In May 2023, Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, embarked on a whistle-stop tour of European capitals to shore up support from his western partners in the run-up to Ukraine’s summer offensive that year. His tour was a relative success – the subsequent offensive less so.
Fast forward 18 months, and Zelensky has once again been visiting London, Paris, Rome and Berlin in search for western support. This time, he sought backing for his victory plan. But the odds now are clearly stacked against Ukraine on the battlefield. And Zelensky also faces an uphill struggle on the diplomatic front.
The initial plan for Zelensky and his allies had been to convene at a meeting of the Ramstein group. This is the loose configuration of some 50 countries who have supported Ukraine’s defence efforts since the start of the full-scale Russian aggression in February 2022.
With the US president, Joe Biden, scheduled to attend after a state visit to Germany, the gathering at Ramstein Air Base in Germany had been pitched at the level of heads of state and government. It was expected that there were to be some big announcements of continuing support for Ukraine.
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.
But with hurricane Milton scheduled to hit Florida, Biden was forced to cancel his trip. While Biden’s visit to Germany has apparently been rescheduled for October 18, 2024, the Ramstein meeting remains postponed.
This has deprived the Ukrainian president of the chance to pitch his victory plan to his more important allies. So he has been unable to get them to commit to the support that will be necessary to implement it.
Zelensky wants an accelerated path to Nato membership. He is also asking for a Nato-enforced no-fly zone over western Ukraine and more air-defence systems for the country to better protect its own skies.
Other key elements of the plan involve permission to use western-supplied long-range missiles against targets deep inside Russia, the delivery of long-range German Taurus ballistic missiles and significant investment into Ukraine’s defence industry.
Most of these demands are non-starters in western capitals. That much was already made clear during Zelensky’s recent trip to New York and Washington in mid-September.
The Ukrainian president managed to get his US counterpart to authorise US$8 billion (£6.12 billion) in further security assistance. But there has been no progress on lifting the restrictions that the US and other allies are placing on Ukraine’s use of western military aid against Russian territory.
The western alliance remains divided on this. And the US is particularly sceptical of its strategic value.
Similarly, the prospect of Ukraine joining Nato continues to be remote – not least as it would require the consent of all 32 current member states. The Slovak prime minister, Robert Fico, has openly stated that he will veto Ukraine’s accession to the alliance. His Hungarian counterpart, Victor Orban, is also well known for his opposition to Kyiv joining the alliance.
More damaging to Ukraine’s Nato aspirations, however, is a similar reluctance in both Washington and Berlin. This has been key in ensuring that the two most recent Nato summits in Vilnius in 2023 and Washington in 2024 only re-affirmed that “Ukraine’s future is in Nato” but failed to attach a clear timeline to it.
Kyiv’s allies need to double down – now
At the end of his meeting with the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, on October 11, Zelensky secured another €1.4 billion (£1.17 billion) worth of air defences, tanks, drones and artillery, to be jointly delivered by Germany, Belgium, Denmark and Norway.
But Taurus ballistic missiles – top of Kyiv’s shopping list – are not included in this package. While predictable, this was a major disappointment for Zelensky. As was the fact that he essentially walked away empty-handed from his meetings in London, Paris and Rome.
There is no indication that any of these major allies are likely to withdraw their support. But it is equally clear that they are not prepared to increase it decisively.
This was also evident during the visit to Kyiv of the new Nato secretary-general, Mark Rutte, on October 3. Rutte travelled to Ukraine within days of assuming the role to reiterate the continuation of the alliance’s support. But as symbolically important as this was, he merely confirmed what had already been agreed rather than announcing anything new.
The EU did marginally better. On October 10 it was announced the bloc was set to extend the training programme for Ukrainian troops until the end of 2026. The mission was launched in November 2022 and has trained some 60,000 troops to date. That’s about half of all Ukrainian soldiers trained abroad – and three times the number who received training from the US.
The EU’s overall aid to Ukraine now stands at €162 billion since the beginning of the war in 2022, compared to €84 billion from the US. Two-thirds of US aid is military in nature, and with almost €57 billion to date, it dwarfs the contributions by Germany and the UK, the two next-largest donors with around €10 billion each.
These are impressive numbers and there can be no doubt that Ukraine would have lost this war long ago without support from its western allies. Yet, the fact is that what Ukraine’s western partners currently provide is barely enough to prevent a Ukrainian defeat, let alone enable Ukraine to implement its victory plan.
Vladimir Putin has consistently raised his country’s war effort to meet any challenges presented over the course of the conflict. Unless the west doubles down on its support to allow Kyiv to do the same, not only will Ukraine not win this war, it is in serious danger of losing it.
The high-level meeting planned for Ramstein would have been the opportunity for the west to change gear decisively. Ukraine can only hope that its postponement, rather than outright cancellation, means its allies may yet step up to the plate.
Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Renaud Foucart, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster University
This year’s Nobel memorial prize in economics has gone to Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and James Robinson of the University of Chicago for their work on why there are such vast differences in prosperity between nations.
While announcing the award, Jakob Svensson, the chairman of the economics prize committee, said: “Reducing the huge differences in income between countries is one of our times’ greatest challenges”. The economists’ “groundbreaking research” has given us a “much deeper understanding of the root causes of why countries fail or succeed.”
The award, which was established several decades after the original Nobel prizes in the 1960s, is technically known as the Sveriges Riksbank prize in economic sciences. The academics will share the award and its 11 million kroner (£810,000) cash prize.
To explain their work and why it matters, we talked to Renaud Foucart, a senior lecturer in economics at Lancaster University in the UK.
What did Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson win for?
The three academics won the prize mostly for providing causal evidence of the influence of the quality of a country’s institutions on its economic prosperity.
At first glance, this may seem like reinventing the wheel. Most people would agree that a country that enforces property rights, limits corruption, and protects both the rule of law and the balance of power, will also be more successful at encouraging its citizens to create wealth, and be better at redistributing it.
But anyone following the news in Turkey, Hungary, the US or even the UK, will be aware that not everyone agrees. In Hungary for instance, cases of corruption, nepotism, a lack of media pluralism, and threats to the independence of the judiciary have led to a fierce battle with the European Union.
Rich countries typically have strong institutions. But several (wannabe) leaders are perfectly comfortable with weakening the rule of law. They do not seem to see institutions as the cause of their prosperity, just as something that happens to be correlated.
In their view, why does the quality of institutions vary across countries?
Their work starts with something that has clearly not had a direct effect on today’s economic prosperity: living conditions at the start of European colonialism in the 14th century. Their hypothesis is that, the richer and the more inhospitable to outsiders a place was, the more colonial powers were interested in brutally stealing the country’s riches.
In that case, they built institutions without any regard for the people living there. This led to low quality institutions during the colonial period, that continued through independence and led to bad economic conditions today.
All of this is because – and this is another domain to which this year’s laureates contributed – institutions create the conditions of their own persistence.
In contrast, in more hospitable and less developed places, colonialists did not take resources. They instead settled and tried to create wealth. So, it was in their (selfish) interest to build democratic institutions that benefited people living there.
The researchers then tested their hypothesis by looking at historical data. First, they found a “great reversal” of fortune. Places that were the most urbanised and densely populated in 1500 became the poorest by 1995. Second, they found that places where settlers died quickly from disease and could therefore not stay – while local populations were mostly immune – are also poorer today.
Looking at the colonial roots of institutions is an attempt to disentangle causes and consequences. It is also perhaps the main reason why the committee would say that even if this year’s laureates did not invent the idea that institutions matter, their contribution is worthy of the highest distinction.
Some have suggested the work simply argues ‘democracy means economic growth’. Is this true?
Not in a vacuum. For instance, their work does not tell us that imposing democracy from scratch on a country with otherwise malfunctioning institutions will work. There is no reason for a democratic leader not to become corrupt.
Institutions are a package. And this is why it is so important to preserve their different aspects today. Weakening even a little bit of the protections the state offers to citizens, workers, entrepreneurs and investors may then lead to a vicious circle where people do not feel safe that they will be defended against corruption or expropriation. And this leads to lower prosperity and more calls for authoritarian rules.
There may also be outliers. China is clearly trying to push the idea that capitalism without a liberal democracy can be compatible with economic success.
The growth of China since Deng Xiaoping’s reforms in the 1980s coincides with the introduction of stronger property rights for entrepreneurs and businesses. And, in that sense, it is a textbook version of the power of institutions.
But it is also true that Deng Xiaoping ordered the crushing by the military of the Tiananmen Square protests for democracy in 1989. China today also has a clearly more authoritarian system than western democracies.
And China is still much poorer than its democratic counterparts, despite being the world’s second-largest economy. China’s GDP per capita is not even a fifth of that of the US, and it is facing major economic challenges of its own.
Actually, according to Acemoglu, Xi Jinping’s increasingly authoritarian regime is the reason why China’s economy is “rotting from the head”.
What trajectory are democratic institutions throughout the world currently on?
Acemoglu has expressed concern that democratic institutions in the US and Europe are losing support from the population. And, indeed, many democracies do seem to be doubting the importance of protecting their institutions.
They flirt with giving more power to demagogues who claim it is possible to be successful without a strong set of rules that bind the hands of the rulers. I doubt today’s prize will have the slightest influence on them.
But if there is one message to take home from the work of this year’s laureates, it is that voters should be cautious not to throw the baby of economic prosperity with the bathwater of the sometimes frustrating rules that sustain it.
Renaud Foucart 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.
Just as calculators took over the tedious number-crunching in maths a few decades ago, artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming coding. Take Kyo, an eight-year-old boy in Singapore who developed a simple platform game in just two hours, attracting over 500,000 players.
Using nothing but simple instructions in English, Kyo brought his vision to life leveraging the coding app Cursor and also Claude, a general purpose AI. Although his dad is a coder, Kyo didn’t get any help from him to design the game and has no formal coding education himself. He went on to build another game, an animation app, a drawing app and a chatbot, taking about two hours for each.
This shows how AI is dramatically lowering the barrier to software development, bridging the gap between creativity and technical skill. Among the range of apps and platforms dedicated to this purpose, others include Google’s AlphaCode 2 and Replit’s Ghostwriter.
In another example of the power of these apps, an eight-year-old American girl called Fay built a chatbot that purported to be Harry Potter. She had it up and running in just 45 minutes, at which point it asked if she had heard the rumours about the Deathly Hallows and suggested they discuss it over a butterbeer at the Three Broomsticks.
For those that already know how to code, numerous AI apps have become incredibly helpful too. At the other extreme from the natural language coding apps described above, tools like Tabnine and GitHub Copilot act as intelligent assistants, predicting and autocompleting code as you type.
Alternatives such as Sourcery and DeepCode go a step further, offering real-time code cleanup, suggesting improvements and fixing vulnerabilities. New tools are emerging weekly, such as OpenAI’s GPT Canvas, a new GPT version designed to help with sophisticated coding. Many of these tools can also translate code from one programming language to another, say from JavaScript to Python.
The productivity gains that these tools offer are revolutionising the software industry. As many as 70% of companies have already adopted the likes of GitHub Copilot, with coders reporting that AI is enabling them to write software that is more reliable and bug free.
By removing the need to spend so many hours ironing out human errors, coders are able to spend more time focusing on higher value tasks such as designing system architecture and collaborating with colleagues.
It is also changing the game for university educators like myself as we race to keep up. We’ve been having to rethink teaching materials and also assessment methods, wrestling with how exactly to grade a student’s coding in situations where AI tools are doing much of the work.
Today’s limitations
As exciting as all this is, AI coding is still in its infancy. At this stage it can only help non-coders to build simple applications or games. It can’t yet oversee big complex IT projects by understanding the big picture in a way that a human coder would.
It can’t yet invent new ways to solve problems either, and is still more likely to lag in areas like, say, spacecraft navigation that require highly specialised knowledge.
Many tools also don’t write perfect code: a program will often work but won’t be efficient or secure enough for use in the real world. Similarly, AI tools don’t inherently understand the context of the data they process, so may mishandle sensitive information or perpetuate biases present in the data on which they were trained.
For all these reasons, in professional situations there’s still a need for a coder to make sure that everything is meeting the necessary standards. No doubt in future we may see AI coding tools designed to handle everything from security issues to highly specialised subject matter. Their ability to help non-coders to build apps will also only improve. For now at least, however, AI coding is still amplifying the skills of coders rather than replacing them altogether.
How to build your own game
All the same, it’s incredible what you can do with these tools as a non-coder already. Here’s a quick guide to making a simple platform game:
Step 1: Sign up for an AI tool: Create an account with, say, Cursor or AlphaCode 2 and follow the setup instructions. Depending on which tool you choose, you may need to do a quick install. You may also need to install a programming language such as Python, as well as a source code editor such as VS Studio Code 2 – the coding platform will keep you right on this.
Step 2: Start your game: Open a new project in the tool. Into the prompt, type: “Create a simple platform game where the platforms are made of sweet treats”.
Step 3: See what it’s like: Click “run” or “preview” to see what you’ve created (depending on which system you are using, you may have to do this in the source code editor). You should see platforms made of candy or cakes.
Step 4: Make some changes: Let’s say we change the main character into a parrot. Simply type into the prompt: “Make the avatar a green parrot”.
Step 5: Add features: Now type into the prompt: “Let the parrot be controlled by the cursor arrows, insert some sweets for it to collect and add a score counter for how many it has collected”.
Step 6: Test and tweak: Click “run” or “preview” again to test the updated game. Make changes by typing things like, “Insert a black crow that will chase the parrot around the screen. If the crow touches the parrot, freeze the screen and display a message in the middle of the screen saying ‘Too Bad!!!’”. Keep repeating these steps until you’re happy with the results.
Step 7: Get it out there: You might now want to share your game with friends or online via an app store. It must be said that AI coders are not yet doing this well, so you may find this trickier without prior knowledge. One option is to deploy the game online via a free platform such as Zeabur, as explained here.
Daniel Zhou Hao 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 UK and north-western Europe have had a particularly wet 2024. Extreme weather patterns caused by climate change are nothing to celebrate, but there is one group of organisms that will have appreciated all the rain.
Numerous languages have a saying to the effect of “growing like mushrooms after the rain”. Indeed, rainfall across the year is a major factor in the prevalence of mushrooms. These are the short-lived structures we see poking above the soil that fungi use for reproduction. The rest of the fungus is actually there all the time, growing within the soil in a web of filaments known as mycelium.
Similar to the way plants spread their offspring via seeds, fungi produce mushrooms to release spores that can be carried on the wind or spread by animals. As with any organism’s reproduction, it costs the fungus a lot of energy to make mushrooms, so its decision to make this investment will be attuned to when it is likely to have the best chance of success.
Spores need moisture to germinate, and it generally helps if it’s not too cold. Autumn in the temperate climate found across much of Europe usually provides these conditions in abundance. Add in a mild, wet summer to get things started and that’s why we’re probably looking at a bumper autumn for wild mushrooms in 2024.
Do the seasons feel increasingly weird to you? You’re not alone. Climate change is distorting nature’s calendar, causing plants to flower early and animals to emerge at the wrong time.
