the exploits of two rising stars with the ambition to become figuras, the term for that handful of elite matadors like El Juli, who appear on the most lucrative and prestigious bills.
Bullfighting and the screen arts have history in and beyond Spain. During cinema’s infancy, early filmmakers the Lumière brothers filmed matadors in Madrid. At annual village fairs, Spaniards would pay to enter a tent and watch recordings of professional corridas. The Valencian Vicente Blasco Ibánez’s 1908 novel Blood and Sand has a strong claim to being the earliest literary text to be written with a future film adaptation in mind.
In 1951, Hollywood actress Ava Gardner (a close friend of Ernest Hemingway, author of bullfighting novel Death in the Afternoon) starred alongside Catalan matador Mario Cabré in Pandora and the Flying Dutchman, which featured corridas in Gerona (the city’s bullring was demolished in 2006). Spanish television started broadcasting bullfights in 1956. Nearly 70 years later, Movistar Spain shut down its dedicated bullfighting channel in March 2023.
Oscar-winning writer and director Pedro Almodóvar – who received a lifetime achievement award at San Sebastian this year – has his Madrid offices close to the world’s premiere bullring, Las Ventas. In 1986 he portrayed the world of bullfighting in Matador, starring a very young Antonio Banderas, later returning to the subject in Talk to Her (2002).
This film, which won Almodovar the Oscar for best screenplay, contains scenes in which a female matador is gored in the picturesque bullring in Aranjuez. The British Board of Film Censorship insisted on cuts, and Almodóvar faced legal challenges from animal rights groups. According to Spanish law, corridas are permitted and can be filmed. The legal situation becomes thornier if a bull is killed by a professional matador for the sole purposes of the event being captured on film.
The trailer for Talk to Her.
Documenting the glory and the horror
Nothing is staged for Serra’s documentary. He followed the Peruvian Andrés Roca Rey, a box-office phenomenon often dismissed by serious aficionados as a crass populist; and the more refined Pablo Aguado, a native of Seville.
Serra connected better with Roca Rey, capturing his fears and solitude in an often hostile professional environment. Pay-for-view television channel Canal+ set a new gold standard for broadcasting bullfights with technical panache. Serra makes no attempt to replicate this labour. Placing the camera at the eye level of the bull and the matador results in a far more graphic and gruesome spectacle.
The Catalan filmmaker is amongst world cinema’s masters of sound design, and the audience is privy to the bull’s breathing as well as conversations between the matador and his team once the afternoon’s activities in the sand have come to a bloody conclusion.
Tardes de Soledad is likely to anger and unnerve aficionados and abolitionists alike. Industrial farming is arguably crueller than bullfighting, but recognising this fact is not automatically a defence of the “national fiesta”. It might just be that any hypothetical prohibition needs to framed alongside a wider reassessment of our relationship with, and responsibility to, non-human creatures.
Some abolitionists suggest that, even though bulls are sold for meat afterwards, it is death and torture being employed for entertainment that renders corridas so problematic. Psychological desensitisation is a real risk, especially when children are in attendance.
Aficionados claim bullfighting is a rare opportunity to address our own mortality in a society in which death and nature are increasingly kept at a distance. Almodóvar’s pristinely shot bullfighting scenes nevertheless show how ritualised beauty – the vivid stylised outfits, the music, the choreography and the architecture – often divert attention from the blood.
Serra’s harrowing footage might even shake some enthusiasts out of their complacency. Can so much animal and human suffering be justified in the name of an ancestral art? Conversely, Tardes de Soledad registers the poetry, pain and pathos of bullfighting in and beyond the arena. Dialogues between Roca Rey and his entourage establish a new benchmark for depicting the interior world of a matador, more unforgiving and empathetic than anything by Hemingway.
A rallying call at anti-bullfighting demonstrations is: “It’s not culture, it’s torture.” Serra’s documentary warrants the Concha de Oro for showing the terms are not mutually exclusive.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Duncan Wheeler 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.
For those of a certain age, Coneheads is an iconic 90s film. But for breakdancers, it seems, developing a cone-shaped head can be an occupational hazard.
According to a 2024 medical case report, a breakdancer who’d been performing for 19 years was treated for “headspin hole”, a condition also known as “breakdancer bulge” that’s unique to breakdancers. It entails a cone shaped mass developing on top of the scalp after repetitive head-spinning. Additional symptoms can include hair loss and sometimes pain around the lump.
Approximately 30% of breakdancers report hair loss and inflammation of their scalp from head-spinning. A headspin hole is caused by the body trying to protect itself. The repeated trauma from head-spinning causes the epicranial aponeurosis – a layer of connective tissue similar to a tendon, running from the back of your head to the front – to thicken along with the layer of fat under the skin on top of the head in an attempt to protect the bones of skull from injury.
The body causes a similar protective reaction to friction on the hands and feet, where callouses form to spread the pressure and protect the underlying tissues from damage. Everyday repetitive activities from holding smartphones or heavy weights through to poorly fitting shoes can result in callouses.
But a cone-shaped head isn’t the only injury to which breakdancers are prone, however. Common issues can include wrist, knee, hip, ankle, foot and elbow injuries, and moves such as the “windmill” and the “backspin” can cause bursitis – inflammation of the fluid filled sacs that protect the vertebrae of the spine. A headspin hole isn’t the worst injury you could sustain from breakdancing either. One dancer broke their neck but thankfully they were lucky enough not to have any major complications.
Others, such as Ukrainian breakdancer Anna Ponomarenko, have experienced pinched nerves that have left them paralysed. Ponomarenko recovered to represent her country in the Paris 2024 Olympics.
As with other sports, it’s unsurprising to hear that the use of protective equipment results in the reduction of injuries in breakdancing too.
But breakdancers aren’t the only ones to develop cone shaped heads.
Newborns
Some babies are born with a conical head after their pliable skull has been squeezed and squashed during the journey through the vaginal canal and the muscular contractions of mother’s uterus.
A misshapen head can also be caused by caput secundum, where fluid collects under the skin, above the skull bones. Usually, this condition resolves itself within a few days. Babies who’ve been delivered using a vacuum assisted cup (known as a Ventouse) – where the cup is applied to the top of the baby’s head to pull them out – can develop a similar fluid lump called a chignon.
Vacuum assisted delivery can also result in a more significant lump and bruising called a cephalohematoma, where blood vessels in the bones of the skull rupture. This is twice as common in boys than in girls and resolves within two weeks to six months.
If you’ve ever seen newborns wearing tiny hats in the first few hours of their life, then one of these conditions may be the reason.
Newborn skulls are made up of lots of small bony plates that aren’t fused together, which enables babies’ brains to grow without restriction. Usually, once the brain reaches a slower growth pace that the bones can keep up with, the plates fuse together. In craniosynostosis, the plates fuse together too early creating differently shaped heads. Surgery can prevent brain growth restriction but is usually unnecessary if the child hasn’t been identified as having an shaped head by six months of age.
Adam Taylor 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.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Martin Lang, Senior Lecturer and Programme Leader in Fine Art , University of Lincoln
Leap Year, a new exhibition of work by South Korean artist Haegue Yang at the Southbank Centre’s Hayward Gallery, is a bold and diverse display of contemporary art, mixing materials and ideas in unexpected ways.
Those with a knowledge of art history over the last 70 years, like me, will appreciate how Yang plays with and combines various art traditions. For example, her use of LED, neon strip-lights, steel, text, projected video and even smell are deliberate references to materials commonly used in contemporary art.
Yang’s art isn’t particularly “Korean”, but why should it be? Like many artists from around the world, Yang has been influenced by western pop culture. Coca-Cola and Hollywood movies have been as much part of life in South Korea since the Korean war as in Britain. While some see this as a downside of globalisation, many in South Korea embrace these influences, seeing them as a sign of progress. This fusion of cultures is a fact of life for Yang, and it runs through her art.
In the wall text at the exhibition, Yang claims to have developed a “culturally hybrid visual language”. Her work references modernism, minimalism and conceptual art. Large black-and-white photo collages that bring to mind early 20th-century dada art (a post-war movement that was anti-bourgeois and often satirical and nonsensical) provide the backdrop for sculptures mounted on wheeled frames, reminiscent of stage sets or even fairground rides.
Another resembles a shower cubicle, but with grab handles on the outside. The title, Sol LeWitt Vehicle, points to the conceptual artist Sol LeWitt. Geometric floor patterns recall the work of Gabriel Orozco, another well-known contemporary artist. In one room, the walls are painted in a blue that’s close to Yves Klein’s famous International Klein Blue (a shade of pure ultramarine he claimed to have invented and which features in his most famous works), although the paint was sourced locally by gallery staff.
Connecting with tradition
Yang is particularly interested in the ways contemporary art connects with older folk and craft traditions. For example, she explores weaving practices from different cultures, even working with Filipino artisans. These pieces sit alongside Reflected Red-Blue Cubist Dancing Mask, a sculpture that takes inspiration from how early cubist artists saw African masks as pure aesthetic objects, rather than ritualistic tools.
Yang’s interpretation has wheels and handles, allowing it to be worn and used performatively, restoring its function, but with a modernist aesthetic twist.
Her interest in folk traditions goes deeper. During the COVID lockdown in Seoul, she began exploring paper cutting, a traditional Korean craft often linked with shamanic rituals. From there, she expanded her research to include paper-cutting practices from other parts of the world, like wycinanki from eastern Europe and amate from Mexico.
In her Mesmerising Mesh series, she uses traditional Korean paper (hanji), as well as Japanese washi and graph paper, to create intricate collages. The wooden structures she builds around these works resemble shrines from different cultures. Though some viewers might think of them as something more familiar, like the decor in a western Chinese restaurant. In fact, these designs were inspired by the Hmong people of Southeast Asia.
In the west, since the second world war, the idea of universal art has often been viewed as tied to colonialism or cultural dominance, yet we embrace universal ideas like healthcare and human rights as progressive. Yang’s work suggests that art, too, has the power to bridge divides and foster empathy, breaking down barriers between cultures. Art may vary greatly across traditions, but at its core, it speaks to our shared humanity – a message as relevant as ever in our polarised times.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Martin Lang 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.
Ken Murphy, CEO of the British multinational supermarket chain Tesco, recently said at a conference that Tesco “could use Clubcard data to nudge customers towards healthier choices”.
Loyalty schemes have been around as far back as the 1980s, with the introduction of airlines’ frequent flyer programmes.
Advancements in loyalty schemes have been huge, with some even using gamified approaches, such as leaderboards, trophies and treasure hunts, to keep us engaged. The loyalty principle relies on a form of social exchange, namely reciprocity.
In exchange, we accept that, in many cases, loyalty schemes collect data on us. Our purchasing history, often tied to our demographics, generates improvements in the delivery of the service.
If we accept this, then we continue to benefit from reward schemes, such as promotional offers or other discounts. The effectiveness depends not only on making attractive offers to us for things we are interested in purchasing, but also other discounted items that we hadn’t considered buying.
Does it work?
So is this the future? The first issue is whether we’re happy to have data collected on us. There is a trade-off between the level of personalisation we want, and the amount of data we are willing to give. Research has shown that the more personalised the schemes are, the more alarmed we are about the crossing of privacy boundaries. For example, many of us dislike tailored communication about services through the use of chatbots.
The second, related point is that loyalty scheme data is, and will continue to be, of enormous value to third-party organisations. For instance, market research can use loyalty scheme data to track consumer trends more accurately. Researchers can use the data to make inferences about health-related behaviour.
As valuable as the data from loyalty schemes is for scientific purposes, not all shoppers are happy with having their data shared in this way. In one 2023 survey conducted by Yasemin Hirst from Lancaster University and colleagues of 1,539 people, 39% said they were unwilling to share their personal data with academic institutions, while 56.9% didn’t want to share with private organisations.
What data people were willing to share also varied: for example, people were happier sharing loyalty card data (51.8%) than social media data (30.4%) for research purposes. In general, people worried about privacy as well as misuses of their data.
All of this points to data privacy and permission being needed for sharing personal data with third-party advertisers and data brokers for people shopping online.
The final aspect is what the data reveals. Data from loyalty schemes does not present a complete picture of a shopper. We mix and match where we buy our food because of our budget and our geographical location. And some retailers have greater coverage and delivery in rural areas than others – further influencing our behaviour.
In our recent research, Sarah Jenkins and I conducted a study to look at issues related to what Murphy had in mind. We asked 389 people to evaluate ways their grocery shopping behaviour could be influenced.
We looked at three categories. One included financial incentives and discount offers. The second was classic “nudging” methods, such as labelling healthy or green options, campaigns or education schemes.
Finally, we looked at technological incentives that could be implemented via smart phones or laptops when making online purchases. For example, there could be suggestions as to nutritional choices, or an automated system that would select only healthy food choices. Alternatively, the system could score your shopping choice according to how healthy they were.
People assessed all of these options in terms of whether they could help boost healthy and green choices. Generally, participants preferred the financial methods overall, specifically discounts on healthy food options (44.7%). They also judged taxes on unhealthy food items as effective.
Campaigns for sustainability (6.3%) and automated choices for sustainability (6.5%), such as online shopping algorithms only offering us sustainable options, were least preferred. One possible reason for this might be a lack of understanding of what sustainability actually means.
Behavioural and financial methods were judged to be slightly more ethical than technological methods, though most people found all options fairly ethical.
That said, techniques to nudge people’s behaviour in the right direction don’t always work. People like or dislike them depending on a mix of factors, including whether it seems effective, whether it is ethical and whether they actually have a desire to change their behaviour.
Future options
Across the different ways market researchers study our shopping trends, the same pattern emerges: about 25% of the time, we buy our groceries online. The precise percentage varies by country and by foodstuffs we buy, but in general the forecasts is that it will increase to about 45% in the next 5-10 years.
This will mean further innovations in loyalty schemes, designed both to attract new customers as well as maintain the current base. Retailers therefore need to be aware of the shortcomings of such approaches, including that they don’t work on people who don’t want to change their behaviour, that they only provide limited information, and that there may be a point where services are so personalised that many people become unwilling to share their data.
Some of us will continue to enjoy the benefits of these schemes, so long as we have the chance to exercise choice. Indeed, some want to have suggestions made that ease the selection of healthy or sustainable options, but others don’t. What matters is having a choice.
Magda Osman receives funding from ESRC, Research England, British Academy, EPSRC, Food Standards Agency.
Celebrities can have huge influence and reach enormous audiences. That’s why Kamala Harris was happy to recently gain the endorsement of musician Taylor Swift.
Due to their media attention and massive fan bases, some Hollywood stars and musicians can appear more powerful than traditional politicians. And these perceptions of influence may also translate into actual impact.
Indeed, some celebrities have taken up causes, using their fame to overtly push for change (for instance, Bob Geldof and Princess Diana). Others endorse politicians, or successfully run for office themselves (for instance, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ronald Reagan).
While it may seem like celebrities who pivot to politics are able to trade on their pre-existing notoriety, few celebrities are well known beyond their fan bases and many people would expect them to lack the gravitas of world leaders.
However, results of our recent exploratory study conducted in the UK shows that at least one celebrity, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, stands out. He achieved public recognition, leadership and trust ratings as high as the most well-known politicians.
Indeed, our study found that The Rock’s recognition was on par with the Nobel prize-winning, two-term US president Barack Obama. He was also considered more trustworthy than many politicians.
In the study, we invited 251 participants to evaluate the faces of 40 seasoned politicians and celebrities to assess their leadership potential and perceived personality traits.
Only six of the faces had close to universal recognition. Former US presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump, former UK prime minister Boris Johnson and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson scored 90% or above. By contrast, US president Joe Biden and Russian president Vladimir Putin were each recognised by 80%.
Interestingly, The Rock was also judged to be more considerate, competent, credible, intelligent and trustworthy than most politicians.
When asked to indicate how strongly participants felt about each figure’s leadership potential, the results were surprising. Biden scored 64%, higher than Putin’s 56%, which was in turn higher than Trump and Boris Johnson who both received 42%.
But a much larger percentage, 72%, rated The Rock as a strong leader, only bettered by Obama’s score of 87%. In our statistical models, two key personality traits, competency and credibility, predicted The Rock’s perceived potential as a national leader.
The Rock’s fame, stemming from his wrestling career persona, television presence, and Hollywood stardom, seem to demonstrate the impact of a well-maintained media image. His expertise in wrestling’s “kayfabe” style of performance (a dramatic wrestling style that is presented as genuine) has greatly boosted his public persona as an authentic “nice guy”.
This early experience, and a strong screen presence, is likely to have contributed to leadership scores similar to Obama. Here it seems that The Rock’s heavily cultivated media personality has translated into perceptions of effective leadership.
This idea connects with the theory of mediated authenticity , which suggests that positive perceptions arise when audiences view media figures in a favourable light. The Rock’s wrestling persona has allowed him to build a connection to his fans and he seems to have developed this further with his Hollywood roles.
What can Trump and Harris learn?
Politicians must also connect with the public. Boris Johnson, for example, did well in the 2019 UK election because he knew how to connect and leveraged this ability to his advantage.
However, leaders also need to be seen as knowledgeable and trustworthy to make an enduring positive difference.
The Rock was asked about political ambitions.
Some theorists of power argue that social influence derives from being well-liked, not just being famous. Of course, The Rock is famous for his nice guy image, along with his movie catalogue and perpetually perfect physique. His perceived leadership potential could come from being both popular and seen as a good role model.
The Rock’s potential has been spotted by political parties. He describes himself as an independent and back in 2023 he revealed that he had been approached by multiple political parties about possibly running for office.
Can you be a ‘nice’ populist?
The last few years has seen the rise of numerous political leaders around the world, who have been labelled with the term “populist”. Leading figures on this list include Trump, India’s prime minister Narendra Modi, former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro and Boris Johnson. However, these leaders tend not to be highly trusted.
The erosion of trust in politicians and political systems is a significant issue that can lead to decreased engagement with the democratic process, regardless of political level. This ultimately results in a civic structure that fails to represent the people it is meant to serve.
With the US presidential election just weeks away, and still virtually tied, political strategists for both of the major parties must confront a key question: how much trust does each candidate have from the public?
Like it or not, The Rock’s wrestling persona relied on building a genuine connection with fans through his kayfabe-style performance, and his friendly image. The careful cultivation of this has given him enduring popularity and, as an unintended consequence of that performance, leadership appeal on the national stage.
When you are perceived as being a genuinely nice leader, our early research suggests, trust will follow. Something that more politicians clearly need to understand.
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.
Tensions are running high in the Middle East. The murderous attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7 2023 kicked off a spiral of violence in the region. That has culminated, a year later, in Israel mounting a ground invasion of Lebanon. The invasion, which Israel says aims to confront and destroy Hezbollah, follows 12 months of tit-for-tat strikes between Israel and Iran, which have gradually escalated in intensity.
Given that Hezbollah is closely associated and supported by Iran, there is mounting concern that this conflict could become a major flashpoint in international relations. The worry is that this war might provide the spark that causes the next global conflict.
To understand how dangerous the situation could be, it’s worth looking at the theory of conflict escalation. In 1997, Austrian economist Friedrich Glasl published his nine-stage model of conflict escalation, which is generally accepted as the most sophisticated study of how conflicts can develop from disputes to all-out conflict (a step he gives the rather ominous name of “Together into the abyss”).
Nine stages of confict escalation. Graphic by Swinnall, original from Sampi. Derived from: Konflikteskalation nach Glasl.svg, CC BY-NC
The first level is when a conflict is readily or easily resolved, but when a resolution is not achieved, positions on either side of the argument harden and frustration begin to mount. The next step naturally occurs when conflict parties seek to make their case, hoping to gain advantage in the court of global opinion.
Stage three of the model sees the adversaries beginning to take action. Neither side wants to yield advantage to the other, while any sense that discussion might mitigate the conflict has disappeared in mutual antagonism and mistrust. Accordingly at stage four, the conflict parties resort to an “us v them” rhetoric in an attempt to build coalitions and attract support. Stage five, described as “loss of face”, is when one or other of the antagonists feels they have become tarnished in the eyes of the community as a whole. Reputation no longer matters as much as achieving their ends. Sometimes one side or the other commits an act that it feels has isolated it, which only serves to harden it position.
In stage six, threats or ultimatums are issued. This can lead to hostilities spiralling as the conflict parties seek credibility by putting a timescale on a threat, which in turn will heighten the pressure on both sides. This can also bind another of the warring parties to a course of action from where there is little opportunity to retreat. This facilitates the move to stage seven, where the antagonists begin to trade the first limited blows in response to the threats they have made.
The world is watching the US election campaign unfolding. Sign up to join us at a special Conversation event on October 17. Expert panellists will discuss with the audience the upcoming election and its possible fallout.
In stage eight, the offensive blows intensify, with the focus on trying to injure – or even destroy – the adversary’s capacity for response or call into question the legitimacy of the other side’s leader. Often this can lead to one or another of the parties fragmenting into warring factions, making the situation increasingly uncontrollable.
As the conflict hurtles into stage nine, the threat to one or another of the parties has become existential, who are now falling “together into the abyss”. All sense of caution is abandoned as the only goal is the total annihilation of the adversary. A state of total war.
What stage are we at?
After years of animosity and denunciation on both sides, the conflict between Israel and Iran has now progressed to the stage that both sides have exchanged limited blows against each other. Reports have linked Iran to the planning of the Hamas attack on October 7. Tehran has recently denied having any part in the massacre. Hezbollah, which is more closely linked to the Islamic Republic, has carried out a year-long barrage of rockets from Lebanon into northern Israel. In response, Israel has now directly struck against Iran’s proxy, invading southern Lebanon to engage and attempt to destroy Hezbollah.
Both sides clearly want to demonstrate their power and influence in the region. But the stakes could rise if Iran feels an urgent need to protect its proxies. For Israel, its leaders have long argued that its very existence is at stake.
In terms of Glasl’s stages of escalation, the two countries appear to have reached stage seven, where they are launching limited blows against each other while avoiding direct confrontation. Both want to make their adversary consider whether the cost of continuing is worth the potential rewards that can be gained.
Iran’s air attacks on Israel suggest that while Iran can see that its regional position is being threatened and is still seeking to support the non-state actors in Gaza and Lebanon, the way in which they have conducted their attacks suggest that Tehran does not feel itself powerful enough to escalate further than it already has.
The only direct blows the two powers have launched against each other have been from the air. Iran has now launched two (large) barrages of rockets against Israel, one in April this year and again at the end of September. Both bombardments were announced in advance and neither has resulted in Israeli casualties.
Israel responded in April with a targeted strike against an Iranian airbase close to one of the country’s nuclear installations. It has yet to directly respond to the latest Iranian barrage, but Netanyahu has said Israel would target Iran’s military installations “based on Israel’s national security needs”.
Analysts believe that both sides – so far at least – are using these limited strikes to signal their unwillingness to escalate. But there is a great deal at stake. Iran will feel its position as a regional power threatened by Israel’s ground campaign in Lebanon. Meanwhile Israel has repeatedly declared that it is fighting for the security of its people. Neither appears to want a wider conflict – and their allies certainly wouldn’t encourage them if they did.
So it’s clear that – up to now at least – neither Israel nor Iran wants to venture any further down the road to “the abyss” as envisaged by Glasl’s nine-stage model.
Matthew Powell 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.
With affordability, housing and health care at the top of voters’ minds in British Columbia, they haven’t heard much about climate change with less than a week to go until the provincial election.
But a closer look at the platforms and policy announcements of the province’s Conservatives, New Democratsand Greens reveals fundamental differences on almost every climate-related policy.
While there is uncertainty about how much B.C.’s emissions would decline under another NDP government, they would almost certainly increase under a new Conservative one.
Climate action measures
The parties differ on the threat posed by climate change and urgency of action. The NDP and Green platforms both acknowledge the “climate crisis,” and each devotes a chapter on protecting communities from extreme weather, such as flooding, wildfires and heat domes like the one that occurred in 2021.
In contrast, the Conservatives claim climate change is not a crisis and that wildfires are a natural occurrence, without acknowledging how the blazes are amplified by climate change-driven heat and drought. The party favours adaptation technology over a “doom cult” perspective.
The three parties also present very different visions of B.C.’s economic future. Both the NDP and Greens emphasize the province’s comparative advantage in clean energy, and commit to skills training for the renewable energy and clean tech sectors.
In contrast, the Conservative proposal for a “free and prosperous” B.C. does not mention climate change or clean energy, while the party’s “clean energy” announcement embraces natural gas heating and oil-powered vehicles.
The Conservatives propose to scrap “any and all carbon taxes,” which suggests both the consumer and industrial carbon taxes. Although the party indicates it would do so “regardless of what happens in Ottawa,” the current federal government would respond by imposing both federal carbon taxes, as it has in other provinces.
The NDP would repeal only the consumer tax if the federal government does. The Greens would retain both taxes and remove sectoral benchmarks below which industrial polluters don’t pay the tax.
On electricity, the NDP proposes to double renewable electricity capacity by 2050 to substitute for declining consumption of fossil fuels. The party highlights BC Hydro’s recent call for clean power, which yielded proposals for triple the capacity originally sought.
The Greens similarly propose to expand rooftop solar and other renewables. The Conservatives welcome “all power sources,” including renewables, but also natural gas plants and nuclear.
Flood waters cover highway 1 in Abbotsford, B.C., in November 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward
Oil and gas accounts for the next largest share of B.C.’s emissions at 20 per cent. The NDP election platform commits to implement a cap on oil and gas emissions. In addition, the NDP government announced in 2023 that future liquid natural gas (LNG) approvals will be conditional on net-zero operations within the province.
The Conservative Party seeks to double LNG capacity, without mention of either an oil-and-gas cap or net-zero commitment. For their part, the Greens would reject all future LNG development, ban fracking and manage a decline of gas production.
The NDP and Greens both promise financial support for rooftop solar, home retrofits and heat pumps. In contrast, the Conservatives argue, without evidence, that the grid cannot support heat pumps and promise to repeal the voluntary zero-carbon building code and a “ban” on natural gas heating.
B.C. has been a climate laggard
B.C. has been slow to act on climate. That will make it very challenging to meet our 2030 emissions target.
But progress will only be made by strengthening climate policies, something both the NDP and Greens commit to do.
In contrast, the Conservatives promise to repeal current climate policies and halt development of others. But with a growing population and plans for LNG expansion, B.C.’s emissions would increase rather than decline under that strategy.
As B.C. voters prepare to cast their ballots this week, they’ve got a lot to contemplate on climate.
Kathryn Harrison receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. She is chair of the mitigation advisory panel of the Canadian Climate Institute, and a member of British Columbia’s Climate Solutions Council, but her comments do not represent either body nor the University of British Columbia.
Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson have been awarded the 2024 Nobel memorial prize in economics for their influential work on how institutions shape economic development. Some would say the decision to award these scholars the Nobel was long overdue.
The paper that formed the basis of their work is one of the most cited in economics. Acemoglu and Robinson’s subsequent book, Why Nations Fail, has also been hugely influential.
These works have inspired a rich debate on the relationship between societal institutions and economic development – so in that sense, congratulations are in order. But they have also been the subject of substantial criticism. In the aftermath of the award, it is fitting to highlight the blind spots in their analysis.
The most important piece of criticism concerns the connection between the quality of a country’s societal institutions and its level of economic development. Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson’s work divides institutions into two categories: “inclusive” and “extractive”.
Inclusive institutions – such as those that enforce property rights, protect democracy and limit corruption – foster economic development, according to the laureates. In contrast, extractive institutions, which give rise to a high concentration of power and limited political freedom, seek to concentrate resources in the hands of a small elite and thus stifle economic development.