This article is part of a series, Wild Seasons, on how the seasons are changing – and what they may eventually look like.
How to make the most of it
Some of the most prized gourmet mushrooms can be foraged in autumn, like chanterelles or porcini. When done responsibly, it’s a great hobby. But foragers beware: there has been an influx of mushroom identification books written by generative-AI and riddled with (potentially deadly) errors, so always get information about edible mushrooms from a safe and reliable source.
Chanterelle mushrooms are edible (and delicious). lzf/Shutterstock
If you ever feel tempted to pick something without being certain what it is, remember the adage: “there are old mushroom hunters and there are bold mushroom hunters, but there are no old bold mushroom hunters”. Never munch on a hunch.
Autumn is the most productive season for mushrooms in temperate regions, though spring is fruitful too; St George’s mushroom was named for its tendency to appear around April 23. It’s also not only mushroom-forming fungi that have these seasonal and weather-driven patterns. Cases of a nasty lung infection called valley fever in the south-western US are caused by the microscopic Coccidioides soil fungi. They peak in the autumn, with particular surges in years following wet winters.
Considering fungi are so dependent on weather and temperature, it’s not surprising that the timing and overall length of mushroom production is being affected by climate change. This mirrors the shifts in seasonal patterns for plants and animals.
While an extended mushroom season could sound like good news to foragers, unfortunately, changing conditions may make fungal diseases like valley fever a bigger problem. And as extreme floods become more common, exposure to mould fungi will probably become a more pressing health issue in homes.
Fungi aren’t just rain-lovers, though, they’re actually also rain-makers. Spores released into the atmosphere from fungi can act as a surface on which moisture in the air can form water droplets, and when this happens on a large scale it can contribute to the formation of clouds.
This is just one example of the many underappreciated ways that fungi support our environment. Come rain or shine, I hope that you have the opportunity to get out into nature this autumn and enjoy the fungi.
Rowena Hill 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.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has promised to “rip out the bureaucracy that blocks investment” in the UK. He was speaking at his government’s first international investment summit, an attempt to encourage the finance and business worlds to put more money into the country.
But the government will need much more investment – by both the private and public sectors – than can be drummed up with one summit and an intent to slash red tape if it is to meet its economic goals. So Labour’s upcoming first budget on October 30 presents a vital opportunity to lay the foundations for an investment boost over the coming years.
A major, long-term aim is to get the UK’s annual growth back to its pre-2008 banking crisis rate, when it was around 2% a year. The UK has been growing at about half that rate since then.
This slower economic growth has damaged people’s living standards as well as the tax receipts the government needs to fund public services, particularly since the pressures of the COVID pandemic.
Slow growth could be turned around by increasing investment in things like infrastructure. The UK has lagged behind comparable economies in this regard – it has had the lowest rate of investment in the G7 group of major economies for 24 of the last 30 years.
Last year, the UK’s GDP per capita (a measure of the average income) was nearly £11,000 lower than it would have been had the economy continued to grow at its pre-2008 rate.
Rather unusually, despite the UK’s debt recently reaching 100% of GDP – the highest amount in more than half a century – the usually fiscally conservative International Monetary Fund (IMF) has said the UK should consider focusing on investment. This, it says, could potentially boost GDP growth and thus stabilise the debt-to-GDP ratio.
And the UK’s spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), believes it is possible to raise economic growth through more investment. The OBR estimates that a sustained 1% of GDP increase in public investment could increase the level of potential national output by just under 0.5% after five years, and around 2.5% in 50 years.
So, there will undoubtedly be a number of investment measures in the Budget. But how many depends, in part, on whether the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, revises some restrictions on borrowing, known as the fiscal rules. There could be adjustments such as offsetting government debt with its assets, including student loans. Reeves is reportedly looking at this possibility – which could create as much as £50 billion of additional fiscal headroom.
She could also re-institute the previous Labour government’s golden rule: only borrow to invest. This could separate out capital investment (spending on things like roads and other infrastructure), which is needed to support long-term growth, from day-to-day spending on public services. It would also increase the transparency of what the borrowing is for, and whether it can deliver growth that can help stabilise the debt-to-GDP ratio.
These changes would prevent public investment from being cut in order to meet one of the current fiscal rules Reeves is adhering to. That is, that debt must be falling as a percentage of GDP over a rolling five-year period. As it stands, this rule restricts how much Reeves can borrow – even if that is what the country needs to grow economically.
A change to this rule could help the government fund its two new initiatives to promote public investment: the National Wealth Fund, which requires just over £7 billion over the parliament, and GB Energy, which needs about £8 billion.
Convincing investors
Investments in the National Wealth Fund and GB Energy could further raise economic growth by “crowding in” private investment. For example, investing in infrastructure like a road entices private firms to invest too, perhaps in new premises or more staff, because a better transport link will make these firms’ investments more profitable.
The government’s aim is to bring in three times the public investment in the National Wealth Fund to invest in infrastructure and key sectors. GB Energy likewise intends to bring in private investors to support the green transition that can generate new output and jobs.
But targeting growth will take more than just finding the money. It also requires a regulatory approach and planning system that generates confidence among private investors to put their money in alongside the government.
The impending Budget won’t set out all of the details that investors are looking for, but they will expect to see the growth strategy and assess whether it is credible. For instance, successive governments have struggled with planning reform, so investors will be justified in wondering what will be different this time.
Rachel Reeves could potentially give herself an extra £50 billion to spend if she changes the fiscal rules. Fred Duval/Shutterstock
Investors will also be on the lookout for a more certain regulatory regime over several years. The main impediments to investment tend to be uncertainty, including over regulation and planning, as well as being able to find workers with the right skills. This Budget is an opportunity to set out what the government plans to do in both areas over its five-year parliament.
One positive signal to investors would be if the Budget sets out a broad definition of “capital”. For physical capital like a factory to be properly used, it requires people (human capital). And we hear a lot about green assets and digital assets, which essentially means that capital can be physical, human or green, as well as digital.
By outlining its policies around infrastructure and skills, as well as its environmental and digital policies, any proposed growth strategy would be more holistic and likelier to have a positive impact on growth.
But the difference between a strategy and a great strategy is in its execution. The Budget will almost certainly set out various fiscal policies to support growth. But the ability to deliver this strategy will determine whether it is truly a budget for growth.
Linda Yueh 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 Duncan Large, Professor of European Literature and Translation; Executive Director, British Centre for Literary Translation, University of East Anglia
Han Kang, the South Korean winner of the 2024 Nobel prize in literature, made her breakthrough in the English-speaking world with her first translated novel (her third in Korean), The Vegetarian. Published in English in 2015, it was an immediate success, making the Evening Standard bestseller list. It went on to win the Man Booker international prize the following year for Han and her young English translator, Deborah Smith.
In the summer of 2015, Han spent a week at the University of East Anglia (UEA) where she was the resident author for the Korean-English literary translation workshop at the annual summer school of the British Centre for Literary Translation (BCLT). She was already a prize-winning writer in Korea and had recently published the controversial novel that Smith would go on to translate as Human Acts.
As part of the summer school in July 2015, Deborah Smith led a workshop with Han for six emerging translators of Korean, sponsored by the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. Han later commented that the event as a whole was “on a larger scale and more intensive than any other translation program I had previously heard about or experienced”.
It was already clear that Han was a major figure, and the power of her writing was reinforced by the quiet authority of her presence. For workshop participant Roxanne Edmunds: “The great thing about the workshops was that we were able to work on the translation with the author. It was a little intimidating at first, but Han put us at ease with her enthusiasm.”
I remember that in the workshop we spent an hour or so moving around a comma, adding it to the sentence, taking it out. And spent a long time discussing the colour and feel and look of a cardigan one of the characters wore and how it signified. I was quite amazed at how we could do this in all seriousness – labouring over such details (not even there on the page), when I had been working until then on tight deadlines and weekly translation quotas. But Han’s work stood up to that scrutiny and expansive kind of reading.
Victoria Caudle, another of the workshop participants and now a doctoral candidate at UCLA, added:
Working with Han, I experienced a writer who respected translation as its own process of writing. She was fascinated by how we would agonise over how to express the slightest movement or smallest image in the text. Overall, I remember how generous she was, how softly she spoke and how strong her words were.
After a week of intensive discussion, the group produced a translated extract from Han’s short story Europa that was barely a page in length, but the value of such activities always lies at least as much in the process as in the product.
The workshop culminated in a joint reading of the translated text as part of the Summer School’s finale at Dragon Hall in Norwich, the beautiful medieval home of BCLT’s partner the National Centre for Writing.
Bowman and Caudle went on to found the Smoking Tigers, a Korean-English literary translator collective, together with several other alumni. Buoyed by the success of her translation of The Vegetarian, Smith founded Tilted Axis Press, which in turn won the International Booker prize in 2022 for Tomb of Sand, written by Geetanjali Shree and translated from the Hindi by Daisy Rockwell.
In response to Han’s Nobel win, the president of the Literature Translation Institute of Korea, Sooyoung Chon, remarked: “Han Kang’s Nobel prize in literature is a pivotal moment that highlights LTI Korea’s efforts to introduce Korean literature to the world.” BCLT has continued to collaborate closely with LTI Korea on several other summer school workshops, but the inaugural 2015 edition has proved particularly consequential.
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 Large works for the British Centre for Literary Translation at the University of East Anglia, which received funding from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea for its 2015 Summer School.
The desire to have our own biological children is hard-wired into many of us. And the desire is often felt more keenly in those struggling with infertility. So the promise of a simple solution is hard to ignore – which may be why “the Mucinex method” is trending on social media.
Many women on TikTok are attributing successful conception to their use of the widely available cough and cold medicine Mucinex – or similar over-the-counter decongestant medicines containing the active ingredient guaifenesin.
Why would a medicine designed to relieve cough and cold symptoms help women get pregnant? During unprotected sexual intercourse, sperm are deposited at the top of the vagina. To reach and fertilise the egg, the sperm must first traverse the cervix, a small canal that connects the vagina and the womb.
The cervix plays a critical role in regulating the passage of sperm through its production of cervical mucus. During a woman’s menstrual cycle, the quantity and consistency of the cervical mucus changes, becoming optimal around the time of ovulation.
If there is too much mucus, or it is too thick, it can stop the sperm from reaching the egg. So, the idea goes that by taking Mucinex, a woman would thin her cervical mucus and make it easier for the sperm to reach the egg.
The rising popularity of fertility tracking apps has increased awareness of signs of the fertile window among users, including through monitoring of cervical mucus quantity and consistency. Once familiar with their individual signs, it follows that women who are trying or, indeed, struggling to conceive might start considering how to optimise their chances of conception in any given cycle.
A simple over-the-counter product such as Mucinex could well seem like a quick and simple solution with potentially more rapid results than dieting or a change in other lifestyle factors.
Not surprisingly, questions are being asked over the validity of taking Mucinex, or other guaifenesin-containing medicines, as fertility aids.
The fact is, there is scant scientific evidence proving that Mucinex can help with fertility. The most cited scientific study is from 1982 and was published in the journal Fertility and Sterility. Here, scientists studied 40 couples whose infertility was defined as being a “cervical issue”.
The women in the study were given 200mg of guaifenesin, three times a day starting on the fifth day of their menstrual cycle. By the end of the study, 15 out of the 40 couples had become pregnant, which some may see as supporting the use of guaifenesin.
However, as there was no group that didn’t take guaifenesin (a control group), it is not possible to attribute these pregnancies solely to guaifenesin.
In a separate case study, a man took 600mg of guaifenesin, twice a day, for two months. The study reported a dramatic increase in sperm production and motility. However, as this study was conducted on a single 32-year-old man, the researchers could not confirm that guaifenesin was the cause of the change.
It should be noted that Reckitt, the makers of Mucinex, said in a statement that Mucinex should “only be used as intended in line with label directions”. And that taking Mucinex for infertility “constitutes off-label use”.
Is there any harm in taking guaifenesin to conceive?
While no associations between guaifenesin and birth defects have been identified, there is still no solid data on how guaifenesin might affect embryo development.
For those seeking to become parents, the idea of boosting your chances with a widely available medication is understandably enticing. However, there is not enough evidence to support taking guaifenesin to improve fertility.
There are a range of other simple, lifestyle changes that have been shown to help with getting pregnant. These include maintaining a healthy weight and diet, reducing alcohol intake, giving up smoking and lowering stress. For those experiencing difficulties in becoming pregnant, the best, and possibly simplest advice is to talk to your doctor.
Adam Watkins receives funding from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council under grant BB/V006711/1.
Emma Lucas is a council member of the Society for Reproduction and Fertility.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Liam Lachs, Postdoctoral Research Associate in Climate Change Ecology and Evolution, Newcastle University
The authors working in their ‘coral nursery’ in the Pacific.Liam Lachs
Our research group has bred corals able to better survive marine heatwaves. Our work, now published in Nature Communications, shows that it is possible to improve coral heat tolerance even within a single generation.
We did this using selective breeding: a technique used by humans for thousands of years to produce animals and plants with desirable characteristics. Selective breeding is how humans turned wolf-like dogs into St Bernards, chihuahuas and everything in between.
Now, selective breeding is being considered as a tool for nature conservation, particularly for coral reefs. The Coralassist Lab (of which we are part) and the Palau International Coral Reef Center have been working on coral heatwave survival specifically. Our latest results are the culmination of seven years’ work.
Marine heatwaves trigger mass coral bleaching and mortality, with 2023-2024 declared as the fourth global mass bleaching event. Assisted evolution methods — like selective breeding — aim to boost natural adaptation to buy time for corals under climate change.
Yet the improvement in heat tolerance in our selectively bred corals was modest compared to the intensity of marine heatwaves expected in the future. While selective breeding is feasible, it is likely not a panacea. We’ll still need to tackle the cause of mass coral bleaching by reducing greenhouse gas emissions in order to mitigate warming and give assisted evolution programmes time to take effect.
How to breed corals for heat tolerance
The first step was to determine the heat tolerance of many potential parent corals on the reef. Then, we chose specific individuals to breed two separate families of offspring, selected for either high or low heat tolerance. We reared these offspring for three to four years until they reached reproductive maturity, and then tested their heat tolerance.
Some of the selectively-bred coral at the nursery in the Pacific island nation Palau. Jesse Alpert
We conducted selective breeding trials for two different traits, either the tolerance to a short, intense heat exposure (temperatures 3.5°C above normal for ten days) or a less intense but long-term exposure more typical of natural marine heatwaves (2.5°C above average for a month). This enabled us to estimate the heritability of each trait, the response to selective breeding, and whether both traits have a shared genetic basis.
Selecting parents for high- rather than low-heat tolerance enhanced the tolerance of their adult offspring for both traits tested.
a) Overview of the experimental design and examples of (b) Acropora digitifera parents and (c) their offspring at the nursery in Palau. Coralassist lab
Heritability was roughly 0.2 to 0.3 on a scale of 0 to 1, which means about a quarter of the variability in offspring heat tolerance was due to genes passed from their parents. In other words, these traits have a substantial genetic basis on which natural and artificial selection can act.
However, even this level of enhancement may not be enough to keep pace with ever more intense heatwaves. Depending on climate action, the intensity of heatwaves is expected to rise in the coming decades by around 3°C-weeks per decade, faster than the enhancement achieved in our study.
Interestingly, corals selectively bred for high- rather than low, short-stress tolerance were no better at surviving the long heat stress exposure. With no genetic correlation detected, it is plausible that these traits are driven by independent sets of genes, and corals that are good at surviving the short sharp heat stress aren’t necessarily the best at surviving longer term marine heatwaves.
This would have important implications, as work like this would benefit from cheap and rapid tests that can effectively identify heat tolerant colonies for breeding. However, if these tests can’t predict which coral colonies will survive month-long heatwaves, it presents a serious challenge.
Coral fragments during a long-term simulated marine heatwave, with some remaining relatively healthy throughout (upper) and others bleaching (lower) or dying (not shown). Liam Lachs
Scaling up selective breeding
Since it is possible to selectively breed corals for increased heat tolerance, the next step is to conduct large-scale trials in the wild. This will likely require considerable numbers of selectively bred corals to be deployed, perhaps by directly seeding coral larvae on reefs, or planting corals reared in an aquaculture facility.
For this to work, outplanted corals must become reproductive themselves and contribute to the wild population gene pool. Doing this at very large scales will be challenging, but it may not be necessary to replenish the coral coverage of large areas.
Instead, it may be sufficient to create a network of fewer strategically located larval production hubs, containing selectively bred corals at high densities to maximise fertilisation success. These hubs would serve to seed other reefs and could provide further broodstock for targeted actions.
A lot more research and development is still needed, with many critical questions remaining unanswered. How many corals need to be outplanted to have the desired effect? Can we ensure there are no trade-offs that could compromise populations (evidence so far suggests this is not a large risk)? How can we avoid dilution of selected traits once added to the wild? How can we maximise responses to selection?
Given the pace of ocean warming, optimisation and implementation of assisted evolution will need to happen soon for them to have a chance at success, even if only on small scales. Above all, the survival of coral reefs still depends on urgent climate action.
Liam Lachs received funding from the Natural Environment Research Council ONE Planet Doctoral Training Partnership (NE/S007512/1).
James Guest received funding from European Research Council Horizon 2020 project CORALASSIST (725848). He is affiliated with SECORE International as a science advisory board member.
Adriana Humanes 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.
President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the effects of Hurricane Milton on Oct. 10, 2024, in Washington, D.C. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Rumors and lies about government responses to natural disasters are not new. Politics, misinformation and blame-shifting have long surrounded government response efforts.
When Hurricane Harvey hit Houston in 2017, for example, rumors and misinformation both originated from and were spread by government, news and individual user accounts on social media. And after Hurricane Sandy in 2012, rumors about the storm were so widespread that even CNN’s live coverage of the event was inaccurate.
Those rumors don’t usually come from former presidents. Yet in the wake of hurricanes Helene and Milton, former President Donald Trump spread falsehoods about the federal government’s response to the disaster. Misinformation on the topic became so widespread that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, known as FEMA, set up a webpage to debunk the rumors spawned by Trump.
President Joe Biden responded angrily, calling the falsehoods that Trump and his followers spread “reckless, irresponsible” and “disturbing.” He also suggested Trump’s claims undermined the rescue and recovery work being done by local, state and federal authorities.
Disaster relief often becomes political because so many people are affected – and because there is a lot of media coverage surrounding hurricanes, floods and other major weather events. Additionally, relief requires a lot of money and coordination by high-profile elected officials.
The rhetoric around federal emergency management is made only more complicated because most people do not know that much about the federal law that governs disaster relief. Indeed, even state and local officials find navigating the details of the law and accompanying regulations difficult.
And finally, the law’s design and the timing of hurricane season can lead to politicization. Elected officials – politicians – are always involved in coordinating government response efforts, adding a layer of politics to disaster relief. The fact that hurricane and election seasons coincide only heightens the politics of such relief.
Former President Donald Trump saying falsely that the Biden administration “stole a billion dollars” meant for disaster relief and used it to help immigrants.
Explaining government responses to natural disasters
The Disaster Relief Act of 1974, as amended and now known as the Stafford Act, is the law that governs how the federal government responds to natural disasters and other emergencies.
But the act does not guarantee federal assistance to the communities affected by hurricanes or other natural disasters.
Instead, the governor of an affected state or the chief executive of an affected tribal government must ask the president for a disaster declaration. The request can be made before or after a storm hits but must show that the disaster is of such a severity and magnitude that the state, local or tribal governments cannot respond on their own.
Responding to such requests, Biden issued declarations covering eight states before and after Helene. He also issued a declaration for the Seminole Tribe and the state of Florida in response to Milton.
After the president issues a declaration, the federal government can begin to assist state, local and tribal governments. This includes coordinating all disaster relief assistance – from evacuations to recovery – provided by federal agencies, private organizations such as the Red Cross, and state and local governments.
Federal assistance can be financial or logistical. It covers everything from help repairing roads and restoring utility services to providing assistance and services, such as temporary housing, legal services and crisis counseling, to the people who have been affected by the disaster.
The number of federal agencies and employees involved in disaster relief is astounding. For example, thousands of federal personnel from FEMA, the Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency and the departments of Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation are helping respond to Helene and Milton.
Several state and local officials also play key roles after a disaster declaration. Each state’s governor or tribe’s chief executive serves as the leading official for coordination of state and federal efforts. That person also designates an officer to serve as a liaison between the federal government and the state or tribe. And in each affected community, a local elected official leads the response on the ground. This is usually a city or town’s mayor.
Federalism in action
Implementation of the Stafford Act requires cooperative, healthy relationships between the president, federal agencies and state, local and tribal governments.
When done well, government disaster response is a prime example of what’s called “federalism” in action. Federalism involves the sharing of power between the national and state governments. The framers of the United States Constitution created this system of shared power so that the national government could solve coordination and capacity problems among the states, and the state governments could respond to the nuances of local circumstances.
In response to state government requests in the wake of Hurricane Helene, for example, Biden directed federal efforts to help those most affected. The federal government’s response has so far included working with over 450 state and local officials to ensure that those affected by the hurricane have everything from housing assistance to financial support for medical and funeral expenses.
Politics in the mix
The very things that the framers designed the federalist constitutional system to do, however, can create opportunities for political manipulation. The Stafford Act creates a system of emergency management that is highly decentralized and responsive to local needs.
But that decentralization also means that, because of their different perspectives, the officials involved in disaster response prioritize different things, which can lead to conflict.
For example, various officials involved in the response to Hurricane Helene have advocated for federal resources such as money and personnel to go toward restoring utilities, law enforcement, fire, health, communications and transportation services. How can the national government possibly choose between all of these necessary services?
Everything is made more complicated because, as studies have shown, on average, the officials in charge of making such decisions – elected officials and their appointees – have less experience in government than the career civil servants who work on a daily basis with the people affected by natural disasters.
As a result, the Stafford Act’s decision to place elected officials and their appointees in charge of emergency management could reduce the quality of government response.
Members of the FEMA Urban Search and Rescue task force search a flood-damaged area in Asheville, N.C., in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene on Oct. 4, 2024. Mario Tama/Getty Images
Debating size and role of government
Elected officials’ different political leanings add another wrinkle. Debates over disaster response often reflect larger political debates such as those over the size and role of government.
The history of the Stafford Act provides an illustrative example. Traditionally, disaster relief was the responsibility of state and local government. But a series of natural disasters, including the Alaska earthquake in 1964 and hurricanes Betsy in 1965 and Camille in 1969, were so large in scale that the federal government had to step in and help.
In the aftermath of Camille, accusations of racial discrimination in the relief process and partisan squabbling over who was to blame for the ineffectiveness of the government’s response to the disaster mounted. Media and congressional attention on government mismanagement of the relief effort created a window for the expansion of the federal government’s role in the process and ultimately led to the passage of the first version of the Stafford Act.
Fast-forward 35 years and many of the same issues – racial discrimination, government mismanagement and politicization of relief – arose in 2005 in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Media and congressional attention led to legislation that amended the Stafford Act and restructured FEMA and how the federal government responds to state and tribal requests for assistance.
Trump’s lies are from the same playbook – false claims about money being diverted to migrants and that relief efforts are being used only to help areas where Democrats live.
Yet the devastation left by Helene and Milton do raise questions about local and federal coordination in preparation for and response to natural disasters and has led to calls for Congress to pass reforms to improve equity, efficiency and effectiveness in government responses to natural disasters. Whether this reform is possible in such a contentious political climate remains an open question.
Jennifer L. Selin has received funding and/or support for her research on the executive branch from the Administrative Conference of the United States. The views in this piece are those of the author and do not represent the position of the Administrative Conference or the federal government.
When Tony Blair came to power in 1997 as the first Labour prime minister in a generation, his government became associated with the phrase “we’re all middle class now”.
In the second part of Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics, a podcast series from The Conversation Documentaries, we look back at a century of class in British politics to understand why Blair’s decision to move Labour away from the working class was such a watershed moment.
The British Labour party was created in 1900 by trade unionists who wanted to give a voice to working class people. At the time, the class structure was rigid and only property-owning men over the age of 21 could vote.
But the rupture of the first world war ushered in universal adult suffrage, and with it, says Mark Garnett, senior lecturer in politics at Lancaster University, a feeling among opponents of the Labour party that it would eventually become the main electoral force. He says:
When we get to the middle part of the 20th century, being a supporter of the Labour party was something that one inherited almost … it would certainly be very peculiar if you were a very conscious member of the working class who didn’t also see yourself as a Labour party supporter.
After the second world war and the election of Clement Attlee as Labour prime minister, class still looked firmly cemented into British political allegiances, as Martin Farr, senior lecturer in contemporary British history at Newcastle University explains.
The most dramatic illustration of class I can give you is in the 1951 general election: 98% of voters voted Conservative or Labour. No other parties mattered.
Thatcher’s greatest achievement
For Farr, the political and economic turmoil of the 1970s, ending in the winter of discontent under the Labour government of James Callaghan, marked the beginning of the end of this political arrangement, paving the way for the election of Margaret Thatcher as Conservative prime minister.
Margaret Thatcher said that her greatest achievement was Tony Blair. The Thatcher years created a different sort of Labour Party … which necessarily wasn’t the party of trade unions to the same extent because there were weaker trade unions and fewer trade unionists.
After 17 years of Conservative rule, Blair’s election in 1997 brought Labour back into power. But its attitude toward its working class base had changed.
Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London, says Blair’s advisers realised that the working class in Britain was shrinking and that, unlike the past, Labour couldn’t put together a winning electoral coalition based purely on working-class voters. But he also says they wanted to build a cross-class coalition.
They spent more time rhetorically appealing to the middle-class votes and thought the working-class vote will look after itself as long as they got the economy and public services right. And perhaps they should have done more … to appeal to both sides of that electoral coalition, that cross-class coalition that they hoped to build.
For more analysis, listen to the full episode of Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics on The Conversation Documentaries, which also includes interviews with the former Labour MPs Reg Race and David Hanson, who is now a member of the House of Lords and minister of state for the Home Office.
A transcript is available on Apple Podcasts.
Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics is produced and mixed by Anouk Millet for The Conversation. It’s supported by the National Centre for Social Research.
Listen to The Conversation Documentaries via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here.
Tim Bale has previously received funding for research on the Conservative Party and party members from the Leverhulme Trust and from the Economic and Social Research Council. Martin Farr and and Mark Garnett 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. Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics is supported by the National Centre for Social Research.
Tito Mboweni, former South African Reserve Bank Governor, Minister of Finance, and Minister of Labour was arguably one of the country’s most consequential economic policymakers and drove several significant economic
reforms.
He began his career in government as Minister of Labour in President Nelson Mandela’s 1994 administration. As the first Minister of Labour in the new democratic South Africa, he took several steps to improve the relationship between business and labour.
Among these were major legislative reforms, including the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Labour Relations Act, Mines Health Safety Act and the NEDLAC Act, designed to improve cooperation between different “constituencies” – labour, business, and government.
He was appointed as the Eighth Governor of the South African Reserve Bank in
1999. In this role he introduced inflation targeting and presided over the first monetary policy committee meetings. This substantially modernised the Bank’s approach. For instance, Mboweni introduced a monetary policy statement outlining the reasons for the Bank’s decisions. These were televised, bringing new transparency to the conduct of monetary policy. Before this, the bank’s targeted monetary policy aggregates, and its communications, were made through printed documents.
Monetary Policy Forums took monetary policy to many parts of the country, bringing a new openness and engagement between the Bank and ordinary South Africans.
He held the position of Governor until 2009. But his legacy endures. The South African Reserve Bank is highly regarded across the world, with an inflation rate that is firmly within the target range and well-anchored inflation expectations.
As finance minister
Shortly after Cyril Ramaphosa was inaugurated as President of the Republic of South Africa in 2018, the then Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene resigned. The President appointed Mboweni as Minister of Finance in October 2018.
Mboweni made three consequential decisions in South Africa’s economic policy
trajectory.
The first was the decision, in 2019, to freeze government wages from 2020. He was alarmed by the rapid and unsustainable increase in government wages. Together with slowing economic growth, this led to a fiscal position that was deteriorating at an alarming pace. The wage freeze ultimately started the slow return to the fiscal rectitude that had been the hallmark of the period of government before Jacob Zuma became president in 2009.
The second, also in 2019, was the publication of a paper on economic growth. It was known officially as “Economic transformation, inclusive growth, and competitiveness: Towards an Economic Strategy for South Africa”.
Other recommendations of the paper are being followed, including those for rail, telecommunications and ports.
The third was the introduction of a comprehensive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This included a significant expansion of the grants system, with a Social Relief of Distress grant pegged at R350 per person per month. Research by the NIDS-CRAM initiative, led by Dr Nic Spaull of Stellenbosch University, has highlighted how the grant positively affected millions of people’s lives.
Enduring legacy
It is difficult to think of any other economic policymaker who has left such an enduring legacy.
Stellenbosch University awarded him an honorary doctorate in 2010 and appointed him Professor Extraordinary of Economics from 2002 to 2005 . He was a frequent participant at Bureau for Economic Research conferences. There, his engaging speaking style made him a popular drawcard.
His love of red wine and engaging conversation made him a popular visitor at the university. In 2010, he spent time at the Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Studies as part of a research group working on the global financial crisis and its consequences for democracy.
This is an edited version of a tribute published by the Bureau for Economic Research, Stellenbosch University.
Roy Havemann is a senior economist at the Bureau for Economic Research where he leads the Impumelelo Economic Growth Lab. He was previously at the National Treasury where, amongst other things, he was Tito Mboweni’s speechwriter.
It is sad to write about Tito Mboweni in the past tense.
Tito Titus Mboweni, who was born on 16 March 1959 in Tzaneen, a town in South Africa in what was then the Transvaal, passed away after a short illness in Johannesburg on 12 October 2024.
After the announcement of his death, tributes poured in for this South African leader. Many have been touched by his legacy in politics, business, governance and the economy of South Africa.