The laureates claim the introduction of inclusive institutions has had a positive long-term effect on economic prosperity. Indeed, these institutions are today found primarily in high-income countries in the west.
A huge problem with this analysis, however, is the claim that certain institutions are a precondition for economic development.
Mushtaq Khan, a professor of economics at Soas, University of London, has analysed Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson’s work extensively. He argues that it mainly shows today’s high-income countries score higher on western-based institution indexes, and not that economic development was achieved because states first established inclusive institutions.
In fact, history is rife with examples of countries that grew rapidly without having these inclusive institutions in place as a precondition for growth. East Asian states such as Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan are good examples. Most recently, so too is China.
Yuen Yuen Ang’s award-winning books on China’s development process have laid out in detail how China was riddled with corruption during its growth process. In the wake of this year’s Nobel award, Ang went as far as saying that the laureates’ theory not only fails to explain growth in China, but also growth in the west. She points out that institutions in the US were smeared with corruption during the country’s development process.
Ignoring the brutality of colonialism
Nations are not wrong to pursue some of the inclusive institutions outlined in Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson’s work. But another worrying part of their analysis is that it legitimises the supremacy of western institutions – and, at worst, processes of imperialism and colonialism.
Their work has, indeed, been criticised for not paying attention to the brutality of colonialism. We need to dig a bit deeper into their methods to understand this criticism.
The laureates establish their claim by looking at long-term development in settler colonies versus non-settler colonies. In settler colonies, such as the US, Canada and Australia, Europeans established inclusive institutions. But in non-settler colonies, which include large parts of Africa and Latin America, Europeans established extractive institutions.
Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson point out that, over time, settler colonies perform better. European institutions are thus better for development, they argue.
But, considering that the process of colonisation is a central method of their paper, it’s a mystery that the laureates do not discuss the costs of colonialism more broadly.
Even in settler colonies, where inclusive institutions were eventually developed, years of violence – in many cases verging on the genocide of native populations – predated the development of such institutions. Should this not be factored into the development process?
According to this year’s laureates, Europeans settled in the poorest and most sparsely populated places, and introduced institutions that contributed to long-term prosperity. Johan Jarnestad / Nobel Prize Outreach
After receiving the award, Acemoglu said that normative questions of colonialism didn’t concern them: “Rather than asking whether colonialism is good or bad, we note that different colonial strategies have led to different institutional patterns that have persisted over time.”
This statement might come a shock to some people – why is Acemoglu not concerned about whether colonialism is good or bad? But for those familiar with the inner workings of the economics discipline, this statement doesn’t come as a surprise.
It has, sadly, become a badge of honour in mainstream economics to analyse the world without a normative lens or value judgments. This is a broader issue with the discipline and, in part, explains why economics has become increasingly insular and distant from other social sciences.
The Nobel prize in economics, which actually wasn’t among the five original Nobel prizes, also illustrates this problem. The list of past winners is narrow in geographical and institutional scope, mainly consisting of economists based at economics faculties in a small number of elite universities in the US.
Furthermore, a recent study found the institutional and geographic concentration of awards in economics is much higher than in other academic fields. Almost all the winners of major awards have had to journey through one of the top US universities (limited to less than ten) in their career.
This year’s Nobel prize in economics is no exception. Perhaps this is why it feels like every year, the prize goes to someone who asks “how does a change in variable X affect variable Y”, rather than asking difficult questions about colonialism, imperialism or capitalism – and daring to question the supremacy of western institutions.
Jostein Hauge 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.
Egypt recently deepened its involvement in the war-weary Horn of Africa by arming Somalia and deploying its troops in the embattled country. To Ethiopia’s growing alarm, Egypt is also set to join the multinational force supporting the Somali army against the jihadist threat by al-Shabaab. Egypt’s potentially destabilising presence in the region is seen a direct consequence of Ethiopia’s port agreement with breakaway Somaliland, which Somalia took as a direct affront. Endalcachew Bayeh, a political scholar with a focus on the Horn of Africa, sets out the risks and the path to de-escalation.
What do we know about Egypt’s entry into Somalia and the theatre of conflict in the Horn?
Egypt’s arrival in the Horn of Africa can be traced back to Ethiopia’s quest for a dedicated port under its control. Ethiopia is the world’s largest landlocked country by population and has relied exclusively on the port of Djibouti since the outbreak of the Ethiopia-Eritrea war (1998-2000).
Ethiopia has been exploring alternative access points. This led to the announcement on 1 January 2024 that it had struck a port deal with Somaliland. Ethiopia agreed to recognise the breakaway republic in exchange for a naval base on Somaliland’s coast.
The announcement sparked a diplomatic rift with Somalia, which viewed the deal as a violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Somalia still considers self-declared Somaliland part of its territory.
Amid the turmoil, Somalia courted Egypt as a regional patron to counter Ethiopia. This aligned well with Egypt’s increasing interest in finding a military partner along Ethiopia’s border.
Egypt is a longstanding rival of Ethiopia. Recently, it threatened to go to war over Ethiopia’s massive Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, which it sees as a threat to its survival.
Egypt deployed military forces in Somalia following its defence deal with Mogadishu in August 2024. It also plans to deploy 5,000 soldiers as part of the African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia. The mission is set to replace the African Union Transition Mission in Somalia, in which Ethiopia is a main player.
Ethiopia’s agreement to recognise Somaliland and the friction with Somalia have brought its old enemy, Egypt, to its doorstep.
How have Egypt-Ethiopia hostilities added to regional tensions?
Soon after Egypt’s deployment in Somalia, Ethiopia formalised its recognition of Somaliland. It also sent an ambassador to the capital, Hargeisa. This made it the first nation to officially acknowledge Somaliland’s independence. The two are also rushing to turn their memorandum of understanding into a binding bilateral treaty.
Somaliland ordered the closure of the Egyptian Cultural Library in Hargeisa.
Eritrea, for a time a key ally of Ethiopia’s Abiy Ahmed in the fight against the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, is now at odds with Addis Ababa. And, in response to the recent tensions in the region, Eritrea is strengthening its ties with Egypt and Somalia. A recent meeting of the three has created a united front against Ethiopia.
In Somalia, Ethiopia plays a stabilising role. Somalia now demands that Ethiopia should end its involvement. That could open the way for militant groups and keep Somalia unstable. This is even more likely to happen if Egypt focuses on its competition with Ethiopia rather than Somalia’s stability.
In addition, Somalis have longstanding territorial claims over parts of Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti. Instability can create fertile ground for groups like Al-Shabaab, which aims to include these territories in an Islamic state.
Ethiopia’s recognition of Somaliland and Egypt’s presence in Somalia come at a time of multiple regional crises. These include the strained Ethiopia-Eritrea relations, the Ethiopia-Sudan dispute over Al-Fashaga border region, and instability in Ethiopia.
This volatile environment increases the likelihood of proxy wars.
Key areas to watch are:
Sudan and Egypt: These two countries align on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam issue. Egypt has enhanced its security cooperation with Sudan through military support and joint exercises. Although Sudan is in turmoil, the Al-Fashaga dispute with Ethiopia remains a potential flashpoint. Egypt may take advantage of this dispute and its support for the Sudanese Armed Forces against the Rapid Support Forces to further its interests.
Instability in Ethiopia: In several regions, the government is engaged in active conflict with non-state forces. This instability creates fertile ground for Egypt to potentially support proxies against the Ethiopian government. Egypt and Somalia have already expressed the possibility of using proxy forces.
Egypt’s main motivation for intervening in the region is to control the Nile’s source or hinder Ethiopia’s use of the water. As a result, Ethiopia perceives Egypt’s presence at its doorstep as a direct security threat. This increases tensions between Egypt, Somalia and Ethiopia.
Any further destabilisation of Ethiopia would disrupt the entire region, as it shares porous borders with almost all countries in the Horn.
What are the potential avenues for de-escalation?
A promising pathway for reducing tensions in Somalia and the broader region is for the two regional powers to reconsider their strategies and exercise restraint.
Ethiopia can access the sea through Somaliland without formal recognition. This could ease tensions and would not encourage separatist movements.
For Egypt, a more constructive approach would be to limit its direct involvement in the Horn of Africa. Instead, it should address its concerns about the Ethiopian mega-dam through the United Nations, the African Union and other platforms. Historically, its unilateral actions have often been sources of tensions rather than solutions in the region.
The African Union and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development must ensure that the regional states themselves address regional issues. States must make wise decisions now to calm tensions, as no state will be spared from the spillover effects.
Endalcachew Bayeh 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.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Phil Tomlinson, Professor of Industrial Strategy, Co-Director Centre for Governance, Regulation and Industrial Strategy (CGR&IS), University of Bath
The UK government’s plan to create a new industrial strategy is a welcome attempt to steer Britain’s economy through the challenges of the 21st century. Amid a backdrop of global economic uncertainty, a clear focus on achieving growth is essential.
The plan is at an early stage. The new green paper marks the beginning of a consultation process designed to shape future government policy.
But creating an industrial strategy in the first place – to coordinate a wide range of economic policies – is commendable. For too long, the UK has been lagging behind other countries which have embraced greater government intervention in their economies.
And the idea of having that strategy overseen by an “industrial strategy council”, to offer a degree of independent oversight, is a good one. If set up properly, this council should encapsulate the idea of industrial strategy as a partnership between the state and business – a collaborative effort to discover new opportunities and develop new policies.
It is also pleasing to see the green paper hasn’t shied away from some of the big issues. There is appropriate emphasis on geography, and creating opportunities in “left behind places”. For too long, economic growth in Britain has been disproportionately concentrated in London and the south-east.
Empowering local leaders in other regions to shape industrial policies, tailored to their specific needs, is a step in the right direction.
The emphasis on addressing the UK’s clapped-out infrastructure is also wise. Pledges to invest in broadband, electricity supply, rail and roads should lay the groundwork for a more interconnected economy. There is evidence that improved connectivity could attract new investment and boost regional productivity in areas that have been economically stagnant for decades.
There are also promises to increase public investment in research and development
in emerging industries such as AI and clean energy. The vision for a modern, hi-tech economy driven by innovation is much needed in a county which currently ranks 25th in the global robotics league table, the only G7 nation outside the top 20.
But there are also risks to such a technology-centred approach, which could easily be at odds with the goal of tackling regional inequality. Indeed, given new investment tends to flow to existing hi-tech regions, the divide between successful and left-behind places could widen.
The plan’s green focus is also timely. By prioritising clean energy and investment in sectors such as electric vehicles, the strategy aligns with goals for achieving net zero emissions by 2050.
Mission impossible?
However, other issues also need to be included in the government’s plans. There is no consideration of geopolitics in the green paper. Yet any effective UK industrial strategy has to account for the impact of China and the US, and their ongoing tensions.
Similarly – and strangely – Brexit is hardly mentioned. Despite post-Brexit disruption to trade with the EU continuing to act as a drag on investment and growth, the green paper merely skirts around the issue. Nor is there anything about how industries deeply reliant on EU supply chains and markets (such as car manufacturing) can thrive outside the European single market.
Workers in traditional manufacturing, and in sectors such as retail, hospitality and care, will also need to hear more about support and retraining. The government needs to be mindful of not increasing a sense of polarisation between those who benefit from a green hi-tech revolution, and those who don’t.
And there will need to be much more detail about funding. The Labour government is keen to attract investors – the green paper was published on the same day as a high-profile investment summit in London, which featured impressive international attendees enjoying fine food and high-calibre entertainment.
But heavy reliance on private sector investment raises questions about accountability. For, while public-private partnerships can be effective, there is always a risk that private sector interests may not align with the needs of everyone else.
Overall, the green paper is the starting point for a critical national conversation about the UK’s economic future. The road to tangible success will depend on translating ideas into concrete actions, dealing with inevitable trade-offs, and being brave enough to address some deep structural issues. If it does, the green paper could turn into a blueprint for a genuinely resilient and competitive country.
Phil Tomlinson receives funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for Made Smarter Innovation: Centre for People-Led Digitalisation.
David Bailey receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council’s UK in a Changing Europe Programme.
Michael A. Lewis currently receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC).
Victor Ambros and Gary Ruvkun were awarded the 2024 Nobel prize in physiology or medicine for their discovery of microRNA, tiny biological molecules that tell the cells in our body what kind of cell to be by turning on and off certain genes.
In this episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, we speak to Ambros about the discovery that led to his Nobel prize and find out what he’s researching now. And we hear about how a deeper understanding of microRNA is opening up new avenues for potential treatment of cancers and other diseases.
Today, Ambros is a professor of molecular medicine and the Silverman Chair in Natural Sciences at the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School in the US. But the research that won him a Nobel prize was published more than 30 years ago in 1993, when he had just established his own research lab at Harvard University.
Ambros was trying to understand the way cells get the right instructions from DNA during their development. To do this, he was studying mutations in an experimental organism: a small worm called C. elegans.
We were studying some mutations and that affected C. elegans’ development in interesting ways – but we were not looking for the involvement of any sort of unexpected kind of molecular mechanisms.
Ambros’s wife, Rosalind Lee, and another member of the lab team, Rhonda Feinbaum, had spent a couple of years trying to understand the genetic process behind the mutation in a labour-intensive search. What they eventually discovered was a microRNA, a new dimension to gene regulation – the process through which genes are turned on and off in certain cells. As Ambros put it:
You can say they’re really the heroes behind this, and our job – mine and Gary’s – is to stand in as representatives of the whole enterprise of science, which is so dependent upon teams, collaborations, brainstorming among multiple people, communications of ideas and crucial data … All this is part of the process that underlies successful science like this.
MicroRNA’s role in cancer
Thanks to the discoveries of Ambros and Ruvkun back in the 1990s, medical researchers all over the world are looking at how microRNA affects the development of human diseases. One such researcher is Justin Stebbing, a professor of biomedical sciences at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, UK. He explained:
MicroRNAs, like many processes, can go wrong and they’ve been implicated in diseases as diverse as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s to cancer and kidney failure.