While not without some shortcomings, his career from being a freedom fighter to becoming a trusted and popular public figure serves as an enduring example to others in leadership.
Political and public service was a second part of his career.
After the democratic elections of 1994, Mboweni served as minister of labour in the first cabinet of Nelson Mandela. In a surprise announcement in 1998, Mboweni was appointed as an advisor to the then governor of the South African Reserve Bank, Chris Stals. This was to prepare Mboweni for appointment as governor after the retirement of Stals.
Mboweni could not move directly into the position as governor, as section 4(2)(a) of the South African Reserve Bank Act states that the “governor shall be a person of tested banking experience”.
By serving as an advisor to Stals for a little over a year, Mboweni met this legal requirement. He was appointed as the eighth governor of the central bank on 8 August 1999.
At the time there were concerns about his commitment to the continuation of a policy of controlling inflation, ushered in successfully by Stals in the preceding decade. But Mboweni soon showed his commitment to the continued control of inflation.
He replaced the previous structure used for monetary policy decisions by Stals by establishing the Monetary Policy Committee in October 1999. This was in preparation for the adoption of inflation targeting as a policy objective for the bank.
After his retirement from the Reserve Bank, Mboweni commenced with the next stages of his career: a successful stint in business, which was interrupted by his return to politics. He served as minister of finance from 9 October 2018 to 5 August 2021. In this role he made it very clear that South Africa had to adopt a more prudent fiscal policy to avoid a too rapid growth in government debt. But this viewpoint made him unpopular with many cabinet and ANC colleagues, trade unions and others.
Once he left politics, Mboweni resumed his career in business. He also served the South African community in different ways. He held a number of appointments as honorary professor and was also a patron of the arts. He was also well-known for his enthusiasm for cooking, which he often posted about on social media.
Challenges
Mboweni had to withstand political pressure on the issue of the role of the Reserve Bank. He was exemplary in his protection of the autonomy and independence of bank, which is set out in sections 223 to 225 of the South African Constitution.
Politicians favour lower interest rates, particularly during election periods. But Mboweni was not afraid of being unpopular. He was steadfast in protecting the autonomy and independence of the South African Reserve Bank. Mboweni also led the central bank during the global financial crisis of 2008 . South Africa was one of the countries that did not suffer a banking crisis or collapse during that period.
Achievements
Mboweni’s single biggest achievement was his successful transition from an ANC freedom fighter in exile to his roles as senior politician, central bank governor and businessman.
His successful adoption of a policy of inflation targeting despite opposition was also a major achievement. Under Mboweni’s leadership the South African Reserve Bank showed critics that South Africa can make a continuous commitment to a low rate of inflation.
Other than establishing the Monetary Policy Committee, Mboweni also played a major role in bringing monetary policy closer to the people. Under his leadership, the bank was one of the first central banks in the world to announce monetary policy decisions about interest rates at a media conference. He also introduced the central bank’s Monetary Policy Forums, where the public can engage the senior leadership of the central bank on monetary policy.
Shortcomings
Mboweni had many successes in business, central banking and politics. He also a few shortcomings. One was that he did not insist on the readoption of the lower inflation target (3%-5%) announced in 2001, that was later abandoned. A lower inflation target some 20 years ago would have anchored South Africa’s inflation rate and inflation expectations on a lower trajectory.
It is difficult to judge whether Mboweni’s somewhat untimely (though not necessarily unexpected) resignation as finance minister can also be regarded as a failure. However, a finance minister can only function optimally with the support of the head of state. Such support was clearly lacking.
Legacy
Mboweni leaves a legacy of a successful transformation from a freedom fighter to a businessman, central banker and politician. If more former freedom fighters made this successful transition, South Africa’s prospects would look considerably better.
Another legacy is honesty and integrity. Mboweni was never embroiled in scandals or questionable business dealings. If other ANC cadres could follow this example, South Africa would also offer a better future for all its citizens.
As an NRF-rated researcher, Jannie Rossouw received research funding from the NRF. He serves as independent non-executive Board member of Finbond Mutual Bank, Noordelike Helpmekaar Study Fund and Satsanga Fintech Holdings.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Vanessa Newby, Assistant Professor, Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University
The United Nations security council has expressed strong concern for the safety of peacekeepers in Lebanon after a series of incidents over the past week in which UN positions have come under fire from the Israel Defense Forces as they continue their push in the south of the country.
“UN peacekeepers and UN premises must never be the target of an attack,” the security council said on October 14 in a statement adopted by consensus of the 15-member council. It urged all parties to respect the security and safety of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (Unifil) operating in south Lebanon.
The same day Israel requested that Unifil withdraw five kilometres back from the blue line which constitutes the de facto border between Israel and Lebanon, to keep them “out of harm’s way”.
On each occasion, the IDF has either claimed it was acting in self-defence against Hezbollah or that its actions were accidental. These explanations have failed to convince the rest of the world.
The US, several European countries and the EU have all stated that UN peacekeepers must not be harmed. The UN secretary general, António Guterres, contends these attacks may constitute war crimes and are a breach of both international law and international humanitarian law.
Since 1978, Unifil has lost 337 peacekeepers, making Lebanon the most costly, in human terms, of all the UN peacekeeping operations. But despite these risks it has remained in post. Throughout Unifil’s deployment, IDF has put it under pressure both directly and through a proxy force, the South Lebanon Army (SLA). As such Unifil has a strong institutional memory of staying put in the direst of circumstances which makes it unlikely to recommend a drawdown.
What’s more, the security council is aware that if Unifil leaves the area, another UN-led conflict resolution mechanism is likely to be required in future. This logic is why Unifil mandates have always been renewed – albeit sometimes for three months or less.
The biggest threat to Unifil’s deployment is if one or more troop contributing countries decide the risks are too high and withdraw their contingents. The post-2006 Unifil mission comprises the highest number of European troop contingents of all peace operations worldwide with the main contributors being Italy, Spain, Ireland, and France.
The two sectors that comprise the mission – sector west and sector east – are led by Italy and Spain respectively. The biggest non-EU contributors are India, Ghana, Indonesia and Malaysia. If one or more of these countries were to decide to withdraw troops, this could trigger a reevaluation of the mission’s ability to deploy.
If Unifil were to leave, it is worth noting that their compounds have a large amount of expensive equipment – much of it owned nationally by the troop contributing countries. The logistical challenge of moving troops and equipment in a battle zone would be very difficult and dangerous.
Despite the intense fighting, many civilians still remain. The death toll from the hostilities is now estimated to be 2,306 dead and 10,698 wounded. Unifil’s presence remains crucial to monitor the hostilities and wherever possible, provide civilian protection and humanitarian assistance. But for that to be possible, Israel’s allies must continue to exert pressure to ensure that the IDF ceases all attacks on Unifil.
A new ‘zone of security’?
One possible reason for the attacks is that the IDF believes ridding the area of Unifil exposes Hezbollah and will enable the IDF to continue their incursion unhindered by the watchful eyes of an international observer.
Israel’s ground offensive in southern Lebanon, October 13 2024. Institute for the Study of War
But there’s another possibility. During the Lebanese civil war, the IDF occupied a section of Lebanese land bordering Israel that was known as the “zone of security”. Its purpose was to serve as a buffer zone for northern Israel, initially designed to protect Israeli citizens from Palestinian militia, and later also from the Shia resistance groups Amal and Hezbollah.
The Israeli request for Unifil to move five kilometres back from the blue line could mean Israel is considering reestablishing some kind of buffer zone. Several factors point to this being a possibility – although the IDF and the Israeli government may not be aligned on this issue as recent tensions suggest.
First, the IDF has now deployed units from at least four divisions into Lebanon. The volume of troop numbers deployed is upwards of 15,000 suggesting this incursion is more than a limited operation.
Second, 29 Unifil compounds lie along the blue line. Were they to be evacuated by the UN, there would be nothing to stop the IDF from moving in and developing them into their own strongholds. While UN positions would need reinforcement and protection equipment, they would nonetheless remain useful.
Third, in 2006 the IDF tried to destroy Hezbollah from the air and deployed limited haphazard ground incursions. These tactics failed and the prevailing view may now be that the only way to guarantee the safe return of 65,000 Israelis to their homes in northern Israel is through an occupation.
But unlike the previous occupation, where the IDF was aided by the SLA, Israel currently has no partner in Lebanon, and it is unlikely to find a willing accomplice among the Lebanese population to help them manage the security of a buffer zone. This means IDF troops would directly bear the brunt of attacks from resistance groups, and the northern Israeli villages would be unlikely to remain secure.
The Netanyahu government’s continued use of military solutions to solve political problems has worrying implications for Israel, Lebanon and the Middle East as a whole. At this stage, Israel looks as if it might be settling back into a conflict that could become another “forever war”.
Thus far, the tactics used by the IDF would imply they are not thinking ahead to “the day after” and the cost to Israel that would come with the prolonged occupation of a buffer zone.
This article was written with assistance from John Molloy, lt. col. (rtd.) Irish Defence Forces and former senior Unifil political & civil affairs officer, 2008-2017.
Chiara Ruffa receives funding from the Swedish Research Council, the Fulbright Commission and the European Commission.
A recent poll by the Social Research Foundation, a think thank, found that 60% of South Africans thought the government of national unity was working well. It also reported that support for the unity government’s anchor political parties, the African National Congress (ANC) and the Democratic Alliance (DA), had risen since 29 May 2024 when elections were held.
The poll results came out at the same time as the business press was reporting increased collaboration between business and government, fostered by the unity government. Corporations have reportedly pledged up to R250 million (about US$14.3 million to assist the state to address various logistics crises and help the National Prosecuting Authority prosecute corruption.
Although we should be cautious about taking such news at face value, it is worth noting that the arrival of the unity government has been accompanied by other good news. For example:
take-home pay for those in employment has begun to rise
Still, it is wise not to get too excited unless any upturn in the economy benefits the majority of South Africans. As Frans Cronje, director of the Social Research Foundation, has observed, while the unity government may be good for the middle class, there is no sign yet that it is addressing the needs of the poor and the people on the periphery of the economy.
Unless its benefits become socially inclusive, it might well collapse. We need to take Cronje’s reservations seriously. Note, however, that although the unity government is a coalition, it is led by the African National Congress. And, while all parties agree that they need to put the economy back on track and promote growth, there is little evidence yet that the government is pursuing distinctively new policies.
Beware complacency
We are often told that “a rising tide lifts all boats”.
But this claim owes more to ideology than careful analysis of economic data. In any case, it is a catchphrase which condones inequality. It suggests that as long as living standards increase for the poor, it does not matter if the wealthy gain even more. Indeed, one version is that the more the well-off benefit, the more likely they are to spend and invest their money – that is, to create wealth for others.
Such complacency is dangerous. Apart from being contentious economically, it poses risks to both democracy and political stability. This is particularly the case in South Africa, which is widely recognised as the most unequal country in the world.
High rates of inequality erode social cohesion and trust in democracy. In the May general election, the lowest level of voter turnout since 1994 reflected a worrying decline in support for democracy: from 72% in 2011 to just 43% by 2023.
Extremes of inequality are unlikely to lead to the formation of governing coalitions committed to pursuing developmental strategies of benefit to all. As a result, populist parties that tout simplistic solutions may find it easier to win support. As suggested by the unheralded performance of Jacob Zuma’s umKhonto we Sizwe Party in the 2024 election, this is a particular danger in South Africa. Here, the poorer black majority possess potential political power in an economy which remains largely controlled and owned by a richer, white minority. The French economist Thomas Piketty in his latest blockbuster, Capital and Ideology, warns that in such situations, the dangers of a lurch towards authoritarianism are much increased.
Highly unequal countries typically suffer higher levels of stress, crime and violence, often resulting in violent responses by the state against marginalised communities to quell protests.
Little prospect of reduction of inequality
The issue is not whether the unity government is blind to these dangers, but whether the policies it is pursuing are likely to make a dent in the staggering level of inequality.
If investment and growth do occur, there will be good news down the line – possibly the creation of some 2 million jobs and more financial room for the government to fund social benefits for the poor. But it’s unlikely to have a marked effect on the level of inequality.
First, the unity government is not promising any great change from policies that have been pursued since 1994, only more efficient implementation. Those policies have somewhat decreased racial disparities, notably by promoting a black middle class, but they have not reduced the overall level of inequality. Indeed, as Piketty shows, this has increased, not decreased, since 1994.
Second, the unity government’s policies may continue to focus on the reduction of poverty. But this is unlikely to shift the proportions of income between the different classes. As Cronje has hinted, the new government is underpinned by a middle-class coalition, and for this to hang together, the middle class will want to reap its reward.
Third, history doesn’t offer much hope. Former settler colonies stand out for their exceptionally high levels of inequality. In South Africa, white people always dominated the top earners before 1994. Now they have been joined by high-earning black people, many of them public officials. The top decile’s share of total earning has increased since the end of apartheid. Today it is close to 70%, compared with around 35% in Europe.
Fourth, we live in an age which Piketty describes as “hyper-capitalism”, in which money and ultra-rich elites are highly mobile. This makes it hard for national governments to tax the rich more. They can leave, or threaten to withdraw their investments to earn higher returns elsewhere. South Africa has already been leaking its millionaires. The unity government will not want to scare any more of them away. So, it’s unlikely to adopt aggressive tax policies in the cause of narrowing inequality.
The unity government may well promote high growth and if successful, may ameliorate poverty, but it seems unlikely that it will either attempt or succeed in reducing inequality. It may be good for the elite and middle class, but not necessarily for the health of democracy.
Roger Southall 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 Murray Leith, Professor of Political Science and Director of the Centre for Migration, Diaspora, Citizenship and Identity, University of the West of Scotland
Alex Salmond, possibly one of the most famous Scottish politicians of recent decades, and certainly the best-known face of the Scottish National Party (SNP), has died at the age of 69.
The former first minister of Scotland, a long-standing member of the Westminster parliament and a member of the Scottish parliament, he led the SNP from a small, fringe party within Westminster to become the ruling party of the Scottish government. He was the first Scottish nationalist first minister of Scotland, a post he would hold from 2007 to 2014.
Salmond was born, raised and educated in Scotland. It was while he was a student at St Andrews University that he joined the university branch of the Federation of Student Nationalists in December 1973. As one of only two fully paid-up members of the SNP at the university, he became the branch president.
After graduation, and a couple of years as a civil servant, Salmond moved to the Royal Bank of Scotland and became an economics expert, with a focus on oil. Yet, throughout this career he remained an active and committed member of the SNP.
Leftwing in his views, he was part of the 79 Group, a small faction of the SNP that was very critical of the then leadership, and which advocated a more leftwing stance for the party as a whole. He, along with others, was briefly expelled from the SNP in 1982, but was allowed back in a month later.
By 1985, Salmon was a senior figure in the SNP. His political career truly began in 1987, when he defeated the incumbent Conservative in Banff and Buchan in 1987 to become the consituency’s Westminster MP. He would win re-election four times, and then be elected to Holyrood, all from the north-east of Scotland, for the next three decades.