Stebbing said that in cancer, microRNA has been found to turn off tumour suppressor genes, effectively allowing cancers to spread. But microRNA can also be useful in understanding cancer, and in potential treatments:
We can work out the right treatments for people based on what we call a microRNA signature. We can understand prognosis, which means how severe people’s cancers are, but we can also try and harness them for treatments to make people better.
To find out more about the discovery of microRNA and what research is being done on it today, listen to the full episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, which includes an introduction from Vivian Lam, associate health and biomedicine editor at The Conversation in the US.
This episode of The Conversation Weekly was produced by Katie Flood, Gemma Ware and Mend Mariwany. Sound design was by Michelle Macklem, and our theme music is by Neeta Sarl.
Listen to The Conversation Weekly via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here.
Victor Ambros’s laboratory’s research has been funded (since 1985) and is currently funded by the US National Institutes of Heath. Justin Stebbing 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 winners of a competition which challenges academics to explain their research in just three minutes have been announced.
A total of 850 researchers from across the UK entered the tenth annual Vitae Three Minute Thesis (3MT®) competition, which was sponsored by The Conversation through its Universal Impact training and mentoring subsidiary.
These were narrowed down first to 65 competitors and then six finalists, before a judging panel and a public vote determined the winning three.
The overall judges’ award went to Jo Baker from Newcastle University for her presentation on children’s speech difficulties, which was perfectly illustrated through the use of an original cartoon.
Speech and language therapist Jo Baker impressed the judges.
Ulster University’s James McMullan captured the public’s imagination with his presentation on whether eating fish could be the secret to healthy ageing, winning the people’s choice award.
Universal Impact also had the chance to pick an editor’s champion. We chose Muhammad Muddasar at University of Limerick for his research looking at whether the heat we waste on a daily basis could be transformed into a new energy source.
The other finalists were Ferdinando Sereno at UCL, Natalie Weir at University of Derby and Charlie Gerlis from the University of the West of England.
Originally developed by the University of Queensland, the competition challenges doctoral researchers to communicate their research to a non-expert audience – in three minutes or less.
As a judge, I was blown away by the overall standard of the entries – this really was a masterclass in research communications.
All of the academics involved spoke passionately about their research, explaining how it could contribute to making the world a better place.
Each of these researchers deserved their place in the final and it took lengthy discussions before the panel was able to pick a winner.
This year’s final was broadcast live online with the winners announced on Friday, October 4.
The presentations were recorded and uploaded online ahead of a public vote.
‘It opens minds and opens doors’**
At Universal Impact, we have been delighted to support this mission by joining the judging panel and mentoring the champions (who also receive a coveted trophy and small grant) to help them build on their success and take their research to an even wider audience.
Vitae, which organised the competition, is a non-profit organisation that supports the professional development of researchers.
Rachel Cox, head of membership and engagement at Vitae, said: “The Vitae Three Minute Thesis is a fantastic competition which provides a unique opportunity for doctoral researchers to think differently about how they communicate work that is meaningful to them to a wider audience.
“It opens minds and opens doors for the individuals involved, as it can be a pathway to a wide variety of future careers, as previous participants have shown.
“At Vitae, we are proud of the impact this competition has had over the past ten years, and we are excited to see what it can do over the next decade.
“We are also delighted that Universal Impact and The Conversation are supporting this year’s event.”
You can find out more about the competition and the work of Vitae here.
The Conversation Weekly podcast caught up with Victor Ambros from his lab at the UMass Chan Medical School to learn more about the Nobel-winning research and what comes next. Below are edited excerpts from the podcast.
How did you start thinking about this fundamental question at the heart of the discovery of microRNA, about how cells get the instructions to do what they do?
The paper that described this discovery was published in 1993. In the late 1980s, we were working in the field of developmental biology, studying C. elegans as a model organism for animal development. We were using genetic approaches, where mutations that caused developmental abnormalities were then followed up to try to understand what the gene was that was mutated and what the gene product was.
It was well understood that proteins could mediate changes in gene expression as cells differentiate, divide.
We were not looking for the involvement of any sort of unexpected kind of molecular mechanisms. The fact that the microRNA was the product of this gene that was regulating this other gene in this context was a complete surprise.
There was no reason to postulate that there should be such regulators of gene expression. This is one of those examples where the expectations are that you’re going to find out about more complexity and nuance about mechanisms that we already know about.
But sometimes surprises emerge, and in fact, surprises emerge perhaps surprisingly often.
These C. elegans worms, nematodes, is there something about them that allows you to work with their genetic material more easily? Why are they so key to this type of science?
C. elegans was developed as an experimental organism that people could use easily to, first, identify mutants and then study the development.
It only has about a thousand cells, and all those cells can be seen easily through a microscope in the living animal. But still it has all the various parts that are important to all animals: intestine, skin, muscles, a brain, sensory systems and complex behavior. So it’s quite an amazing system to study developmental processes and mechanisms really on the level of individual cells and what those cells do as they divide and differentiate during development.
You were looking at this lin-4 gene. What was your surprising discovery that led to this Nobel Prize?
In our lab, Rosalind Lee and Rhonda Feinbaum were working on this project for several years. This is a very labor intensive process, trying to track down a gene.
And all we had to go by was a mutation to guide us as we gradually homed in on the DNA sequence that contained the gene. The surprises started to emerge when we found that the pieces of DNA that were sufficient to confer the function of this gene and rescue a mutant were really small, only 800 base pairs.
And so that suggested, well, the gene is small, so the product of this gene is going to be pretty small. And then Rosalind worked to pare down the sequence more and to mutate potential protein coding sequences in that little piece of DNA. By a process of elimination, she finally showed that there was no protein that could be expressed from this gene.
And at the same time, we identified this very, very small transcript of only 22 nucleotides. So I would say there was probably a period of a week or two there where these realizations came to the fore and we knew we had something new.
You mentioned Rosalind, she’s your wife.
Yeah, we’ve been together since 1976. And we started to work together in the mid-’80s. And so we’re still working together today.
And she was the first author on that paper.
That’s right. It’s hard to express how wonderful it is to receive such validation of this work that we did together. That is just priceless.
Victor Ambros and Rosalind Lee toast the Nobel news on the day of the announcement. UMass Chan Medical School
Like it’s a Nobel Prize for her too?
Yes, every Nobel Prize has this obvious limitation of the number of people that they give it to. But, of course, behind that are the folks who worked in the lab – the teams that are actually behind the discoveries are surprisingly large sometimes. In this case, two people in my lab and several people in Gary Ruvkun’s lab.
In a way they’re really the heroes behind this. Our job – mine and Gary’s – is to stand in as representatives of this whole enterprise of science, which is so, so dependent upon teams, collaborations, brainstorming amongst multiple people, communications of ideas and crucial data, you know, all this is part of the process that underlies successful science.
That first week of the discoveries, did you anticipate at that point that this could be such a huge step for our understanding of genes?
Until other examples are found of something new, it’s very hard to know how peculiar that particular phenomenon might be.
We’re always mindful that evolution is amazingly innovative. And so it could have been that this particular small RNA base-pairing to this mRNA of lin-14 gene and turning off production of the protein from lin-14 messenger RNA, that could be a peculiar evolutionary innovation.
The second microRNA was identified in Gary Ruvkun’s lab in 1999, so it was a good six years before the second one was found, also in C. elegans. Really, the watershed discovery was when Ruvkun showed that let-7, the other microRNA, was actually conserved perfectly in sequence amongst all the bilaterian animals. So that meant that let-7 microRNA had been around for, what, 500 million years?
And so it was immediately obvious to the field that there had to be other microRNAs – this was not just a C. elegans thing. There must be others, and that quickly emerged to be the case.
You and Gary Ruvkun had been postdoctoral fellows at the same time at MIT, but by the time you made your respective discoveries, you’d both set up your own labs. Would you call them rival labs, in the same town?
No, I would certainly not call it rival labs. We were working together as postdocs basically on this problem of developmental timing in Bob Horvitz’s lab.
We just basically informally divided up the work. The understanding was, OK, Ambros lab will focus on lin-4 gene, and Ruvkun lab will focus on lin-14, and we anticipated that there would be a point that we would get together and share information about what we’ve learned and see if we could come to a synthesis.
That was the informal plan. It was not really a collaboration. It was certainly not a rivalry. The expectation was that we would divide up the work and then communicate when the time came. There was an expectation in this community of C. elegans researchers that you should share data freely.
Your lab still works on microRNA. What are you investigating? What questions do you still have?
One I find very interesting is a project where we collaborated with a clinician, a geneticist who studies intellectual disability. She had discovered that her patients, children with intellectual disabilities, in certain families carried a mutation that neither of their parents had – a spontaneous mutation – in the protein that is associated with microRNAs in humans called the Argonaute protein.
Each of our genomes contains four genes for Argonautes that are the partners of microRNAs. In fact, this is the effector protein that is guided by the microRNA to its target messenger RNAs. This Argonaute is what carries out the regulatory processes that happen once it finds its target.
These so-called Argonaute syndromes were discovered, where there are mutations in Argonautes, point mutations where only one amino acid changes to another amino acid. They have this very profound and extensive effect on the development of the individual.
And so working with these geneticists, our lab and other labs took those mutations, that were essentially gifted to us by the patient. And then we put those mutations into our system, in our case into C. elegans‘ Argonaute.
I’m excited by the very organized, active partnership between the Argonaute Alliance of families with Argonaute syndromes and the basic scientists studying Argonaute.
How does this collaboration potentially help those patients?
What we’ve learned is that the mutant protein is sort of a rogue Argonaute. It’s basically screwing up the normal process that these four Argonautes usually do in the body. And so this rogue Argonaute, in principle, could be removed from the system by trying to employ some of the technology that folks are developing for gene knockout or RNA interference of genes.
This is promising, and I’m hopeful that the payoff for the patients will come in the years ahead.
Victor Ambros receives funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Heath.
You’d be forgiven for thinking that young people are behind most knife crime in the UK. Media coverage often focuses on youth involvement, and the government’s plan to halve knife crime focuses specifically on young people and vulnerable teenagers.
Evidence shows that most knife-involved crime is committed in the home, between adults, in the form of intimate partner violence. Only around 18% of knife offences are carried out by 10- to 17-year-olds. These usually involve other young people.
Although young people’s share of knife crime is low, their involvement is a significant concern and has risen starkly in the last decade.
Choosing to carry a knife out of the home, into the streets, or into school is a rare choice that most children never make. Estimates show that between one and four in 100 young people carry knives.
For those few who do, it is important to understand the complex factors behind why. This is what we, and many other academics, have been studying in our research.
Both researchers and young people themselves cite protection as a factor in knife carrying. Many young people are fearful of being victims of knife crime, and knife carrying may offer a sense of security and defence from potential threats.
This fear is not necessarily correlated to reality. Young people tend to overestimate the prevalence of weapon carrying among their peers. What’s more, those carrying knives for defence often end up having their own knife used against them.
Seeing images of knives
One reason that young people may have a fear of knife crime is because of how the threat is presented to them through images.
Media reports and anti-knife campaign material often features images of shocking weapons, such as zombie knives. Depictions of piles of seized weapons and vicious blades all paint a picture of a risky landscape.
You probably noticed that the photos illustrating this article do not include a picture of a knife. This is a deliberate choice. Our research has found that such knife imagery can evoke fear or excitement for some young people.
Their heightened emotional responses suggest that these young people are the most likely to be vulnerable to future knife carrying. Those who feel most unsafe in their communities are the most likely to respond negatively to graphic imagery.
Interestingly, the young people who participated in our research self-reported knife imagery as having little impact on them. But our study investigated their unconscious emotional response through an implicit association test. This approach is key in a research area vulnerable to self-presentation bias, where young people might attempt to hide their true feelings.
The test we used assessed response speeds to determine associations between images of knives and words relating to fear and excitement. Overall, response times were faster (showed more association) for fear-related words.
Other evidence suggests that anti-knife crime imagery and messaging can create exaggerated belief about the prevalence of knife carrying. This may increase, rather than reduce, the fear of victimisation, and further encourage people to carry knives.
Floods of knife images in a young person’s social and educational environment may normalise knife carrying. Nearly two-thirds of young people report experiencing secondary traumatic stress when viewing knife crime news on social media.
When knife imagery is used in intervention materials presented by someone in a position of authority (a teacher or police officer, for example), it can validate the fears even more.
In other words, the more we talk about knife crime, the scarier it can seem, and the more young people feel the need to protect themselves by carrying a weapon.
Labour’s plan to cut knife crime – including a ban on zombie knives that has just come into effect – should go a long way to reducing the availability of “status” weapons. It may also mean that images of these knives are less prevalent in the media, which, given our research findings, would likely have a positive effect.
But, as noted earlier, most young people are not at risk, and have had no exposure to knife crime. Knife carrying is not normal behaviour for most young people. Anti-knife messaging would serve young people better by avoiding the use of knife imagery, and instead focus on discussing how to keep safe by avoiding risky behaviour, and how to get help if a dangerous situation arises.
Dr Charlotte Coleman receives funding from N8 Policing Research Partnership.
Dr Charlotte Coleman is a member of the Youth Justice Board Academic Liaison Network
Dr Charlotte Coleman is an executive member of the Society for Evidence Based Policing.
Jess Scott-Lewis 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.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Elizabeth Chappell, Researcher Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, The Open University
The 2024 Nobel peace prize has been awarded to Nihon Hidankyo, a Japanese grassroots organisation created by survivors of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Nihon Hidankyo has provided thousands of witness accounts and public appeals by survivors, who are known as hibakusha, and has sent annual delegations to the UN.
Their work was commended by the Nobel committee, who decided to award the prize to Nihon Hidankyo “for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and for demonstrating that nuclear weapons must never be used again”.
Nihon Hidankyo’s co-chair, Toshiyuki Mimaki, said: “I never expected we would win the Nobel peace prize. Now we want to go further and appeal to the world to achieve lasting peace. We are old, but we never give up.”
There are an estimated 106,000hibakusha still living in Japan, with many more alive around the world. There are also survivors – and their descendants – of the more than 2,000 nuclear tests that have taken place worldwide since 1945. Some of these people use the term hibakusha to describe themselves.
This was not the first time the prize had been awarded to a nominee for their efforts towards nuclear disarmament. And it probably won’t be the last.
In 1985, the prize was awarded to an organisation called the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. And then, in 1995, the prize was won by Joseph Rotblat, the only scientist to have left the Manhattan Project – the US government’s research project to produce the first atomic bomb – on moral grounds.
Barack Obama was next in 2009, for his “vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons”. His administration made efforts to renew the strategic arms reduction treaty with Russia, and Obama became the first US president to visit one of the atomic bombed cities when he made a special trip to Hiroshima in 2016.
The following year, the prize was won by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) for its “groundbreaking efforts to achieve a treaty-based prohibition of nuclear weapons”. This was a reference to the UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, which from 2017 has outlawed states from participating in any nuclear weapon activities.
Nihon Hidankyo may not be a household name, but two of its former co-chairs are quite well known internationally. Hiroshima-born Sunao Tsuboi was photographed in one of the few known images to be taken on the day of the bombing.
Tsuboi and fellow survivor Shigeaki Mori also spoke with Obama on his visit to the city. It is said that Obama’s visit was, in part, triggered by Mori’s research. He had spent 40 years searching for the identities of 12 US prisoners of war who had been killed in the bombing of Hiroshima.
Another of Nihon Hidankyo’s former co-chairs, Nagasaki-born Sumiteru Taniguchi, spent three-and-a-half years in hospital after the bombing of his city and never fully recovered from his wounds.
Taniguchi’s story became famous after the publication of his 1984 memoir, The Postman of Nagasaki. The book’s author, Peter Townsend, was a Royal Air Force pilot in the second world war and is known in the UK for his affair with Princess Margaret, sister of the late Queen. The memoir was made into a film in 2022.
The logic of nuclear deterrence
We are currently at a time where the threat of nuclear weapons is growing. This was reflected by the committee who, when awarding Nihon Hidankyo with the prize, noted that the “taboo” against their use was “under pressure”.
Nuclear deterrence relies on the logic of the threat to inflict “unacceptable damage” on the enemy. But nuclear deterrence is not foolproof. What is unacceptable to one adversary may be acceptable to another, depending on the circumstances.
It’s worth remembering that the 1945 atomic bombings were not, as is commonly believed, the only reason the Japanese surrendered the following week and brought the war to an end. Various factions in the war council had been attempting to find ways to surrender for over a year, and the bombs offered Japan’s Emperor Hirohito a way to save face.
The bombs didn’t force the Japanese to surrender, they gave Hirohito the opportunity to surrender … News of the Nagasaki bomb came as they were having a meeting of the imperial war council about what to do about the Soviets coming into the war. It should be known that there was never any special imperial war council meeting after the Hiroshima bomb. That wasn’t considered weighty enough to make everyone drop what they were doing and head to the Imperial Palace.
The effects of radiation on the human body were little known in 1945, due to censorship both by the Japanese military and the US occupation that followed. As I was told in an interview with a hibakusha called Keiko Ogura, who was eight when the first bomb was dropped: “No one understood why people were still dying days, weeks, months and years after the attacks – they thought the atomic bomb was poison gas.”
We now know much more about the devastating consequences of radiation for humans, animals and the environment across generations. However, research is still not widely publicised, with ICAN taking the lead as an international forum for important new findings to be shared and known.
Let’s hope this year’s award will help inform the world once and for all of the nature of these weapons. As former US president, John F. Kennedy, said in a speech to the UN in 1961: “A nuclear disaster, spread by wind and water and fear, could well engulf the great and the small, the rich and the poor, the committed and the uncommitted alike.”
Next year will mark the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombings. This prize should help ban what Kennedy described as the “sword of Damocles” that still threatens life on earth.
Elizabeth Chappell does not work for or receive funding from any external organisation.
As people who research ageing like to quip: the best thing you can do to increase how long you live is to pick good parents. After all, it has long been recognised that longer-lived people tend to have longer-lived parents and grandparents, suggesting that genetics influence longevity.
Complicating the picture, however, is that we know that the sum of your lifestyle, specifically diet and exercise, also significantly influences your health into older age and how long you live. What contribution lifestyle versus genetics makes is an open question that a recent study in Nature has shed new light on.
Scientists have long known that reducing calorie intake can make animals live longer. In the 1930s, it was noted that rats fed reduced calories lived longer than rats who could eat as much as they wanted. Similarly, people who are more physically active tend to live longer. But specifically linking single genes to longevity was until recently a controversial one.
While studying the lifespan of the tiny worm C elegans at the University of California, San Francisco, Cynthia Kenyon found that small changes to the gene that controls the way that cells detect and respond to nutrients around them led to the worms doubling their lifespan. This raises new questions: if we know that genetics and lifestyle affect how long you live, which one is more important? And how do they interact?
To try to tease out the effects of genetics versus lifestyle, the new study in Nature examined different models of caloric restriction in 960 mice. The researchers specifically looked at classical experimental models of caloric restriction (either 20% or 40% fewer calories than control mice), or intermittent fasting of one or two days without food (as intermittent fasting is popular in people looking to see the positive benefits of caloric restriction).
Because we now know that small genetic variations affect ageing, the researchers specifically used genetically diverse mice. This is important for two reasons. First, as laboratory studies on mice are normally performed on genetically very (very!) similar mice, this allowed the researchers to tease out the effects of both diet and genetic variables would have on longevity.
Second, humans are highly diverse, meaning that studies on genetically near-identical mice don’t often translate into humanity’s high genetic diversity.
The headline finding was that genetics appeared to play a larger role in lifespan than any of the dietary restriction interventions. Long-lived types of mice were still longer lived despite dietary changes.
Diet counts, but genes count more
And while shorter-lived mice did show improvements as a result of dietary restrictions, they didn’t catch up to their longer-lived peers. This suggests that there’s truth to the “pick good parents” joke.
Caloric restriction models still increased lifespans across all the types of mice, with the 40% restriction group having improved average and maximum lifespans compared with the 20% group.
And the 20% group showed improvements in both group average and maximum length of lives compared with the control group. It’s just the effects of genetics were larger than the effect of the dietary interventions.
While all the caloric restriction models resulted in increased lifespan in the mice on average, in the most extreme caloric restriction model tested (40% less group) changes that could be seen as physical harms were observed. These included reduced immune function and losses in muscle mass, which outside of a predator- and germ-free laboratory environment could affect health and longevity.
There are some important caveats in studies like this. First, it’s not known if these results apply to humans.
As with most caloric restriction research in mice, the restricted feeding groups were fed 20% or 40% less than a control group who ate as much as they wanted. In humans, that’d be like assuming people eating every meal every day at a bottomless buffet is “normal”. And people who do not eat from limitless trays of food are “restricted feeding”. That’s not an exact parallel to how humans live and eat.
Second, although exercise wasn’t controlled in any way in this study, most groups did similar amounts of running in their in-cage running wheels except the 40% caloric restriction group who ran significantly more.
The researchers suggested that this extra exercise in the 40% group was the mice constantly hunting for more food. But as this group did so much more exercise than the others, it could also mean that positive effects of increased exercise were also seen in this group alongside their caloric restriction.
So, while we can’t pick our parents or change the genes we inherit from them, it is interesting to know that specific genetic variations play a significant role in the maximum age we can aspire to.
The genetic cards we’re dealt dictate how long we can expect to live. Just as important in this study, however, lifestyle interventions such as diet and exercise that aim to improve lifespan should be effective regardless of the genes we have.
Bradley Elliott receives funding from the Physiological Society, the British Society for Research on Ageing, the Altitude Centre, and private philanthropic individuals, and has consulted for industry and government on longevity research. He is on the Board of Trustees of the British Society for Research on Ageing.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Massey, Professor of extragalactic astrophysics (dark matter and cosmology), Durham University
Illustration of the Extremely Large Telescope, currently under construction in Chile’s Atacama desert.ESO, CC BY
In recent decades, we’ve learnt huge amounts about the universe and its history. The rapidly developing technology of telescopes – both on Earth and in space – has been a key part of this process, and those that are due to start operating over the next two decades should push the boundaries of our understanding of cosmology much further.
All observatories have a list of science objectives before they switch on, but it is their unexpected discoveries that can have the biggest impact. Many surprise advances in cosmology were driven by new technology, and the next telescopes have powerful capabilities.
Still, there are gaps, such as a lack of upcoming space telescopes for ultraviolet and visible light astronomy. Politics and national interests have slowed scientific progress. Financial belts are tightening at even the most famous observatories.
This is article is part of our series Cosmology in crisis? which uncovers the greatest problems facing cosmologists today – and discusses the implications of solving them.
The biggest new telescopes are being built in the mountains of Chile. The Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) will house a mirror the size of four tennis courts, under a huge dome in the Atacama desert.
Reflecting telescopes like ELT work by using a primary mirror to collect light from the night sky, then reflecting it off other mirrors to a camera. Larger mirrors collect more light and see fainter objects.
The Extremely Large Telescope under construction atop the Cerro Amazones peak in northern Chile.
Another ground-based telescope under construction in Chile is the Vera C. Rubin telescope. Rubin’s camera is the largest ever built: the size of a small car and weighing about three tonnes. Its 3,200 megapixels will photograph the whole sky every three days to spot moving objects. Over the course of 10 years, these photographs will be combined to form a massive time-lapse video of the universe.
Astronomy used to be a physically demanding job, requiring travel to remote telescopes in dark sites –- but many astronomers began working from home long before COVID. In the late 20th century, major ground observatories started to put in place technology to allow astronomers to control telescopes for observations at night, even when they were not there in person. Remote observing is now commonplace, carried out via the internet.
Expect the unexpected
The view of any telescope on the ground is limited, though, even if it’s on top of a mountain. Launching telescopes into space can get around these limitations.
The Hubble Space Telescope’s operational history began when the space shuttle lifted it above the atmosphere on April 25 1990. Hubble got the full 1960s sci-fi treatment: a rocket to launch it, gyroscopes to point it, and electronic cameras instead of photographic film. But one plan fell through: for Hubble to host a commuting astronaut-astronomer, working decidedly away from home.
Webb, launched on December 25 2021, now spends a third of its time looking at planets around other stars that weren’t even known about when it was designed.
The stated goal of an expensive telescope is usually just a sales pitch to space agencies, governments and (shhh…) taxpayers. The Webb telescope should achieve its original science goals, but astronomers have always known that seeing further, finer or in more colours can achieve so much more. The unexpected discoveries by telescopes are often more significant than the science objectives stated at the outset.
Taking the long view
For scientists, it’s a relief that telescopes go beyond their brief, because Hubble and Webb both took more than 25 years from napkin to launch. In that time, new scientific questions arise.
Building a large space telescope typically takes about two decades. The Chandra and XMM-Newton space telescopes took 23 years and 15 years to build, respectively. They were designed to observe X-rays coming from hot gas around black holes and galaxy clusters, and were launched very close together in 1999.
Similar timescales apply to the European Space Agency’s Hipparcos and Gaia space telescopes, which have mapped all the stars in the Milky Way. The Cobe and Planck missions to study the microwave-light afterglow of the Big Bang also took two decades. Precise dates depend how you count, and a few exceptions have been “faster, better, cheaper”, but national space agencies are generally risk averse and slow when developing these projects.
The latest space telescopes are therefore millennials. They were designed at a time when astronomers had measured the universe’s newborn expansion following the Big Bang, and also its old-age, accelerating expansion. Their main goal now is to fill the gap –- because, surprisingly, interpolations from early times to late times don’t meet in the middle.
The measured rates for the expansion of the universe are inconsistent, as are results for the clumpiness of matter in the cosmos. Both measurements create challenges for our theories of how the universe evolved.
Observing the middle age of the universe requires telescopes operating at long wavelengths, because light from distant galaxies is stretched by the time it reaches us. So, Webb has infrared zoom cameras, while the European Space Agency’s Euclid space telescope, launched in 2023, and Nasa’s Nancy Grace Roman telescope, which is set to launch in 2026, both have infrared wide-angle views.
Three buses come along at once
Most stars shine in ultraviolet and infrared colours that are blocked by the Earth’s atmosphere, as well as the colours our eyes evolved to see.
Extra colours are useful. For example, we can weigh stars on the other side of our galaxy because massive stars are bright in infrared, while smaller ones are faint – and they stay that way throughout their lifetimes. However, we know where stars are being born because only young stars emit ultraviolet light.
In addition, independent measurements of the same thing are vital for rigorous science. Infrared telescopes, for example, can work together and have already made surprising discoveries. But it’s not great for diversity that the Webb, Euclid and Roman space telescopes all see infrared colours.
Earthly politics gets in the way, too. Data from China’s Hubble-class space telescope, Xuntian, is unlikely to be shared internationally. And in protest at Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in February 2022 Germany switched off its eRosita X-ray instrument that had been operating perfectly, in collaboration with Russia, a million miles from Earth.
Cheap commercial launches may save the day. Euclid was to have lifted off on a Russian Soyuz rocket from a European Space Agency spaceport in French Guiana. When Russia ended operations there in tit-for-tat reprisals, Euclid’s launch was successfully switched at the last minute to a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket.
If large telescopes can also be folded inside shoebox-size “cubesat” satellites, the lower cost would make it viable for them to fail. Tolerating risk creates a virtuous circle that makes missions even cheaper.
But perhaps the most unusual telescope technology, which may bring the most unexpected discoveries, is gravitational wave detectors. Gravitational waves are not part of the electromagnetic spectrum, so we can’t see them. They are distortions, or “ripples”, in spacetime caused by some of the most violent and energetic processes in the universe. These might include a collision between two neutron stars (dense objects formed when massive stars run out of fuel), or a neutron star merging with a black hole.