SNP leadership and independence referendum
Salmond first became leader of the SNP in 1990, and he showed his significant skills as a political strategist on the UK-wide stage. From here, he would become a very visible and recognisable face for the SNP, and for Scotland.
It would be the advent of devolution in 1997, and the creation of the Scottish parliament in 1999 that would change the face of Scottish politics and allow Salmond to reach new heights. But there were many bumps along the way. Just a year into the life of the brand new parliament, Salmond suddenly stood down as SNP leader. There were rumours of fallouts with other leading figures.
Salmond would, however, return as leader in 2004, replacing John Swinney (currently the first minister) after a poor showing for the SNP in Scottish parliament elections. As he was an MP and not an MSP at the time, the party at Holyrood was led by Nicola Sturgeon, at the time a longtime ally.
Not only did he return as an MSP, but the SNP became the largest party in the Scottish parliament by one seat in 2007. It formed a minority government with Salmond as first minister and Sturgeon as his deputy.
Another milestone was reached in 2011, when Salmond would lead the SNP in winning a majority within the Scottish parliament, a task everyone thought impossible given the voting system was, arguably, specifically designed to avoid such outcomes. This win led Salmond to begin negotiations with the UK government of David Cameron to hold a referendum on Scottish independence.
In perhaps one of Salmond’s most effective moments, he came away with an agreement that allowed him many of his specific objectives – a single question on the ballot and a long lead in, of two years, before the referendum itself. Only ten years after he had returned as leader, he led the SNP to a referendum outcome where 45% of voters said yes to independence, a much larger figure than many thought possible.
However, this was still a loss, and Salmond resigned as party leader the next day. He then returned to Westminster in 2015 but lost his seat in 2017.
Further problems arose for Salmond in 2018, when allegations of sexual assault were made, and he resigned from the SNP after being a member for 45 years. Despite being cleared at a trial in 2020 of 14 charges, his relationship with the SNP, and his personal relationships with Sturgeon and other leading SNP figures, were badly damaged.
He directly blamed Sturgeon and her husband, SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, for the way in which he was treated. He took the Scottish government to court over the handling of the accusations and won a substantial payout of half a million pounds.
Establishing a new party
Whether it was because of his treatment by the SNP, his disquiet at what he saw as the wrong priorities, or the inability for him to find a role after leaving as first minister, Salmond decided to establish a new political party, Alba, in 2021, only three years after leaving the SNP.
After being on the national, and international, stage for several decades, Salmond remained committed to the political fight for Scottish independence. There were several defections from the SNP – two MPs, one MSP, and a few local councillors – but the party has never won an elected seat at any level.
Salmond also presented a television show on Russian state broadcaster RT, a decision unpopular with many in the SNP. He also wrote as a tipster on horse racing for newspapers for many years.
There can be little doubt that Salmond’s professional and personal lives were characterised by ups and downs. Yet the fact remains that he led the SNP to many victories, and saw them challenge the status quo and the British state in a manner unthinkable when he first became an SNP MP.
Those present during the last few days of the 2014 referendum will remember the distinct feeling that maybe, just maybe, the SNP could pull off a win, and an independent Scotland – a dream he shared with millions of others – could be a possibility.
Salmond reshaped the SNP, he reshaped the political landscape of Scotland, and his legacy cannot be overstated.
Murray Leith has previously received funding from the European Union, the Scottish Government, and the UK Government. He is a member of the Electoral Reform Society.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Jérôme Viala-Gaudefroy, Spécialiste de la politique américaine, Auteurs historiques The Conversation France
Nationwide polls are often of limited relevance, considering the unique structure of the US electoral system. To gain a better understanding of the upcoming presidential election, we need to focus on surveys conducted in the pivotal battlegrounds – the so-called swing states. After the missteps in previous elections, it’s hard to place too much confidence in these polls, as many rely on unrepresentative samples.
As we head toward the 2024 US presidential election, media large and small frequently fall into the trap of “horse race” journalism. Policy questions are rarely treated in depth, and the emphasis is often on the latest polls. One week they announce Kamala Harris as moving ahead, and the next, Donald Trump still has an edge. But how reliable are these polls?
In the United States, rather than being elected by direct popular vote, the president is chosen indirectly through the Electoral College, an institution inscribed in the country’s constitution. Each state is assigned a number of electors based in part on its population, but also on its number of senators. As a result, smaller states get a larger voice than their population would indicate.
One of the implications is that national election polls can be deceiving. In most states with established partisan majorities, the outcomes are predictable due to the winner-takes-all approach. This system awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state (with the exception of Maine and Nebraska, which use a proportional system). As a result, the most relevant polls are those conducted in “swing states”, where neither party holds a consistent advantage.
According to recent analyses, around ten states are expected to be in play for 2024. Based on recent trends, there are seven swing states to watch: Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. In the 2016 and 2020 elections, victory margins in these states were razor-thin, often less than 1%.
With both Harris and Trump within striking distance of the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency, these swing states, with a combined 91 votes, will determine the outcome.
Map published on 18 August 2024 by CNN. The number of electors for each state are show. The colors indicate the states that appear to be strongly (dark blue) or probably (light blue) leaning toward Kamala Harris, and strongly (red) or probably (pink) leaning toward Donald Trump. In yellow are the seven pivotal states where victory is likely to come down to a small number of votes. Click to zoom.
The 2016 and 2020 polling failures: flukes or systemic issues?
When the margins are so tight in these key states, accurately measuring voter intentions is an enormous challenge. In 2016, national polls correctly predicted Hillary Clinton’s popular-vote win – she had nearly 3 million more than Trump. However, they failed to foresee Trump’s Electorial College victories in critical states, which ultimately put him over the top.
The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) pointed out several reasons for these errors, including underrepresentation of Republican voters, over-representation of college-educated voters (who tend to lean Democratic), and an underestimation of undecided voters who eventually voted for Trump or third-party candidates.
Despite efforts to fix these problems, other biases showed up in 2020. While graduate voters were not over-represented and undecideds were evenly split between Biden and Trump, the Covid-19 pandemic had made the pollsters’ task more complicated. AAPOR points out that the states with a higher proportion of Covid-19 cases were the ones with the highest polling errors. As a result, pollsters underestimated Trump’s vote share in key swing states and also overestimated Biden’s national lead, making the 2020 polls the least accurate in 40 years.
Proportion of polling errors in presidential elections since 1936. Click to zoom. Pew Reseach Center
Despite these errors, Biden still triumphed, winning 4 percent more of the popular vote and taking home 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232. Biden’s victories in the swing states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin make all the difference.
Polling errors and public distrust
Errors of this magnitude naturally increase the public’s scepticism of polling, especially among Republicans, who are already wary of establishment institutions. Contrary to initial assumptions, Trump voters didn’t hesitate to express their preferences in 2016 and 2020. However, they were less likely to participate in polls due in part to their distrust of mainstream institutions. As a result, working-class white voters – and their opinions – were underrepresented in many polls.
Pollsters also face technical challenges. Getting a respondent on the phone now requires calling hundreds of people, thanks to caller ID and call screening. Polls with smaller samples (fewer than 1,000 respondents) are less reliable. To deal with these hurdles, many pollsters are now using a mix of methods, including e-mail, online surveys, and robocalls.
Though cheaper, online surveys often draw voluntary participants who are compensated, which leads to issues of accuracy and representation. This growing reliance on online polling has contributed to a doubling of polling companies from 2000 to 2022, according to Pew Research Center.
Margin of error and identifying “likely” voters
The margin of error is a critical component of polling that is often misunderstood by the public and media. It typically falls between 3 and 4 percentage points, but for smaller demographic groups (for example, young people, white men, or Hispanics), it can be even higher. Media headlines, however, frequently imply a candidate is leading, even when the difference is within the margin of error. University of California, Berkeley researchers suggest that to ensure 95% accuracy, the margin of error should be closer to 6%.
However, the media sometimes amplify results, particularly in headlines, by implying that a candidate is ahead, even when the difference is within the margin of error. Moreover, researchers at the University of Berkeley have shown that to guarantee 95% accuracy, this margin should be increased to at least 6%. This means a candidate projected to receive 54% of the vote is likely, in reality, to secure anywhere between 48% and 60%, reflecting an actual margin of error of 12 percentage points.
Another significant challenge for pollsters is identifying likely voters. Only around two-thirds of citizens eligible to vote actually go to the polls. In 2016, turnout on the Democratic side was overestimated, giving the false impression that Clinton was a lock for victory. This likely caused some of her supporters to stay home, while Trump’s base showed up in force when polls suggested he was behind. Accurately predicting who will turn out to vote is crucial to polling accuracy.
Lessons from the 2022 midterms: A glimmer of hope for 2024?
Polling showed notable improvements during the 2022 midterm elections, with the results being the most accurate since 1998. Importantly, there was no significant bias toward either party. However, midterm elections operate differently than presidential elections, and the dynamics for 2024 may be very different. That said, many polling institutions have adapted since 2016: as of 2022, 61% of polling firms had changed their methods, such as refining sampling techniques and improving question wording. More than a third have changed their methods after 2020.
While these changes are positive, challenges remain, especially in predicting turnout and combating low response rates.
What good are polls, then?
At the end of the day, election polls offer snapshots – often imprecise – and can only provide general trends. Polling methods vary across firms, introducing biases that make it difficult to compare results.
Survey aggregators offer averages that might be more reliable than individual polls, but they still come with a degree of uncertainty. This is true for FiveThirtyEight, the well-known website founded by statistics guru Nate Silver. After ABC took over in 2023, Silver left, taking his forecasting model with him to his new platform, Silver Bulletin, which continues to attract significant media attention.
With the unpredictability of polls, political betting markets have become popular as polling alternatives. Platforms like Polymarket, which recently hired Silver, have multiplied rapidly. Some people, like Elon Musk, argue that markets provide better forecasts than traditional polls, though this claim is unproven. There are also concerns that these markets could be manipulated to sway public opinion.
While opinion polls aren’t the best tools for predicting elections – as this could be one of the closest in recent history – their value lies in gauging public opinion on key issues. However, even in this role, polls can still be biased, often influenced by how questions are phrased.
For example, in 2019 USA Today ran the headline “Poll: Half of Americans say Trump is victim of a ‘witch hunt’ as trust in Mueller erodes”. This was in reference to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. The question asked by the poll was:
“President Trump has called the special counsel’s investigation a ‘witch hunt’ and said he has been investigated more than previous presidents for political reasons. Do you agree?”
The problem with this wording is that it combined two different ideas: whether the investigation was a “witch hunt” and whether Trump had been unfairly targeted for political reasons. On top of that, the question lacked neutrality, presenting only his perspective.
Naturally, Trump used the result to his advantage, even though other polls from sources such as The Washington Post, CBS News, and NPR-PBS told a different story.
To use polling data wisely during this election, it’s crucial to recognize these limitations and pay attention to the fine print – details like the sample size, polling date, margin of error, and methodology. Additionally, consider the poll’s sponsors, who may only release results that align with their particular agenda.
Ultimately, the best way to interpret polling data is with caution, focusing on general trends rather than any single poll. And always remember, election outcomes can be full of surprises.
Jérôme Viala-Gaudefroy ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tomas Sniegon, Associate Professor, Department of European Studies, Lund University
The overthrow of Nikita Khrushchev from the posts of first secretary of the Soviet Communist Party and the leader of the Soviet state in October 1964 was an unprecedented event in the history of the Soviet Union.
The old leader was deposed by the opposition without violence. He was not imprisoned or killed after losing power. While his predecessors Lenin and Stalin and successors Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko all died in power, Khrushchev was sent into retirement, where he lived under supervision for another seven years.
Unlike the era of the last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union did not disintegrate when its leader had to relinquish power. Six decades have now passed since what has become known as the “most democratic coup” in Soviet history – sometimes referred to as the “little October revolution”.
Khrushchev, who rose to power on the death of Josef Stalin in 1953, actually came close to being overthrown as early as 1957. At that time, Stalin’s former collaborators and close comrades, including Georgy Malenkov and Vyacheslav Molotov, opposed him. They even gained an upper hand in the party’s highest body, the presidium. But Khrushchev was saved by the support of the army leadership, the KGB political police and the wider party leadership, the central committee.
Seven years later, however, he was brought down by politicians from the next generation – men who largely owed their powerful positions to him.
Strongest among them was Leonid Brezhnev, who duly took Khrushchev’s place as first secretary (shortly afterwards renaming his position general secretary, the same title as Stalin). Next in line was Alexander Shelepin, the powerful secretary of the party’s central committee who had run the KGB from 1958 to 1961.
The role of the KGB, which in October 1964 was headed by Shelepin’s successor Vladimir Semichastny, was crucial in ensuring Khrushchev’s downfall, as its ninth directorate – which was responsible for the protection of state officials – not only protected but also constantly monitored them.
Semichastny not only knew about the revolt against Khrushchev but was actively involved in it. Had he informed the leader about the plotting, pretty much what he was in the job to do, Khrushchev would more than likely have averted the palace coup this time as well.
In his memoirs, Semichastny even mentioned the fact that Brezhnev raised the possibility of Khrushchev’s assassination during one conversation with him. But this plan was never put into action. In the event the plot to remove the Soviet leader was completed by non-violent means.
Reforming leader
Khrushchev has gone down in history as a reformer who wanted to make Soviet communism less brutal. He strongly criticised Stalin for his abuse of power but, at the same time, he gradually increased his own powers.
His efforts at political and economic reforms stopped when they posed a threat to maintaining the monopoly of communist power. Despite paying lip service to the idea of less heavy-handed domination of the Soviet bloc from Moscow, he became known for his bloody suppression of the Hungarian revolt in 1956. During the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, he then brought the world to the brink of nuclear war.
New kind of leadership: Kruschev meeting US president John F Kennedy in Vienna in 1961.
Also, the rift between the Soviet Union and China at the turn of the 1950s and 1960s caused a certain resentment in Moscow. Khrushchev’s moves towards liberalisation had not caused the rift, which was more due to China’s increased authoritarianism under Mao Zedong during that era. This was exacerbated by border disputes between the two countries as well as disagreements over international relations. But Khrushchev’s critics felt he could – and should – have handled relations more skilfully.
Fall and legacy
Having faced down a coup attempt in 1957, by October 1964 Khrushchev found himself politically isolated and without support in either the presidium or in the central committee. His opponents forced him to return prematurely from his vacation in the Georgian report town of Pitsunda to Moscow where he was confronted by his political opponents, led by Brezhnev with the support of other powerful politicians, including Shelepin, Alexei Kosygin and Mikhail Suslov.
Realising his supporters in the presidium were in the minority and that to retain power would mean involving the army or KGB, which he was not confident would back him, Khruschev resigned.
Reflecting on how his leadership had rejected Stalinism, he is reported to have said: “I am glad that, finally, the party has matured and can control any individual.”
But Brezhnev, who manoeuvred himself into power in Khrushchev’s stead, learned from the fall of his predecessor and tightened his grip on the levers of power. Yet the Soviet Union – thanks in large part to Khrushchev – never returned the state terror and mass murder of Stalinism.