Asked what the next generation of observatories will discover, I have no idea. And that’s a good thing. The best science experiments shouldn’t just tell us about the things we expect to find, but also about the unknown unknowns.
Richard Massey receives funding from the UK Space Agency to support Euclid, and leads UK involvement in the SuperBIT balloon-born telescope.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle Bentley, Professor of International Relations, Royal Holloway University of London
The Apprentice – a new film dramatising Donald Trump’s business career during the 1970s and 80s – is the latest in a presidential election full of controversy.
The movie charts Trump’s (Sebastian Stan) professional rise from an awkward nobody to hotshot real-estate tycoon. Trump’s Pygmalion-like transformation is credited to his friendship with Roy Cohn (Jeremy Strong). Cohn was an infamous prosecutor who worked with Senator Joseph McCarthy during the Communist and Lavender (homosexual) scares, and as a political fixer for Richard Nixon.
The key storyline is that Trump becomes Cohn’s apprentice, learning underhanded ways of business and Machiavellian deal-making. Other figures said to have influenced Trump’s career, such as political adviser Roger Stone, get only cameos at best.
Trump does not look good. He is portrayed as vain, using amphetamines as diet pills and getting plastic surgery including liposuction and a scalp reduction. Trump rejects his alcoholic brother and later Cohn, who dies from AIDS in social disgrace.
Trump is also shown to rape his then-wife, Ivana (Maria Bakalova) – a scene which made headlines after the movie’s Cannes Film Festival premiere earlier this year. The rape claim was made during the couple’s divorce proceedings, although Ivana said afterwards that she did not consider the incident “rape” in a criminal sense.
Director Ali Abbasi says this depiction isn’t a take-down of the former president but a more nuanced exploration of Trump’s character. Indeed, there is sympathy for Trump – for example, by detailing the emotional pressure from his father.
The film explores how this experience fuelled Trump’s obsession with winning, which is cultivated by Cohn and his three rules of success: “attack, attack, attack”, “deny everything” and “never admit defeat”. The film seeks to get inside Trump’s mindset, not only as a businessperson, but unpicking what drove him in the White House, as well as the election he’s now fighting.
Some have criticised this approach for being too soft on Trump. A review in The Guardian called the film “obtuse and irrelevant”. A further concern is that presenting Trump as a “winner” could actually be seen to legitimise amoral business practices as successful, especially given that Trump’s later six bankruptcies are not clearly mentioned.
The Apprentice is also a deeper commentary on America. Another character comments that Cohn’s three rules also describe US foreign policy. The film raises big questions about the US, not least where Cohn repeatedly highlights what he identifies as the country’s virtues, and justifies his (sometimes illegal) actions as upholding these. The audience is left to consider what shapes America and its foreign policy – and what may be toxic about this.
Will the film influence the upcoming election?
The Apprentice’s screenwriter, Gabriel Sherman, insists the movie is not designed “to influence people’s minds”. Yet the film’s release so close to the polls means it is inevitably political.
The Apprentice is unlikely to radically shift the electoral needle. Trump’s negative portrayal may make some voters on the fence question his suitability for high office. But beyond this, the film will reinforce what people already thought.
Pro-Trumpers won’t like the movie, but this upset will likely just give oxygen to their support. Those against Trump will also be able to feel their opinion has been affirmed, even by those who would have wanted the film to take a harder line. Although it’s perhaps uncertain whether anyone who dislikes Trump will want to spend two hours watching even more of him than they already have in this election.
While the film likely won’t influence the final outcome, it is still a major marker in this election thanks to the huge controversy around it. Concern over its divisive portrait of Trump meant the movie took five years to reach production. Clint Eastwood turned down the option to direct due to the perceived business risk involved. Distribution also took time to secure – a situation Abbasi describes as a “boycott or censorship”.
Distribution problems were also exacerbated by legal threats. After Cannes (where the film received an eight-minute ovation), Trump’s legal team issued a cease-and-desist letter. Communications Director for the Trump election campaign, Steven Cheung, said the film was “garbage” and “pure fiction”, constituting election interference.
Strong resistance also came from billionaire and close Trump associate, Dan Snyder, who was involved in the film’s financing, thinking it would paint a positive picture of the presidential hopeful. Snyder later sought to block the film’s release after seeing a preview.
Controversy has only raised the movie’s profile. And while people will watch it for very different political reasons, some will buy a ticket purely because this film is now a standout event in one of the most contentious US elections in history.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Michelle Bentley 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.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Kieran Maguire, Senior Teacher in Accountancy and member of Football Industries Group, University of Liverpool
When the Premier League broke away from the rest of English football in 1992, its 22 clubs generated £205 million in its debut season, and the average player earned £2,050 a week. Thirty years later, despite having two fewer clubs, the league’s revenue had increased by 2,850% to £6.1 billion and the average player earned £93,000 a week.
At the heart of this extraordinary growth is an American revolution. In the Premier League’s inaugural season, football was still in recovery from the horrors of the stadium disasters at Hillsborough and Heysel. Owners tended to be from the local area and with a business background. The only foreign owner was Sam Hamman at Wimbledon, a Lebanese millionaire who bought the club on a whim having reportedly been much more interested in tennis. The season ended with Manchester United (under Alex Ferguson) winning the English game’s top league for the first time in 26 years.
Now, if the bid for Everton by the Friedkin Group (TFG) is ratified, 11 of the 20 Premier League clubs will be controlled or part-owned by American investors. The US – long seen as football’s final frontier when it comes to the men’s game – suddenly can’t get enough of English “soccer”.
Four of the Premier League’s “big six” are American-owned – Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea – while a fifth, Manchester City, has a significant US minority shareholding. Aston Villa, Fulham, Bournemouth, Crystal Palace, West Ham and Ipswich Town also have varying degrees of American ownership.
And it’s not even just the glamour clubs at the top of the tree. American investment has also been significant lower down the football pyramid, led by the high-profile acquisition of then non-league Wrexham by Hollywood actors Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenny, and Birmingham City’s purchase by US investors including seven-time Super Bowl winner Tom Brady. American investment in football has reached places as geographically diverse as Carlisle and Crawley in England, and Aberdeen and Edinburgh in Scotland.
Manchester United was the first Premier League club to come under American ownership – after a row about a horse.
In 2005, United was owned by a variety of investors including Irish businessmen and racehorse owners John Magnier and J.P. McManus. Their erstwhile friend Ferguson, the United manager, thought he co-owned the champion racehorse Rock of Gibraltar with them – a stallion worth millions in stud rights. They disagreed – and their bitter dispute was such that Magnier and McManus decided to sell their shares in the football club.
The Miami-based Glazer family – already involved in sport as owners of NFL franchise the Tampa Bay Buccaneers – had already been buying up small tranches of shares in United, but the sudden availability of the Irish shares allowed Malcolm Glazer to acquire a controlling stake for £790 million (around £1.5 billion at today’s prices).
The fact Glazer did not actually have sufficient funds to pay for these shares was a solvable problem. In the some-might-say commercially naive world of top-flight English football before the Premier League, Manchester United was a club without debt, paying its way without leveraging its position as one of the world’s most famous football clubs. Glazer saw the opportunity this presented and arranged a leveraged buy-out (LBO), whereby the football club borrowed more than £600 million secured on its own assets to, in effect, “buy itself” in 2005.
Despite the need to meet the high interest costs to fund the LBO, United continued winning trophies under Ferguson – including three Premier League titles in a row in 2007, 2008 and 2009, as well as a Champions League victory in 2008. Amid this success, the club felt that ticket prices were too low and set about increasing them, with matchday revenue increasing from £66 million in 2004/05 to over £101 million by 2007/08.
Commercial income was another area the Glazers were keen to increase. United set up offices in London and adopted a global approach to finding new official branding deals ranging from snacks to tractor and tyre suppliers – doubling revenues from this income source too.
But in this new, more aggressive world of “sweating the asset”, the debts lingered – and most United fans remained deeply suspicious of their American owners. (Following their father’s death in 2014, the club was co-owned by his six children, with brothers Avram and Joel Glazer becoming co-chairmen.)
Today, despite its partial listing on the New York Stock Exchange and the February 2024 sale of 27.7% of the club to British billionaire Sir Jim Ratcliffe for a reputed £1.25 billion, United still has borrowings of more than £546 million, having paid cumulative interest costs of £969 million since the takeover in 2005. But with the club now valued at US$6.55 billion (around £5bn), it represents a very smart investment for the Glazer family.
Indeed, while the prices being paid for football clubs across Europe have reached record levels, they are still seen as cheap investments compared with US sports’ leading franchises. Forbes’s annual list of the world’s most valuable sports teams has American football (NFL), baseball (MLB) and basketball (NBA) teams occupying the top ten positions, with only three Premier League clubs – Manchester United, Liverpool and Manchester City – in the top 50.
With NFL teams having an average franchise value of US$5.1 billion and NBA $3.9 billion, many English football clubs still look like a bargain from the other side of the pond.
The risk of relegation
The latest to join this US bandwagon, TFG – a Texas-based portfolio of companies run by American businessman and film producer Dan Friedkin – is reported to have offered £400m to buy Everton, despite the club’s poor financial state.
“The Toffees” have been hit by loss of sponsorships as well as two sets of points deductions for breaching the Premier League’s financial rules, leading to revenue losses from lower league positions. While the new stadium being built at Liverpool’s Bramley-Moore dock has been yet another financial constraint, it will at least increase matchday income from the start of next season.
Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore dock will open in time for the start of the 2025-26 season. Phil Silverman / Shutterstock
A wider reason for the relative bargain in valuations of European football clubs is the risk of relegation – something that is not part of the closed leagues of most US sports. While the threat of relegation (and promise of promotion) has always been an integral part of English and European football, the jeopardy this brings for supporters – and a club’s finances – does not exist in the NFL, NBA, Major League Soccer and similar competitions.
The Premier League, with its three relegation spots at the end of each season, has featured 51 different clubs since it launched in 1992. Only six clubs – Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea, Manchester United, Liverpool and Everton – have been ever present, with Arsenal now approaching 100 years of consecutive top-flight football.
Other Premier League clubs have experienced the dramatic cost-benefit of relegation and promotion. Oldham Athletic, who were in the Premier League for its first two seasons, now languish in the fifth tier of the game, outside the English Football League (EFL). In contrast, Luton Town, who were in the fifth tier as recently as 2014, were promoted to the Premier League in 2023 – only to be relegated at the end of last season.
While it is difficult to compare football clubs with basketball and American football teams, the financial difference between having an open league, with relegation, and a closed league becomes apparent when you look at women’s football on both sides of the Atlantic.
Angel City, a women’s soccer team based in Los Angeles, only entered the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) in 2022 and is yet to win an NWSL trophy. But last month, the club was sold for US$250 million (£188m) to Disney’s CEO Bob Iger and TV journalist Willow Bay – the most expensive takeover in the history of women’s professional sport.
In comparison, Chelsea – seven-time winners of the English Women’s Super League and one of the most successful sides in Europe – valued its women’s team at £150 million ($US196m) earlier this summer. While there are a number of factors to this price differential, the confidence that Angel City will always be a member of the big league of US soccer clubs – and share very equally in its revenue – will have made its new owners very confident in the long-term soundness of their deal.
The story of Angel City FC, the most expensive team in women’s sport.
A further attraction for American investors is the potential to enter two markets – one mature (men’s football) and one effectively a start-up (the women’s game) – in a single purchase. In the US, the top men’s and women’s clubs are completely separate. But in Europe, most top-flight women’s teams are affiliated to men’s clubs – with the exception of eight-time Women’s Champions League winners Olympique Lyonnais Feminin, which split from the French men’s club when Korean-American businesswoman Michele Kang bought a majority stake in the women’s team in February 2024).
While interest in, and hence value of, the WSL is now growing fast, the women’s game in England is dwarfed by viewer ratings for the Premier League – the most watched sporting league in the world, viewed by an estimated 1.87 billion people every week across 189 countries.
These figures dwarf even the NFL which, while currently still the most valuable of all sporting leagues in terms of its broadcasting deals, must be looking at the growth of the Premier League with some jealousy. This may explain why some US franchise owners, such as Stan Kroenke, the Glazer family, Fenway Sports Group and Billy Foley, have subsequently purchased Premier League football clubs.
Ironically, for many spectators around the world, it is the intensity and competitiveness of most Premier League matches – brought on in part by the threat of relegation and prize of European qualification – that makes it so captivating. However, billionaire investors like guaranteed numbers and dislike risk – especially the degree of financial risk that exists in the Premier League and English Football League.
European not-so-Super League
In April 2021, 12 leading European clubs (six from England plus three each from Spain and Italy) announced the creation of the European Super League (ESL). This new mid-week competition was to be a high-revenue generating, closed competition with (eventually) 15 permanent teams and five annual additions qualifying from Europe. According to one of the driving forces behind the plan, Manchester United co-chairman Joel Glazer:
By bringing together the world’s greatest clubs and players to play each other throughout the season, the Super League will open a new chapter for European football, ensuring world-class competition and facilities, and increased financial support for the wider football pyramid.
The problem facing the Premier League’s “big six” clubs – and their ambitious owners – is there are currently only four slots available to play in the Champions League. So, their thinking went, why not take away the risk of not qualifying? However, the proposal was swiftly condemned by fans around Europe, together with football’s governing bodies and leagues – all of whom saw the ESL proposal as a threat to the quality and integrity of their domestic leagues. Following some large fan protests, including at Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge, Manchester City was the first club to withdraw – followed, within a couple of days, by the rest of the English clubs.
Under the terms of the ESL proposals, founding member clubs would have been guaranteed participation in the competition forever. Guaranteed participation means guaranteed revenues. The current financial gap between the “big six” and the other members of the Premier League, which in 2022/23 averaged £396 million, would have widened rapidly.
For example, these clubs would have been able to sell the broadcast rights for some of their ESL home fixtures direct to fans, instead of via a broadcaster. All of a sudden, that database of fans who have downloaded the official club app, or are on a mailing list, becomes far more valuable. These are the people most willing to watch their favourite team on a pay-per-view basis, further increasing revenues.