The Soviet Union was to experience another coup attempt against a leader in 1991, when conservative opponents tried to overthrow another reformer, Mikhail Gorbachev. But this attempt, much less prepared and elaborate and lacking the necessary wider support, failed. The Soviet Union collapsed and was formally disbanded just a few months later.
But for many people, it’s Khrushchev whose reforms and governing style began the gradual disintegration of the Soviet Union as far back as the 1950s, partly thanks to his efforts to impose more democratisation. It is not surprising that the current Russian president, Vladimir Putin, disdains him – especially since Khrushchev, according to Putin, “senselessly donated” Crimea to Ukraine in 1954.
At least Khrushchev himself was able to live to focus on the positives. He would recall in his memoir how he freed his country from the suffocating fear of Stalinism and was able to raise a generation of younger politicians who were finally not afraid to stand up to him. Sadly, this is no longer a hallmark under the current leadership.
Tomas Sniegon 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 – Canada – By Vinita Srivastava, Senior Editor, Culture + Society | Host + Exec. Producer, Don’t Call Me Resilient
This article is from our race-related newsletter, a weekly curation of stories examining how systemic racism permeates our society. Sign up for the newsletter here.
It’s not often that events far away impact us so profoundly at home. But events in Palestine and Israel, which have been reverberating in the Global North for decades, crescendoed over the past year, directly impacting millions of people in the region and also those of us who feel deeply committed to the transnational issues the conflict raises.
In late September, those debates continued at the grade-school-level when teachers in Toronto were prevented from taking students on any field trips for the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, a federally mandated day of memorialization. That school board decision was based on concerns that students may be exposed to rhetoric supporting Palestine. At an earlier demonstration about Asubpeeschoseewagong (Grassy Narrows) First Nation, some demonstrators chanted a slogan connecting Indigenous Peoples dispossessed of their land here to those in Palestine, also dispossessed of their land.
When I was in grade school, Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress were classified as terrorists. Although I remember somehow being able to attend a school-sponsored talk by a former ANC member who spoke about the 1976 Soweto uprising. I trace part of my politicization back to that day.
Teachers who introduce their students to issues like Grassy Narrows are aware of the lasting impression first-person narratives can make.
Because it’s the long weekend, I’ll also point you to a music playlist we made, with suggestions from our podcast guests over the years. I’m inviting all of you to write in with song suggestions to add to it. We will try to get at least some of them up there this long weekend.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Seth Wynes, Assistant Professor, Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of Waterloo, University of Waterloo
How hot is it going to get?
This is one of the most important and difficult remaining questions about our changing climate. The answer depends not only on how sensitive our climate is to greenhouse gases, but also on how much carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases we as a civilization choose to emit over coming decades.
In order to help think more clearly about this question, we asked authors who have contributed to the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to share their best guesses about where the world is headed.
The results of our recently published study show that most of the responding climate experts believe our planet will likely exceed the 1.5 C and “well-below 2 C” warming targets agreed upon by the international community.
In fact, the median estimate was 2.7 C by 2100, which is roughly what is expected if the world’s nations fail to implement new policies consistent with their targets and pledges, and instead only maintained existing levels of action.
But not all authors think alike and to help shed further light on the IPCC report process, and any differences of opinion between authors, we conducted a survey over email with 211 authors of past reports providing responses. Our participants represented all IPCC working groups, and every inhabited continent.
The data they shared provides a fascinating glimpse into the dynamics of modern climate science.
Wide ranging beliefs
Our survey shows that authors shared a wide range of estimates as to likely climate outcomes.
A small number of surveyed experts believe that staying below 2 C is still likely, while others believed that we are on track for even more horrendous levels of climate warming at above 3 C. Approximately 86 per cent of participants estimated warming of more than 2 C by or before the year 2100.
When we planned the study, we wondered whether IPCC authors who worked on climate solutions would be more optimistic than those who worked on climate vulnerability and adaptation. One reason for this is that experts who work on solutions might be more aware of recent research indicating that worst-case climate outcomes are becoming less likely. But we only found weak evidence for this hypothesis.
In some ways this is a good sign, as it suggests that researchers are not working in isolated silos, each holding their own beliefs.
Mixed perceptions
A unique feature of the study is that we also asked IPCC authors what they thought others in the survey would answer in response to the same questions. We were interested to know the extent to which experts in this field believed that other experts shared similar beliefs to their own. Perceptions of peer beliefs are important because they can strongly influence a person’s own beliefs and behaviour.
Participants in our study believed very strongly that their peers’ views on expected future warming were in line with their own beliefs. Even those who expected very high or very low amounts of future warming incorrectly believed that their peers would have similar estimates.
Because IPCC authors are trusted public figures who are often asked to share their thoughts with decision-makers and the media, this finding could be problematic if an author confidently believes that their expectations are also widely shared by their peers.
Interdisciplinary benefits
We see our study as an opportunity for experts to better understand the range of beliefs held by their own community, so they can communicate with more nuance and awareness as to whether their personal beliefs are part of a larger consensus or not.
Climate experts are not oracles. And even though a “wisdom of the crowd” average is often more accurate than a single expert, forecasting decades into the future is extremely difficult.
The balance of evidence from this study reaffirms a message that climate scientists have been repeating for a long time: current efforts to tackle climate change are insufficient and more progress is needed quickly.
While working on this project Seth Wynes received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
H. Damon Matthews receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and from Environment and Climate Change Canada.
The Supreme Court of Canada will soon hear a case, R v. Kloubakov, in which two men charged with financially benefiting from sex work are claiming the charges violate their Charter rights.
The accused worked as drivers for sex workers in Calgary. A court in Alberta found them guilty of benefiting financially from prostitution and being parties to procuring women into the sex trade. They argue that Canada’s sex work laws criminalize people who work with sex workers in non-exploitative situations, and are therefore unconstitutional.
While the appellants in this case are not sex workers themselves, the outcome greatly impacts sex workers and their rights because it could, among other things, undermine their security and ability to put in place safety measures. Migrants arrested under these laws also face the prospect of loss of status, detention and deportation.
The court has concluded their views are irrelevant to the case at hand. This exclusion rehearses Canada’s longer history of excluding those connected with sex work based on race, gender and immigration status.
PCEPA criminalizes “everyone who procures a person to offer or provide sexual services” and anyone “who receives a financial or other material benefit” from sex work, with certain exceptions.
The law assumes that sex workers are victims and ignores their agency and labour. While being a sex worker is not directly made an offence, the law criminalizes the purchase of sexual services and thus renders illegal all commercial transactions for sex. Activists have argued that doing so has driven sex work further underground. Sex workers, and those wishing to purchase sexual services, must avoid police for fear of detection, apprehension and in the case of migrant women, deportation.
Going underground means sex workers are at amplified risk of exploitation and physical harm because they have reduced bargaining power and cannot use safety measures, such as hiring third parties or implementing certain vetting and safety protocols in the spaces they would like to use, for fear of attracting the attention of police.
CASWLR argues that the law’s criminalization of sex workers and third parties replicates and even exacerbates the harms of the former laws that the Court found violated sex workers’ Charter rights to security of the person.
As a sex worker-led umbrella organization, CASWLR members have lived expertise and intimate knowledge of how these laws still harm sex workers in ways that can crucially inform the question of whether the laws are constitutional.
Migrant sex workers
Aside from direct criminalization, migrant sex workers may face additional and distinct consequences under immigration laws if they are charged, convicted or merely under criminal investigation. Migrant sex workers could lose their status in Canada, be detained and deported and be barred from re-entering the country. Further, it is not just sex workers themselves who are affected. Migrant third parties and their family members’ immigration status and future could be imperilled as well.
These potential consequences may drive migrant sex workers to do their work in unsafe conditions to avoid detection by police and immigration enforcement. Sex workers are effectively forced into these precarious conditions because of the existing laws.
In our view, loss of immigration status and deportation for engaging in non-exploitative, consensual activity are consequences of the current law that are not justified under the Charter because of the risks of violence and other harms that arise from avoiding detection.
The Court, however, has decided it will not be considering this aspect at all and has excluded the only two organizations that work with migrant sex workers. The Court did grant intervener status to some organizations who will do a reasonable job in detailing some of the harms of the laws. However, none are sex worker-led and none represent migrant sex workers who may experience additional harms.
The Supreme Court denied intervener status to these organizations because they perceived their interventions as providing new information that would unduly expand the case. Denying standing to these organizations, however, has the ultimate effect of not hearing from those directly impacted by the laws being examined.
Courts are meant to consider the wider implications of how laws are interpreted, implemented and the potential ways they affect others. This is particularly important in constitutional challenges where it is both foreseeable and expected that legal decisions will have widely ranging effects on multiple groups.
History of migrant exclusion
Unfortunately, this exclusion is tied to the history of discrimination and stigmatization of Asian migrant sex workers, ostensibly for their own protection. Though many Canadians may have heard of Canada’s law that restricted Chinese immigration, including the infamous Head Tax, many may not know that it explicitly barred “any Chinese woman who is known to be a prostitute.”
This law took influence from the very first immigration ban in the United States, the 1875 Page Act. This law barred the immigration of women from “any Oriental country” if they were “imported for the purposes of prostitution.” The exclusion and policing of Asian sex workers was justified by ideas of carceral humanitarianism, which proposes that exclusion and policing are a necessary way of protecting people from being trafficked.
These so-called safety measures did not achieve either goal — in the past or present. Migrant sex workers who are directly targeted and harmed by the law were never directly asked what they desired or whether they needed saving.
We see these long-standing patterns at work again today with the Supreme Court’s exclusion of migrant sex workers (and other sex workers) in R v. Kloubakov. The court is demonstrating that it has clearly not learned from history.
When courts deny those most impacted by the law a hearing, they do not take into account all of the considerations they should. Cases can take years to reach the Supreme Court. When courts do take up the task to review law, it should welcome those directly affected by it, particularly when there are groups that have been traditionally marginalized from political and legal power.
For courts to be effective, they must hear from those who can best explain how their rights are violated and excluded from the discussion. Trust in our justice system and our laws are diminished when those directly harmed by it have no say and no recourse.
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.
Developing countries like Indonesia use foreign high-skilled and high-wage workers to drive economic growth and innovation. However, protection of their legal rights is often neglected, affecting these workers’ productivity and well-being and Indonesia’s reputation as a destination country for employment.
My research delves into the flaws of Indonesia’s labour market institutions, such as the national labour dispute settlement system, revealing that current mechanisms are inadequate in protecting the rights of high-skilled foreign workers.
The study
My findings show the national dispute settlement system exhibits significant systemic shortcomings, such as processing cases slowly and siding with employers, which limit its capacity to protect all workers effectively. But disputes involving foreign workers are further complicated by the fact that immigration law allows employers to cancel residence permits, meaning that the government requires the workers to leave the country even though the workers may have been unfairly dismissed.
Foreign workers are mainly from Northeast Asia (China, Japan and Korea), and their use on investment-tied projects coupled with Indonesia’s downstreaming programme will ensure their numbers continue to grow. In 2023, the Indonesian government issued 168,048 permits for foreigners to work in Indonesia with the top three destinations being Central Sulawesi (18,678), Jakarta (13,862) and West Java (10,807). By July 2024, the government had already issued more than 14% more permits than by the same time the previous year.
My study examined 92 labour disputes involving foreign workers between 2006 (when the new national dispute settlement system was implemented) and 2022, which were settled by the Industrial Relations Court. One additional dispute was filed in 2023, but the Industrial Relations Court has not yet published the settlement despite a legal requirement to do so.
I complemented these court settlements with 98 qualitative interviews with other stakeholders, including policymakers, labour rights activists, legal professionals, and other foreign workers, such as foreign spouses, remote workers and digital nomads.
As in other countries too, the number of registered labour disputes is only the tip of the iceberg, as workers tend to cut their losses and move on rather than invest time, energy and limited financial resources in challenging their better-resourced employers.
Employers were all Indonesian companies, so no foreign workers who filed a lawsuit worked for a multinational company, and those who did so had at least 20 nationalities.
In terms of geographical distribution, the studied disputes were settled in 13 local jurisdictions, and were mostly lodged by workers rather than employers.
The nature of the disputes mostly involved claims that an employment contract had been terminated prematurely (87 cases), while a much smaller number involved resignation (4 cases) or were unknown (1 case). Of the 92 claims, 83 were initiated by workers, and eight by an employer. In one case, the lodging party was not recorded in the final decision.
Hiring a private lawyer
Employers used the Immigration Law to undermine the protective role of the Manpower Law – as it stands foreign workers are only entitled to employment protection if they hold a valid residence permit, which employers can and do shorten. Doing so shows that the Indonesian government prioritizes the flexibility of employers at the expense of employment protection for foreign workers.
In at least 92% cases, foreign workers used paid assistance of a private lawyer to represent themselves at formal meetings and hearings required by the Disputes Settlement Law, the cost of which could be hefty.
As one foreign worker explained:
It’s always in the back of your mind, to do whatever to make employers happy if you want to stay. No matter what the work permit and contract say, they can ask immigration to kick us out within a week!“
A retired government official responsible for designing policy regarding foreign workers was surprised when he heard this, explaining that:
I thought they could look after themselves because they earn such high wages. Well, higher than the average Indonesian worker, that is.
Hiring a private lawyer is the only way to represent themselves throughout the dispute resolution process because they need to leave Indonesia once they are fired. Not having the legal right to remain in Indonesia makes it very difficult – even impossible – to do it without them.
Addressing institutional failures
Engaging a private lawyer served as an ‘institutional fix’ that enabled most foreign workers to engage with Indonesia’s labour dispute settlement system by attending formal meetings and hearings, as well as filling out required paperwork and sending essential letters and replies.
Addressing this institutional failure requires a shift in law and policy. Firstly, legal reforms are essential to ensure that immigration and employment laws are integrated to enable foreign workers to have access to legal processes intended to help protect labour rights. At a minimum, this would involve amending policy to prevent employers from cancelling residence permits so that foreign workers need to leave the country prematurely.
Alternatively, the Directorate-General of Immigration could still permit employers to do so, but then provide the affected foreign workers with a limited-stay visa so that they can remain in Indonesia to engage with the legal process. The Hong Kong Immigration Department does this for Indonesian migrant workers.
Secondly, there is a need for enhanced support systems that provide immediate and effective assistance to foreign workers. Government agencies tasked with settling labour disputes, such as local manpower offices and the Industrial Relations Court, should be equipped with adequate resources and trained personnel to handle migrant labour issues. Doing so would decrease the reliance of foreign workers on private lawyers.
Failure to protect the employment rights of foreign workers has the potential to damage Indonesia’s reputation as a destination country for employment. Such damage could undermine Indonesia’s ambitious plans to build a new capital city (Ibu Kota Nusantara) with the assistance of foreign workers, and undermine the government’s downstreaming programme, which helps Indonesia earn more from the export of raw minerals.
Wayne Palmer has received research funding from the International Labour Organization, the Freedom Fund, and the Australian Research Council.
Careers in the maritime industry can take graduates all over the world.Igor-Kardasov
When most people are asked to picture an engineer at work, they probably imagine a civil engineer in a hard hat at a construction site, a chemical engineer in a laboratory or an electrical engineer examining a complex circuit board. Very few, I’m willing to bet, visualise someone aboard a ship.
But, for those drawn both to engineering and a seafaring life, marine engineering and nautical science are ideal careers – especially in a country like South Africa, uniquely positioned where the Atlantic and Indian Oceans converge.
Over 90% of the world’s goods are transported by sea. That means both marine engineers and nautical scientists are crucial to global trade, transportation and resource management. These professionals play a critical role in ensuring that vessels operate reliably, comply with environmental regulations and navigate safely through the world’s oceans.
South Africa’s Department of Higher Education does not distinguish between different types of engineering when collecting statistics about graduates. However, those of us in the marine engineering and nautical science space in academia can confirm the numbers are low. At my own institution, the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) in Cape Town, between ten and 20 people graduate each year from these programmes. At another, Nelson Mandela University in the Eastern Cape province, around seven people graduate in these fields each year. With so few people studying these disciplines, the skills they impart are in high demand. The government’s list of scarce skills for 2024 includes “marine engineering technologist”.
I’m an engineering lecturer in the Department of Maritime Studies at CPUT. There, I teach in both the Bachelor of Nautical Science and Marine Engineering programmes, lecturing on a variety of subjects, including mathematics and applied thermodynamics (the branch of physics that deals with the relationships between heat, energy and work).
Watching my students complete their degrees and start careers in marine engineering or nautical science has made it clear that this work offers a blend of adventure, technical challenge, and the opportunity to contribute to an industry that is essential to global commerce and environmental stewardship.
Whether it’s designing cutting-edge marine technology or navigating the world’s vast oceans, the maritime field promises a fulfilling professional journey.
Theory and practice
Three universities – CPUT, Nelson Mandela University and the Durban University of Technology in KwaZulu-Natal – offer maritime studies courses aimed at those who intend to work at sea. A fourth, the University of KwaZulu-Natal, offers this degree with a focus on maritime law and logistics. There are also some specialised training institutions, among them the South African Maritime Safety Authority, that provide various qualifications and certifications.
You’ll need to have taken mathematics, physical science and English in your school-leaving matric year, and to have passed them well. (Contact individual universities to find out their precise degree requirements.) A strong interest in and commitment to a career at sea or in the maritime industry more broadly is crucial.
Being a strong swimmer can be an advantage. But it is not necessarily a requirement. Students who do not know how to swim will typically have the opportunity to learn and develop their swimming skills as part of their training.
There are practical and theoretical components to these degrees. At our Granger Bay campus near the V&A Waterfront in Cape Town, for instance, we’ve set up a survival centre – a practical facility where students receive training to equip them for life at sea. It is fully equipped with three fully enclosed lifeboats, two open lifeboats, a rigid capsule, two fast rescue craft, a heated 12 x 7 metre pool, an underwater escape training dunker, various life rafts, life jackets, immersion suits, and more.
On the theoretical side, a Bachelor of Nautical Science programme focuses on the navigation and operation of ships. It encompasses navigation techniques, ship stability, cargo handling, meteorology, and maritime laws. This prepares students for careers as navigators in the merchant navy. (Not to be confused with the military navy – a merchant navy is a country’s commercial shipping industry, which includes all the cargo and passenger ships that are registered under that nation and used for trade, transport and other non-military purposes.)
Some of our graduates have gone on to become ship’s masters, also called captains – the highest ranking officer on any ship.
Marine engineering programmes, meanwhile, focus on the design, development, operation and maintenance of the mechanical systems and equipment used on ships and other marine vessels. This includes everything from engines and propulsion systems to refrigeration and steering mechanisms. Marine engineers ensure that these systems function efficiently and safely. They often work closely with naval architects to integrate these technologies into new ship designs or retrofit them into existing vessels.
Ample opportunities
Oceanic African countries, like South Africa, need people with these skills to harness the full potential of their maritime resources.
The development of local expertise in maritime engineering and nautical science is essential for ensuring safe and efficient maritime operations. It also helps to protect marine environments and contributes to global maritime trade. Skilled professionals in these fields help these countries take advantage of their maritime assets, promote economic growth and enhance their roles in international commerce.
As a proud lecturer, I am thrilled to see my students progress and develop both internationally and locally. Many have gone on to work in various exciting and prestigious roles around the world. Some have become ship’s masters, navigating and managing large vessels on international waters, while others have taken on critical roles in maritime operations, port management and logistics in countries such as Singapore, Norway and the United Kingdom. Some have pursued careers in maritime law and policy. Their career paths reflect the diverse and global opportunities available in the maritime industry.
Ekaterina Rzyankina is affiliated with the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT).
It might sound far-fetched, but recent research suggests that dogs’ and humans’ brains synchronise when they look at each other.
This research, conducted by researchers in China, is the first time that “neural coupling” between different species has been witnessed.
Neural coupling is when the brain activity of two or more individuals aligns during an interaction. For humans, this is often in response to a conversation or story.
Neural coupling has been observed when members of the same species interact, including mice, bats, humans and other primates. This linking of brains is probably important in shaping responses during social encounters and might result in complex behaviour that would not be seen in isolation, such as enhancing teamwork or learning.
When social species interact, their brains “connect”. But this case of it happening between different species raises interesting considerations about the subtleties of the human-dog relationship and might help us understand each other a little better.
In the recent study, the researchers studied neural coupling using brain-activity recording equipment called non-invasive electroencephalography (EEG). This uses headgear containing electrodes that detect neural signals – in this case, from the beagles and humans involved in the study.
Researchers examined what happened to these neural signals when dogs and people were isolated from each other, and in the presence of each other, but without looking at each other. Dogs and humans were then allowed to interact with each other.
Look into my eyes
When dogs and humans gazed at each other and the dogs were stroked, their brain signals synchronised. The brain patterns in key areas of the brain associated with attention, matched in both dog and person.
Dogs and people who became more familiar with each other over the five days of the study had increased synchronisation of neural signals. Previous studies of human-human interactions have found increased familiarity between people also resulted in more closely matching brain patterns. So the depth of relationship between people and dogs may make neural coupling stronger.
The ability of dogs to form strong attachments with people is well known. A 2022 study found the presence of familiar humans could reduce stress responses in young wolves, the dog’s close relative. Forming neural connections with people might be one of the ways by which the dog-human relationship develops.
The researchers also studied the potential effect of differences in the brain on neural coupling. They did this by including dogs with a mutation in a gene called Shank3, which can lead to impaired neural connectivity in brain areas linked with attention. This gene is responsible for making a protein that helps promote communication between cells, and is especially abundant in the brain. Mutations in Shank3 have also been associated with autism spectrum disorder in humans.
Study dogs with the Shank3 mutation did not show the same level of matching brain signals with people, as those without the mutation. This was potentially because of impaired neural signalling and processing.
However, when researchers gave the study dogs with the Shank3 mutation, a single dose of LSD (a hallucinogenic drug), they showed increased levels of attention and restored neural coupling with humans.
The researchers were clear that there remains much to be learned about neural coupling between dogs and humans.
It might well be the case that looking into your dog’s eyes means that your respective brain signals will synchronise and enhance your connection. The more familiar you are with each other, the stronger it becomes, it seems.
Jacqueline Boyd is affiliated with The Kennel Club (UK) through membership and contributor to the Health Advisory Group. Jacqueline is a full member of the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT #01583) and she also writes, consults and coaches on canine matters on an independent basis, in addition to her academic affiliation at Nottingham Trent University.
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Olasunkanmi Habeeb Okunola, Visiting Scientist, United Nations University – Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS), United Nations University
Extreme climate events — floods, droughts and heatwaves — are not just becoming more frequent; they are also more severe.
It’s important to understand how communities can recover from these events in ways that also build resilience to future events.
In a recent study, we analysed how communities affected by the extreme flood events of 2021 in Germany’s Ahr Valley and in Lagos, Nigeria, grappled with recovery from floods.
Our aim was to identify the factors – and combinations of factors – that served as barriers (or enablers) to recovery from disasters.
We found that financial limitations, political interests and administrative hurdles led to prioritising immediate relief and reconstruction over long-term sustainable recovery.
We concluded from our findings that the success of recovery efforts lies in balancing short-term relief and a long-term vision. While immediate aid is essential after a disaster, true resilience hinges on proactive measures that address systemic challenges and empower communities to build a better future.
Recovery should not be merely action-oriented and building back infrastructure (engineering). It should also include insights in other areas, like governance and psychology, helping people to deal with losses and to heal.
What worked
To understand the recovery pathways of the two regions, we reviewed relevant literature, newspaper articles and government documents. We also interviewed government agencies, NGO representatives, volunteers and local residents in the communities where these floods occurred.
We found that in the Ahr Valley, recovery wasn’t just about rebuilding structures, it was about empowering individuals.
Through initiatives like mental health and first aid courses, residents learned to support one another. This fostered a sense of community and resilience that was essential for meeting the emotional challenges posed by the disaster.
The focus on rebuilding with a sustainable vision also included environmental initiatives. For example, a type of heating system was put in place that didn’t rely on fossil fuels.
Not only did this reduce carbon emissions, it also served as a symbol of hope. It showed there was an opportunity to create a more sustainable and environmentally friendly community.
In Lagos, too, residents found strength in community and innovation. Grassroots efforts using sustainable materials like bamboo and palm wood highlighted the ingenuity and resourcefulness of the people. Faith-based organisations provided material aid as well as emotional and spiritual support. This reinforced the bonds that held the community together.
Each community faced unique challenges. But they shared a common thread: the importance of adaptive governance – flexible decision-making and strong community ties.
For example, established building codes in the Ahr Valley provided a framework for reconstruction, ensuring that new structures were resilient and safe.
In Lagos, the absence of strong government support highlighted the critical role of community organisations in providing services and fostering a sense of shared responsibility.
What needs improvment
In both the Ahr Valley and Lagos, the journey towards recovery has been fraught with obstacles as well.
In the Ahr Valley, bureaucratic red tape has become a formidable barrier. Residents, eager to rebuild their lives, find themselves entangled in a complex web of regulations and lengthy approval processes. This has delayed their access to insurance and recovery funds. Waiting for months or even years has eroded hope and fuelled a sense of abandonment.
Meanwhile, in Lagos, insufficient government support has left communities to fend for themselves, creating a breeding ground for uncertainty and conflict.
Land tenure disputes, fuelled by a lack of clear property rights, sow seeds of distrust and hinder resettlement efforts. Political disagreements complicate the picture, as competing interests divert attention and resources away from those who need them most.
In Lagos, none of the respondents reported having insurance to help them to recover from disaster-related losses.
While some residents in the Ahr Valley did have insurance, many were under-insured.
The Ahr Valley’s building codes offer a framework for reconstruction. But it’s clear that processes should be streamlined so communities can take ownership of their recovery.
In Lagos, the importance of robust social safety nets is clear. Partnerships between communities and authorities are also needed.
A different approach
Recovery isn’t a separate process that occurs after disasters only. It should be seen as an essential part of managing risks. It’s important to understand what recovery involves and what resources are needed.
This will help reduce future risks and increase resilience after extreme events.
Governments should encourage flexible governance structures that value community voices and local knowledge to enable recovery. A good example is the New Orleans Recovery Authority, established after Hurricane Katrina. It involved local residents and city officials in planning and rebuilding efforts.
Grassroots efforts in Lagos demonstrated the power of sustainable materials and community-led initiatives. Seeing things from the community’s point of view can help tailor solutions that fit the situation and adapt to evolving challenges.
Training and capacity-building programmes empower communities to be active in their own recovery.
Mental health and first aid courses were successful in the Ahr Valley. Equipping individuals with skills in sustainable practices and disaster preparedness helps weave a social fabric capable of weathering future storms.
Olasunkanmi Habeeb Okunola is a Visiting Scientist at, the United Nations University – Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS)
Saskia E. Werners works with United Nations University, Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS). She is grateful to have received research grants in support of her research on climate change adaptation and recovery.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Virginia Raguin, Distinguished Professor of Humanities Emerita, College of the Holy Cross
A silhouette of onlookers in front of Esther Strauss’ sculpture ‘Crowning.’ Michel M. Raguin with cooperation of the Mariendom Linz , CC BY
A sculpture of the Virgin Mary showing her giving birth to Jesus was recently attacked and beheaded. Called “Crowning” by the artist Esther Strauss, the sculpture had been part of a temporary exhibition of art outside the Catholic St. Mary Cathedral in Linz, Austria.
The sculpture was controversial for its explicit depiction of birth; an online petition seeking its removal received more than 12,000 signatures. Strauss’ work was part of a project that sought to look at gender equality and the role of women, designed to honor the 100th anniversary of the cathedral’s consecration to the Virgin Mary. The exhibition opened on June 27, 2024, and the statue was vandalized a few days later.
My research as a historian of art has shown me that there has never been only one way of depicting the birth of Christ.
Depiction of birth in early texts
Early Christian writings reveal that the birth of Christ was of keen interest and reflected ideas of the day.
A widely read text from the mid-second century, called the The Protoevangelium of James, gives details about the life of the Virgin and infancy of Christ. As women of that time gave birth with the aid of midwives, the text explained that the Mother of God also was helped in her labor. Sections 19-20 of the text give details about Joseph contacting two midwives.
One woman is said to have doubted the virgin birth. After she inserted her finger into Mary’s vagina, her hands withered. An illustration in a French prayer book from Paris dating to about 1490-1500 shows the midwife with missing hands. The story explained that her hands grew back after she touched the child Christ.
Menologion of Basil II, an 11th-century illuminated Byzantine manuscript with 430 miniatures depicting the Nativity of Christ, now in the Vatican library. Via Wikimedia Commons
New modes of spirituality in later centuries brought changes in art. St. Bridget of Sweden, who founded a new order of nuns, left a large body or writing, including what she believed were revelations from God. One of her revelations included a vision of Christ’s birth she experienced in Bethlehem in 1371–72.
Although Bridget had given birth eight times, she described Mary’s delivery as “in the twinkling of any eye.” Bridget said she “was unable to notice or discern how or in what member (Mary) was giving birth.” By “member” she may have meant that she did not know through what part of Mary’s body Jesus emerged. Many paintings between the 15th and 16th centuries adopted her vision and showed the child surrounded by light and the Virgin calmly worshipping him.
A painting by Belgian artist Hugo van der Goes, in about 1475, follows Bridget’s vision of the birth. Instead of being “wrapped in swaddling clothes,” Christ lies naked, perfectly clean, in the “great and ineffable light” that Bridget described.
Each era and community produces art that speaks to its own priorities. Fifteenth-century Italy introduced traditions of a miraculous childbirth that were different from a realistic tradition cherished by early Christians of the second century. I would argue that “Crowning” is but one more example of such cultural change. Here, Mary is an inspiration for other women, physically strong and capable even in the difficult process of giving birth.
The sculpture, when intact, was barely 15 inches tall, a clear indication that it was not made for large-scale public veneration. It was a meditative image designed for a one-on-one encounter – for those who decided to engage.
Virginia Raguin 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.