At the same time, a planned ESL wage cap would have stopped players taking all these increased revenues in the form of higher wages, allowing these clubs to become more profitable and their ownership even more lucrative.
American-owned Manchester United and Liverpool had previously tried to enhance the value of their investments during the COVID lockdowns era via ProjectBig Picture – proposals to reduce the size of the Premier League and scrap one of the two domestic cup competitions, thus freeing up time for the bigger clubs to arrange more lucrative tours and European matches against high-profile opposition.
Most importantly, Project Big Picture would have resulted in changing the governance of the domestic game. Under its proposals, the “big six” clubs would have enjoyed enhanced voting rights, and therefore been able to significantly influence how the domestic game was governed.
Any attempt to increase the concentration of power raises concerns of lower competitive balance, whereby fewer teams are in the running to win the title and fewer games are meaningful. This is a problem facing some other major European football leagues including France’s Ligue 1, where interest among broadcasters has dwindled amid the perceived dominance of Paris St-Germain.
So while to date, American-led attempts to change the structure of the Premier League have been foiled, it’s unlikely such ideas have gone away for good. The near-universal fear of fans – even those who welcome an injection of extra cash from a new billionaire owner – is that the spectacle of the league will only be diminished if such plans ever succeed.
And there is evidence from the women’s game that the US closed league format is coming under more pressure from football’s global forces. The NWSL recently announced it is removing the draft system that is designed (as with the NFL and NBA) to build in jeopardy and competitive balance when there is no risk of relegation.
Top US women’s football clubs are losing some of their leading players to other leagues, in part because European clubs are not bound by the same artificial rules of employment. In a truly global professional sport such as football, international competition will always tend to destabilise closed leagues.
Why do they keep buying these clubs?
Does this mean that American and other wealthy owners of Premier League clubs seeking to reduce their risks are ultimately fighting a losing battle? And if so, given the potential risks involved in owning a football club – both financial and even personal – why do they keep buying them?
The motivations are part-financial, part technological and, as has always been the case with sports ownership, part-vanity.
The American economy has grown far faster than that of the EU or UK in recent years. Consequently, there are many beneficiaries of this growth who have surplus cash, and here football becomes an attractive proposition. In fact, football clubs are more resilient to recessions than other industries, holding their value better as they are effectively monopoly suppliers for their fans who have brand loyalty that exists in few other industries.
From 1993 to 2018, a period during which the UK economy more than doubled, the total value of Premier League clubs grew 30 times larger. And many fans are tied to supporting one club, helping to make the biggest clubs more resilient to economic changes than other industries. While football, like many parts of the entertainment industry, was hit by lockdown during Covid, no clubs went out of business, despite the challenges of matches being played in empty stadiums.
Added to this, the exchange rates for US dollars have been very favourable until recently, making US investments in the UK and Europe cheaper for American investors.
Our co-editors commission long-form journalism, working with academics from many different backgrounds who are engaged in projects aimed at tackling societal and scientific challenges.
So, while Manchester United fans would argue that the Glazer family have not been good for the club, United has been good for the Glazers. And Fenway Sports Group (FSG), who bought Liverpool for £300 million in 2010, have recouped almost all of that money in smaller share sales while remaining majority owners of Liverpool.
Despite this, the £2.5 billion price paid for Chelsea by the US Clearlake-Todd Boehly consortium in May 2022 took markets by surprise.
The sale – which came after the UK government froze the assets of the club’s Russian oligarch owner, Roman Abramovich, following the invasion of Ukraine – went through less than a year after Newcastle United had been sold by Sports Direct founder Mike Ashley to the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund for £305 million – approximately twice that club’s annual revenues. Yet Clearlake-Boehly were willing to pay over five times Chelsea’s annual revenues to acquire the club, even though it was in a precarious financial position.
Clearlake is a private equity group whose main aim is to make profits for their investors. But unlike most such investors, who tend to focus on cost-cutting, the Chelsea ownership came in with a high-spending strategy using new financial structuring ideas, such as offering longer player contracts to avoid falling foul of football’s profitability and sustainability rules (although this loophole has since been closed with Uefa, European football’s governing body, limiting contract lengths for financial regulation purposes to five years).
Chelsea’s location in the one of the most expensive areas of London, combined with its on-field success under Abramovich, all added to the attraction, of course. But there are other reasons why Clearlake, along with billionaire businessman Boehly, were willing to stump up so much for the club.
From Hollywood to the metaverse
While some British football fans may have viewed the Ted Lasso TV show as an enjoyable if slightly twee fictional account of American involvement in English soccer, it has enhanced the attraction of the sport in the US. So too Welcome To Wrexham – the fly-on-the-wall series covering the (to date) two promotions of Wales’s oldest football club under the unlikely Hollywood stewardship of Reynolds and McElhenney.
Welcome To Wrexham, season one trailer.
The growth in US interest in English football is reflected in the record-breaking Premier League media rights deal in 2022, with NBC Sports reportedly paying $2.7 billion (£2.06bn) for its latest six-year deal.
But as well as football offering one of increasingly few “live shared TV experiences” that carry lucrative advertising slots, there may also be more opportunity for more behind-the-scenes coverage of the Premier League – as has long been seen in US coverage of NBA games, for example, where players are interviewed in the locker room straight after games.
According to Manchester United’s latest annual report, the club now has a “global community of 1.1 billion fans and followers”. Such numbers mean its owners, and many others, are bullish about the potential of the metaverse in terms of offering a matchday experience that could be similar to attending a match, without physically travelling to Manchester.
Their neighbours Manchester City, part-owned by American private equity company Silverlake, broke new (virtual) ground by signing a metaverse deal with Sony in 2022. Virtual reality could give fans around the world the feeling of attending a live match, sitting next to their friends and singing along with the rest of the crowd (for a pay-per-view fee).
Some investors are even confident that advancements in Abba-style avatar technology could one day allow fans to watch live 3D simulations of Premier League matches in stadiums all over the world. Having first-mover advantage by being in the elite club of owners who can make use of such technology could prove ever more rewarding.
More immediately, there are some indications that competitive matches involving England’s top men’s football teams could soon take place in US or other venues. Boehly, Chelsea’s co-owner, has already suggested adopting some US sports staples such as an All-Star match to further boost revenues. Indeed, back in 2008, the Premier League tentatively discussed a “39th game” taking place overseas, but that idea was quickly shelved.
The American owners of Birmingham City were keen to play this season’s EFL League One match against Wrexham in the US, but again this proposal did not get far. Liverpool’s chairman Tom Werner says he is determined to see matches take place overseas, and recent changes to world governing body Fifa’s rulebook could make it easier for this proposal to succeed.
The potential benefits of hosting games overseas include higher matchday revenues, increased brand awareness, and enhanced broadcast rights. While there is likely to be significant opposition from local fans, at least American owners know they would not face the same hostility about rising matchday prices in the US as they have encountered in England.
When the Argentinian legend Lionel Messi signed for new MLS franchise Inter Miami in 2023, season ticket prices nearly doubled on his account. And while there is vocal opposition to higher ticket prices in England, this is not borne out in terms of lower attendances for matches against high-calibre opposition – as evidenced by Aston Villa charging up to £97 for last week’s Champions League meeting with Bayern Munich.
Villa’s director of operations, Chris Heck, defended the prices by saying that difficult decisions had to be made if the club was to be competitive.
Manchester United’s matchday revenue per EPL season (£m)
For much of the 2010s, with broadcast revenues increasing rapidly, many Premier League owners made little effort to stoke hostilities with their loyal fan bases by putting up ticket prices. Indeed, Manchester United generated little more from matchday income in the 2021-22 season, as football emerged from the pandemic, than the club had in 2010-11 (see chart above).
However, this uneasy truce between fans and owners has ceased. The relative flatlining of broadcast revenues since 2017, along with cost control rules that are starting to affect clubs’ ability to spend money on player signings and wages, has changed club appetites for dampened ticket prices. This has resulted in noticeable rises in individual ticket and season ticket prices by some clubs.
However, season ticket and other local “legacy” fans generate little money compared with the more lucrative overseas and tourist fans. They may only watch their favourite team live once a season, but when they visit, they are far more likely not only to pay higher matchday prices, but to spend more on merchandise, catering and other offerings from the club.
Today’s breed of commercially aware, profit-seeking US Premier League owners – pioneered by the Glazer family, who saw that “sweating the asset” meant more than watching football players sprinting hard – understand there is a lot more value to come from English football teams. The clubs’ loyal local supporters may not like it, but English football’s American-led revolution is not done yet.
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.
Kieran Maguire has taught courses and presented on football finance for the Professional Footballers Association, League Managers Association, FIFA and national football associations in Europe.
Christina Philippou is affiliated with the RAF FA, and Premier League education programs.
In the heart of Isalo National Park in central-southern Madagascar, at least 200km from the sea in any direction, is a remote valley with a mysterious past. This place, Teniky, can only be reached on foot, by hiking through a mountainous region dissected by steep canyons.
Part of the Teniky site has been known for well over 100 years, as we know from names and dates scratched on the rocks there. Various visitors in the 1950s and 1960s with an interest in archaeology described an amphitheatre-shaped location with man-made terraces, a rock shelter with neatly constructed sandstone walls, a chamber cut into the rock with pillars and benches, and a large number of niches cut in the steep cliffs. Recesses are still visible around some of the niches, suggesting that they could be closed off by a wooden or stone slab.
Among the suggested interpretations were that these structures had been made by shipwrecked Portuguese sailors, or Arabs, or even Phoenicians.
No similar rock-cut architecture is known anywhere else in Madagascar or on the east African coast, 400km away.
And until recently, no detailed archaeological studies had ever been carried out at Teniky.
Madagascar’s past is still the subject of considerable debate. Situated in the south-western Indian Ocean, it is one of the last big islands to have been settled by humans. Genetic studies have identified the people of Madagascar as having come mainly from Africa and from Southeast Asia. Archaeology suggests that the first settlers arrived about 1,500 to 1,000 years ago. The earliest settlements studied have been located along the coast, close to river estuaries.
Our archaeological study of Teniky, however, points to a new possibility: a former Persian presence in southern Madagascar about 1,000 years ago.
What we found at Teniky
Our study of high-resolution satellite images revealed the Teniky site was much larger than previously known. It showed there were more terraces and stone walls on a hill 2km to the west. This led us to take a closer look, hoping to get a better sense of who had lived there and when.
During field prospecting on this hill we discovered niches, cut in the walls of a rock shelter, that had not been described before.
Excavations at this rock shelter revealed more archaeological structures, including carved sandstone walls and a large stone basin.
Radiocarbon dating of charcoal samples from the site dated to the late 10th to mid-12th centuries AD. Pieces of ceramic items of southeast Asian and Chinese origin found there have been dated by a specialist to the 11th to 14th centuries AD.
We also found sandstone quarries from which the stones used to build the walls at the rock shelters were extracted. And we found more stone basins on terraces.
The terraces cover a total area of about 30 hectares, indicating that Teniky must have been a fair-sized settlement. Water is available all year round in the valley below, where people might have been able to plant crops, fish for eels or even keep cattle.
Considering the dimensions, location and character of the rock-cut structures at Teniky, we think the niches and chambers served a ritual purpose.
Who were the people who lived at Teniky?
There is no other archaeological site like Teniky in Madagascar. So, the question arises as to what group of people settled there, far inland, and carved the niches and chambers in the cliff walls about 1,000 years ago. The presence of imported ceramics indicates that they took part in the Indian Ocean trade networks at the time but doesn’t tell us where they came from.
We think the answer may lie in the style of the rock-cut niches.
Rock architecture at Teniky, Madagascar. Courtesy Guido Schreurs.
They are similar to rock niches of the first millennium or earlier in Iran (formerly Persia). Archaeologists have interpreted those as belonging to Zoroastrian communities, which used them as part of their funeral rites.
Zoroastrianism was the dominant state religion of the Persian Sasanian Empire (224-656 AD). After the conquest of the Sasanian Empire by the Arabs in the mid-seventh century AD, Islam was imposed.
Zoroastrian funeral rites do not allow direct burial in the ground, so as not to pollute the earth. Instead, dead bodies are left in places of exposure not touching the ground. Once the flesh has decomposed or been removed by animals, the bone remains are dried and placed in bone receptacles (ossuaries).
We tentatively interpret the rock-cut architecture at Teniky as having been made by a community with Zoroastrian origins.
The larger rock-cut niches might have been the places where the bodies of the dead were exposed, and the smaller niches with recesses might have served as ossuaries, closed off by a slab to protect the bones from the rain and thus to prevent them from polluting the earth.
The stone basins at Teniky show stylistic similarities with those used in Zoroastrian ritual ceremonies to hold water or fire, both agents of ritual purity.
Zoroastrians abroad
There are few accounts of Madagascar written at the turn of the first and second millennia AD. Buzurg Ibn Shahriyar, a tenth-century Persian sailor and writer, collected stories from sailors in port towns on the Persian Gulf which suggest that Persian contacts with Madagascar may have existed then. The name Madagascar did not exist at that time but names like “Wak-wak” or “Qumr”/“Komr” may have referred to the island.
Historical documents, archaeological excavations and genetic studies indicate that Zoroastrians left Iran and settled in western India in the late eighth century AD.
Did they settle on the island of Madagascar too? If the rock-cut architecture and associated stone basins at Teniky are the work of a community with Zoroastrian origins, this would strongly point to a former Persian presence in southern Madagascar about 1,000 years ago.
Many questions remain. We hope future studies will answer some of them.
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.
The rapid growth in aquaculture means that billions of individual aquatic animals are now being farmed without basic information that could help ensure even minimal welfare standards. Our newly published study shows that these welfare risks are not uniform: Aquaculture is likely to have severe effects on welfare for some species, but negligible impacts on others.
Whenever humans manage animals on a large scale, welfare becomes a concern. As experts on aquatic animals and their welfare, we believe that taking proactive measures to shape the aquaculture industry’s growth will be critical for its long-term success.
A cuttlefish tackles a challenge originally designed for human children, demonstrating cephalopods’ complex cognitive processes.
Complex aquatic lives
In a wide-ranging review of the existing science, we identified seven risk factors in fish and other sea creatures that would be challenging or impractical to accommodate in captivity. They include 1) migratory behavior, 2) solitary social structures, 3) long life spans, 4) carnivorous feeding habits, 5) cannibalism, 6) living at depths of 165 feet (50 meters) or more, and 7) elaborate courtship or involved parental care.
We researched these characteristics for each of the more than 400 species currently farmed in aquaculture. Our analysis found that many species of fishes, reptiles and amphibians are likely to suffer in aquaculture because they won’t be able to engage in their natural behaviors in farmed conditions. The same is true for crustaceans such as lobsters and for cephalopods such as cuttlefish.
In contrast, aquatic plants and other invertebrates such as oysters would experience fewer differences between their life in the wild versus in a tank, pond or other aquaculture production system.
We also found that species most at risk are among the most expensive on the market but contribute the least to global production. By shifting toward species whose behaviors and life habits are more compatible with aquaculture, the industry could minimize animal welfare risk while also keeping prices down and production quantities high. In other words, protecting aquatic animal welfare is compatible with producing affordable, nutritious food.
Animal welfare in the water
Research shows that many aquatic animals are intelligent, emotional, curious, highly social and have strong preferences. Like land animals, they can suffer if their needs aren’t met.
Divers observe a feeding school of bumphead (also referred to as humphead) parrotfish on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef.
It would be very difficult and expensive to accommodate this species’ long life span, large range, complex foraging behavior and dynamic social relationships in the highly restrictive and monotonous environments of aquaculture.
We also found examples of invertebrate animals with similarly elaborate ways of life. One example is the red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkii), a comparatively small crustacean that builds elaborate tunnel and chamber systems underground. Females care attentively for their tiny offspring, fanning, cleaning and feeding juveniles for up to four months after they hatch.
In contrast, plant species farmed in aquaculture, such as seaweeds and water spinach (Ipomoea aquatica), are nutritious, protein-rich foods that can be raised without posing direct animal welfare concerns.
In 2021 alone, 56 species were farmed for the first time. By identifying species that may naturally adapt better to life in captivity, aquaculture producers and policymakers can steer their industry toward a more humane future.
This approach is already finding support in the U.S., where Washington and California have banned octopus farming. The states acted partly in response to research showing that octopuses are intelligent, curious, social animals that can solve problems and recognize individual people – qualities that are incompatible with being raised en masse for food.
More research is needed to understand the lives and behaviors of other sea creatures that are currently farmed or targeted for production in the future. Most of these species remain understudied and mysterious, which makes it hard to make informed decisions about whether they are suitable for farming.
Better data could contribute to aquaculture policy, while also boosting public appreciation for the diversity and intricacy of life on a planet that is 70% aquatic.
Becca Franks receives funding from TinyBeam Foundation and Open Philanthropy.
Chiawen Chiang 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.
A plastic microfiber found in the exhaled breath of a bottlenose dolphin is nearly 14 times smaller than a strand of hair and can be seen only with a microscope. Miranda Dziobak/College of Charleston, CC BY-SA
Our study found the microplastic particles exhaled by bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are similar in chemical composition to those identified in human lungs. Whether dolphins are exposed to more of these pollutants than people are is not yet known.
The ocean releases microplastics into the air through surface froth and wave action. Once the particles are released, wind can transport them to other locations. Steve Allen, CC BY-SA
In fact, bubble bursts caused by wave energy can release 100,000 metric tons of microplastics into the atmosphere each year. Since dolphins and other marine mammals breathe at the water’s surface, they may be especially vulnerable to exposure.
Where there are more people, there is usually more plastic. But for the tiny plastic particles floating in the air, this connection isn’t always true. Airborne microplastics are not limited to heavily populated areas; they pollute undeveloped regions, too.
Our research found microplastics in the breath of dolphins living in both urban and rural estuaries, but we don’t yet know whether there are major differences in amounts or types of plastic particles between the two habitats.
During these brief permitted health assessments, we held a petri dish or a customized spirometer – a device that measures lung function – above the dolphin’s blowhole to collect samples of the animals’ exhaled breath. Using a microscope in our colleague’s lab, we checked for tiny particles that looked like plastic, such as pieces with smooth surfaces, bright colors or a fibrous shape.
Since plastic melts when heated, we used a soldering needle to test whether these suspected pieces were plastic. To confirm they were indeed plastic, our colleague used a specialized method called Raman spectroscopy, which uses a laser to create a structural fingerprint that can be matched to a specific chemical.
Our study highlights how extensive plastic pollution is – and how other living things, including dolphins, are exposed. While the impacts of plastic inhalation on dolphins’ lungs are not yet known, people can help address the microplastic pollution problem by reducing plastic use and working to prevent more plastic from polluting the oceans.
Leslie Hart receives funding from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, Sea Grant, and the National Science Foundation. Research reported in this article was supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R15ES034169 and the College of Charleston’s School of Health Sciences. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Leslie Hart is an epidemiological consultant for the National Marine Mammal Foundation; however, this study was not conducted as a consultant.
Bottlenose dolphin health assessments were conducted under Scientific Research Permit #26622 and #24359, issued by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Research studies were reviewed and approved by Mote Marine Laboratory and NMFS Atlantic Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC).
Miranda Dziobak 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.
I do research on racist and xenophobic speech. I am also an American citizen, and have voted from overseas since 1996 (first in the U.K., and now in Canada).
The current law giving Americans overseas the right to vote in federal elections is the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, which was signed into law by Ronald Reagan, a Republican president.
The federal program to help American citizens vote while living overseas is overseen by the Department of Defense — which makes sense, given that a large number of them are members of the United States military. All of this should give pause to anyone who thinks that allowing overseas citizens to vote is some sort of left-wing conspiracy.
Complex process
Nor is it an easy matter to vote from overseas. Every state has its own process for verifying citizenship after the registration and request form reaches them, and each has its own rules that voters must follow in order for their ballot to be counted.
My own state, New Jersey, is relatively simple: I can email my registration/request form, get my ballot by e-mail, and email it back. But I must also remember to mail in the paper version of my ballot or my vote won’t count.
This is easy enough for me, from Canada or previously the U.K. But it’s much more difficult for American citizens living in places that lack reliable postal services who often have to use expensive courier services to carry out their duty as citizens.
My husband’s state is New York. He is allowed to e-mail his ballot request, but he must also mail a paper version of the request. And the ballot itself comes with an elaborate set of envelope templates that require precise folding — and must arrive by a strict deadline, no matter where they’re being mailed from.
He’s a former graphic designer, and comfortable performing this task. But imagine trying to do so while suffering from arthritis or vision problems — especially when the home-printed version has tiny text. In short, there is nothing easy about voting from abroad.
So why use inflammatory language to pretend it’s an easy matter to generate many thousands of fraudulent overseas votes? One explanation would be to sow doubt about the election results. Anything that can introduce uncertainty and slow down the counting process can be exploited in an effort that could allow Trump and his allies to falsely declare him the winner on Nov. 5.
Trump’s campaign has made no secret about its plan to follow this path.
Language that suggests American citizens abroad are not really American also fits into a larger pattern of stoking divisions — and of drawing ever tighter boundaries around who would be counted as “real” Americans. This is a classic fascist power move, one that leads to a sharply defined “us,” who are worthy of moral consideration, as opposed to “them,” who are not.
Disenfranchising citizens abroad
Importantly, the movement against overseas voters is not just confined to a social media post. There are lawsuits in several states designed to disenfranchise American citizens abroad. These are citizens who may have gone to enormous lengths to carry out their duties by asking for and sending in election ballots, often at substantial personal expense and faced with substantial barriers.
Trump and his allies are working hard to prevent Americans abroad from exercising their most basic rights of citizenship. When Trump uses language that accuses overseas voters of fraud and foreign interference, it suggests we’re not really Americans.
There’s a major problem in doing so. As mentioned, a large segment of American citizens abroad are members of the U.S. armed forces. Efforts to disenfranchise Americans abroad are also efforts to disenfranchise the military.
‘Figleaf’ language
That’s why Trump’s allegation on Truth Social that Democrats “want to dilute the TRUE vote of our beautiful military” makes no sense. This is especially true given it’s coming from someone who’s attacking the very law that allows members of the military to vote from abroad, including casting ballots for him if they’re so inclined.
This is what I call a figleaf — an additional bit of speech that provides just a bit of cover for saying something else that is much less acceptable. The allegation suggests, to someone who doesn’t understand overseas voting, that Trump somehow supports the military.
Trump’s “diluting the vote” rhetoric also plays into the deeply racist Great Replacement Theory. This theory holds that Democrats and other shadowy forces (often cast as Jewish) are plotting to replace white Americans with foreigners, in part as a way to secure electoral victory.
Overseas voting might seem like a niche issue. But overseas citizens could make all the difference in a close election. The attack on overseas voting is part of a much larger pattern of destructive suggestions from Trump about who is and is not a real American.
Oct. 16 marks World Food Day, a global initiative drawing attention to the “right to foods for a better life and a better future.” However, Canada’s food and agricultural policies are falling short of this objective.
Canada’s current agricultural policies are not serving the well-being of the public. Canada’s agricultural program payments and subsidies are not aligned with the government’s dietary guidelines and health goals.
Very few agriculture investments go to the production of fruits and vegetables, even though Canadians under-consume them. Instead, financial support overwhelmingly goes to feed crops, agricultural export crops and foods high in saturated fat. This is particularly troubling, given the rise of food and lifestyle diseases in Canada, such as diabetes, obesity, coronary heart disease and high cholesterol.
The health-care costs of diet-related diseases from not meeting the dietary guidelines are at least two per cent of all health-care costs in Canada, with some estimates putting it as high as 19 per cent. Agricultural policy is not just about food; it influences health, the economy and the environment.
Climate change and agriculture
Trying to address greenhouse gas emissions without paying attention to agriculture is like heating your home while not ensuring doors and windows are closed. Agriculture is a big contributor to Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.
As climate change intensifies, bringing more frequent and severe wildfires, droughts, floods, and heat domes , agriculture is being impacted. Instability in weather patterns threatens regional and global social stability and may require Canada to rethink the dominant role of international trade in shaping its current agricultural policies.
Despite these concerns, Canada is not investing strategically or sufficiently in agriculture. Despite $12.5 billion dollars in annual agricultural supports, a surprising portion of Canadian farmers continue to financially struggle to survive. According to the National Farmers Union:
“Over the last three decades, the agribusiness corporations that supply fertilizers, chemicals, machinery, fuels, technologies, services, credit, and other materials and services have captured 95 per cent of all farm revenues, leaving farmers just five per cent.”
In 2016, 66 per cent of all farms in Canada were in the revenue class of $10,000 to $249,999. On average, these farms had expenses exceeding their revenue by a large margin.
While Canada spends a large share of its budget on addressing the negative outcomes of how we produce and consume food, there remain greater opportunities for investing in preventive measures that promote a healthier, more sustainable food system. Canada’s 20th century agriculture policy regime is woefully insufficient for the challenges of the 21st century.
Food outlets and school cafeterias can play a role in reducing inefficiencies in the food system, like food waste, and improving sustainability by promoting healthy eating. To make this happen, schools need more resources and autonomy to counter misinformation about food and position Canadians for success by making healthy choices attractive.
To truly make an impact, local food movements must be part of a larger, co-ordinated effort supported by policies that align agricultural production with healthy diets.
A new approach to food policies that considers them from a holistic perspective, beyond GDP, and respects farmers while creating food systems based on the One Planet and One Health frameworks is needed.
It’s important to recognize that farmers are not only just business operators; they are our neighbours, and are integral to our communities. Supporting them with better policies and giving everyone equitable access to nourishing and sustainable foods will ensure a healthier, more resilient future for all Canadians.
Canada needs to provide stronger support for family farms practising agroecologically sound production methods. Government programs that support greater production and purchasing of grains, fruits and vegetables for direct human consumption are also needed. These initiatives would reduce Canada’s reliance on imports of these critical foods.
In addition, federal and municipal governments should strengthen and broaden Canada’s bioregional food systems while also fostering the growth of small- and medium-sized food businesses. It’s also important to reduce the political and market power of oligopolies in Canada’s food system.
In fact, smaller-scale agroecological farmers operating in bioregional food systems are key. Achieving our broader societal goals means thinking of food through agriculture, human health and environmental sustainability lenses.
Canada needs a new vision of agriculture that connects health and environment goals with sustainable diets and prosperous family farming. This vision must prioritize nutritious diets, human and environmental health, and the overall well-being of society beyond profits, market share and food exports. Also it must be formed collectively by decision-makers, farmers, food processors, community groups and the public.
In Canada, governments, organizations and citizens must work together to create a food system vision for Canada, much like Food Secure Canada’s Resetting the Table process previously did.
Further collaboration among agriculture, environment and health professionals can arise from these efforts, as can be seen with Canada’s National School Food program, which is aligning local farmers and suppliers of local options to meet Canada’s Food Guide. This is also an opportunity for Canada’s Food Policy Advisory Council to gain greater influence in shaping policy.
Just as calls for health-care reform often focus on improving services, Canadians have the right to expect better outcomes from agricultural subsidies. By prioritizing economic, environmental and public health sustainability, Canada can ensure its agricultural policy is fit for its 21st-century food system.
Kathleen Kevany received funding from Protein Industries Canada. She is an advisor to Farm to Cafeteria Canada.
Howard Nye receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. He is a board member and research lead for Canadians for Responsible Food Policy.
Mark Kent Mullinix receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Government of British Columbia, various foundations
Talan B. Iscan is a project lead and receives funding from MacEachen Institute for Public Policy and Governance at Dalhousie University. He is a board member with the Halifax Cycling Coalition, a non-profit.