The Conservative party leadership ballot is a private affair. The MPs don’t have to reveal who they voted for if they don’t want to. And given how badly they appear to have bungled their final round of voting in this contest, it seems unlikely we’ll ever know what really happened.
James Cleverly was the firm favourite among MPs, and yet an attempt to manoeuvre him into the final two against the candidate his supporters felt most sure of beating in the final run-off, when party members vote, seems to have backfired.
It would appear Cleverly and his supporters forgot Lyndon B. Johnson’s first rule of politics – learn to count. As a result, party members now have a choice between two rightwing candidates, Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch. Both are popular among members but less electable and palatable for the wider public. The debacle has exposed (not for the first time) the problems with the electoral system.
Cleverly was seen as the unifier of the party, with the ministerial experience and communication skills to help with a transformation. He had wowed party conference with a well-calibrated speech hinting that the party needed to “normalise” to regain trust. Yet his record leaves questions as to exactly how good his communication skills are in reality. He had made several “jokes”, which were not jokes at all – just offensive comments – and reportedly described his own government’s immigration policy as “batshit”.
A Telegraph article just before his shock loss in the parliamentary party vote feared he would “sign the death warrant” of the party as a “middle-of-the-road bluffer who tickles the tummies of members of the parliamentary party by flattering them that their historic defeat was not so bad after all”. Yet judging by the audible gasps when the result was announced, Tory MPs were shocked at how they had messed the vote up. Both the Liberal Democrats and Labour reacted with glee at the news.
Tory MPs react to the news that they’ve inadvertently knocked out their favourite candidate.
The final two
Badenoch has less ministerial experience than Cleverly but is loved by the Tory party as a battler and is now the favourite to win. The same “death warrant” article called Badenoch a “Warrior Queen”, but that cuts both ways. Badenoch, by channelling her inner Thatcher, is pitching herself as a fighter taking on the forces of reaction within and without. But, to quote another Tory, the Duke Of Wellington, Thatcher would only fight battles she knew she could win. Badenoch’s battle seem rather less focused, and her war on the forces of woke now includes new mothers and civil servants (10% of whom, in her view, should be in prison).
Another recent article, this time in the Guardian spoke of how “she often finds it hard to get through an interview without patronising or arguing with the presenter in a manner that reinforces claims she’s divisive and abrasive”. At the same time, her attempt to tell “hard truths” saw her publishing a lengthy pamphlet featuring some triangles – seemingly explaining electoral realignment – which no one could understand. Not ideal attributes for a leader.
So far in this contest, Jenrick’s most notable interventions have been to grandstand about the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), compete to be toughest on immigration, and (and we need to follow the logic slowly here) argue that the ECHR is causing UK special forces to kill instead of capture terrorists. Jenrick is the living embodiment of the old Groucho Marx joke “those are my principles, and if you don’t like them…well, I have others”. He has made either a Damascene or cynical journey from squishy centre to hard right just ahead of this contest. What does he really believe? No one is sure.
The reasons for the Tories’ recent catastrophic election loss are in plain sight. Voters saw the Conservative governments as a toxic combination of poor delivery, scandals and being out of touch. The 2024 defeat was a combination of Boris Johnson’s immorality and Liz Truss’s incompetence. Rishi Sunak then finally fractured his own coalition with a self-defeating immigration policy. None of the candidates have addressed the reasons for the loss and the final two are evidently still in denial.
But it is the Tory members who are voting here. Their version of events is that disunity and a failure to deliver on immigration lost them power. Members may well be torn, as political scientist Tim Bale points out, between values and electability – though with Cleverly out, this latter may be a problem.
Peering through the fog of the contest, there are two things which are very likely. First, Johnson’s shifting of the party to the right, and his closer alignment of the Tory party with the remnants of UKIP is now more evident, and will be further deepened by whoever wins. While Badenoch and Jenrick differ on whether they should beat or join Reform, the Tory party is now on the latter’s territory. There is unlikely to be any Tory “hard truths” to address the electorate’s loss of trust in the party, but instead the talking points will be culture wars, immigration, and leaving the ECHR.
Second, as a result, the party will move further from the centre ground, and away from the average voter, and their concerns. The mess the parliamentary party has made of the contest and the long shadow of dysfunctional leadership have served only to remind voters of the reasons why the party was thrown out of office in July. Peering through his snazzy new glasses, Starmer can see his bad week just got a lot better.
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.
Globular cluster NGC 2005. ESA/Hubble & Nasa, F. Niederhofer, L. Girardi, CC BY-SA
As I finished my PhD in 1992, the universe was full of mystery – we didn’t even know exactly what it is made of. One could argue that cosmologists had made little progress in our understanding of these basic facts since the discovery of the cosmic microwave background (CMB), the afterglow of the Big Bang, in the 1960s.
I left the UK after my doctoral studies to begin a research career in the US, where I was lucky to be recruited to work on a new experiment called the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). This new survey embraced advances in digital technologies with the ambition of measuring the “redshifts” (how light becomes more red if a source appears to move away from you) of a million galaxies.
These redshifts were then used to measure distances, and allowed cosmologists to map the three-dimensional structure of the universe.
One cosmic puzzle in the 1980s, based on the pioneering CfA Redshift Survey of Margaret Geller and John Huchra, was the significant lumpiness of galaxies, and therefore matter, in our cosmic neighbourhood. Galaxies were clustered together across a wide range of scales, with evidence for coherent “superclusters” of galaxies spanning over 30 million light years in length.
This article is part of our series Cosmology in crisis? which uncovers the greatest problems facing cosmologists today – and discusses the implications of solving them.
It was important to know how such superclusters could have formed from the smooth CMB, as it would tell us the total amount of matter in the universe and, more intriguingly, what that matter was made of. That was assuming the only force in play was gravity.
By the end of the first phase of the SDSS, we had achieved our goal of a million redshifts. This data was used to discover many superclusters across the universe, including the amazing “Sloan Great Wall”, which remains one of the largest known coherent structures in the universe, over a billion light years in length.
Type 1A supernova remnant. Nasa/CXC/U.Texas
I am lucky to have lived through this amazing era of cosmic discovery around the turn of the century. Surveys like SDSS, combined with new observations of the CMB and searches for distant exploding stars known as Type Ia Supernovae (SNeIa), coincided to deliver an emphatic answer to the question: “What is the universe made of?”
The discovery of dark energy
From 1999 to 2004, the cosmological community came together to agree that the universe was 5% normal (baryonic) matter, 25% dark matter (unknown, invisible matter), and 70% “dark energy” (an expansive force) – essentially a cosmological constant, which was first postulated by Einstein. The discovery that the universe was dominated by this constant energy shocked everyone, especially as Einstein had called the cosmological constant his “biggest blunder”.
Today, cosmologists still agree this is the most likely make-up of our universe. But observational cosmologists like me have refined our measurements of these cosmic variables significantly – reducing the errors on these quantities.
The latest numbers from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) indicate that 31.5% of the universe is matter (a combination of dark and normal), with the remainder being dark energy assuming a cosmological constant. The error on this measurement is just 3%.
Knowing these numbers to higher precision will hopefully help cosmologists understand why the universe is like this. Why would we expect to have 70% of the universe today as “dark” (can’t be seen via electromagnetic radiation) and not associated with “matter” like everything else in the universe?
The origin of this dark energy remains the biggest challenge to physics, even after 20 years of intense study.
Intriguing measurements
Like me, a few cosmologists have become distracted by other problems over the last two decades. However, 2024 could be the start of a new era of discovery. This year, cosmologists published new results based on two of our best cosmological probes.
The first probe consists of exploding stars dubbed “SNeIa”. As these stars have a narrow range of masses, their explosions can be well calibrated, giving cosmologists a predictable brightness that can be seen far away. By comparing the known brightness of these SNeIa to their redshifts, we can determine the expansion history of the universe. These objects were, in fact, critical for discovering that the expansion of our universe is accelerating.
The second probe works by looking at Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) – relics of predictable sound waves in the plasma (charged gas) of the early universe, before the CMB. These are now frozen into the large-scale structure of galaxies around us. Like SNeIa, their predictable size can be compared with their observed size today to measure the expansion history of the universe.
Recently, DES reported its final SNeIa results from over a decade of work, detecting and characterising many thousands of supernova events. While these SNeIa results are consistent with the orthodox view that the universe is dominated by a cosmological constant, they do leave open the tantalising possibility of new physics – namely, that the dark energy could be varying with cosmic time.
That said, scientists are trained to be sceptical, and there are many reasons to distrust a single experiment, single observation, or even a single set of cosmologists!
Cosmologists now go to extraordinary lengths to “blind” their results from themselves during analysis of the data, only revealing the answer at the last moment. This blinding is done to avoid unconscious human biases affecting the work, which could possibly encourage people to get the answer they believe they should see.
This is why repeatability of results is at the heart of all science. In cosmology, we cherish the need for multiple experiments checking and challenging each other.
The second result to turn heads was the first BAO measurements from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), successor to the SDSS. The first DESI map of the cosmos is deeper and denser than the original SDSS. Its first BAO results are intriguing – the data alone is still consistent with a cosmological constant, but with hints of a possible time-varying dark energy when combined with other data sources.
DESI in the dome of the Nicholas U. Mayall 4-meter Telescope at the Kitt Peak National Observatory. wikipedia, CC BY-SA
In particular, when DESI analyses the combination of its BAO results with the final DES SNeIa data, the significance of a time-varying dark energy increases to 3.9 sigma (a measure of how unusual a set of data is if a hypothesis is true) – only 0.6% chance of being a statistical fluke.
Most of us would take such odds, but scientists have been hurt before by systematic errors within their data that can mimic such statistical certainty. Particle physicists therefore demand a discovery standard of 5 sigma for any claims of new physics – or less than a one in a million chance of being wrong!
As scientists will say: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
Mindboggling implications
Are we entering a new era of cosmological discovery? If so, what would it mean?
The answer to my first question is probably yes. The next few years will be fun for cosmologists, with new data and results due from the European Space Agency’s Euclid mission. Launched last year, it is already scanning the sky with unprecedented accuracy.
Likewise, DESI will get more and better data, while the European Southern Observatory starts its own massive redshift survey in 2025. Then you have the Rubin Observatory in Chile coming online soon. Combining these datasets should prove beyond doubt if dark energy varies with cosmic time.
If it does, it implies there is less dark energy now than in the past. This could be caused by many things but, interestingly, it could signify the end of a present, accelerated phase of the expansion of the universe.
It also implies that dark energy is probably not a cosmological constant thought to be due to the background energy associated with empty space. According to quantum mechanics, empty space isn’t really empty, with particles popping in and out of existence creating something we call “vacuum energy”. Ironically, predictions of this vacuum energy do not agree with our cosmological observations by many orders of magnitude.
So, if we did discover that dark energy varies over time, it might explain why observations are at odds with quantum mechanics, which is an extremely well-tested theory. This would suggest the assumption in the standard model of cosmology, that dark energy is constant, needs a rethink. Such a realisation may help solve other mysteries about the universe – or pose new ones.
In short, the new cosmological observations coming this decade will stimulate a new era of physical thinking. Congratulations to my younger cosmologists: it is your era to have fun.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alan Jenn, Associate Professional Researcher in Transportation, University of California, Davis
A Nissan Leaf charges at a station in Pasadena, Calif., on Sept. 23, 2024.Mario Tama/Getty Images
The Biden administration is using tax credits, regulations and federal investments to shift drivers toward electric vehicles. But drivers will make the switch only if they are confident they can find reliable charging when and where they need it.
Over the past four years, the number of public charging ports across the U.S. has doubled. As of August 2024, the nation had 192,000 publicly available charging ports and was adding about 1,000 public chargers weekly. Infrastructure rarely expands at such a fast rate.
Agencies are allocating billions of dollars authorized through the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for building charging infrastructure. This expansion is making long-distance EV travel more practical. It also makes EV ownership more feasible for people who can’t charge at home, such as some apartment dwellers.
Charging technology is also improving. Speeds are now reaching up to 350 kilowatts – fast enough to charge a standard electric car in less than 10 minutes. The industry has also begun to shift to a standard called ISO 15118, which governs the interface between EVs and the power grid.
This standard enables a plug-and-charge system: Just plug in the charger and you’re done, without contending with apps or multiple payment systems. Many existing chargers can be retrofitted to it, rather than needing to install totally new chargers.
Although EV charging infrastructure has improved in the past several years, reliability is still a critical issue. For example, a 2022 study by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, found that nearly 30% of public non-Tesla fast chargers in the Bay Area didn’t work. A national study in 2023 that used artificial intelligence models to analyze driver reviews of EV charging stations reached a similar result.
These findings highlight the need for more robust maintenance and monitoring systems across charging networks. Federal guidelines require that chargers must have an average annual “uptime,” or functional time, greater than 97%, but this metric is not always as clear-cut as it sounds. While many charging-point operators report high uptime percentages, their figures often exclude factors such as slow charging speeds or incomplete charges that degrade users’ experience.
Cars waiting to charge at a center in San Diego. Gil Tal, CC BY-ND
Many drivers complain about throttling – chargers that dispense electricity at less than the maximum rate the car is capable of accepting, so the car charges more slowly than expected. Sometimes this is normal: Cars will charge more slowly as their battery gets closer to full in order to avoid damaging the battery. Other factors can include weather conditions and the number of other vehicles simultaneously using the charging station.
Drivers’ issues with chargers involve more than just uptime. Technical barriers, such as payment processing and vehicle-charger communication, sometimes can prevent a charge from starting or completing.
To ensure that all EVs can charge smoothly at any network, groups such as the National Charging Experience Consortium and CharIN are bringing automakers, charging providers and national laboratories together to address these issues.
Other obstacles are more local, such as long lines at charging stations and chargers that are blocked by parked cars, snowbanks or other obstacles. Finding vehicles with internal combustion engines parked in EV charger spots is common enough that it has a name: getting ICEd. There’s a clear need for more comprehensive solutions to help the charging experience keep pace with demand for EVs.
A Wall Street Journal tech columnist finds abundant chargers – with abundant challenges – in Los Angeles.
A street-level view
At the University of California, Davis, we are working with the California Energy Commission to understand the range of charging obstacles that EV drivers face. As part of a three-year study, we are sending undergraduate students out to test thousands of chargers across the entire state of California.
So far, our results show that just over 70% of charge attempts have succeeded. Many issues have caused failed charges, including traffic congestion at charging stations, damaged or offline chargers, difficulty using navigation apps to find charging stations, and malfunctioning chargers.
Quantity and quality both matter
As federal investments continue to pour money into EV charging, our findings indicate that it’s important to use these resources not only to expand the network but also to improve the user experience at every step.
Areas for improvement include stricter oversight of charger maintenance; more robust uptime requirements that reflect real-world performance; and better collaboration between automakers, charging-point operators and software providers to ensure that vehicles and chargers can work together seamlessly.
The future of EV adoption depends not just on how many chargers are available, but on how reliable and easy they are to use. By addressing specific pain points that drivers face, policymakers and industry leaders can create a charging ecosystem that truly supports the needs of all EV drivers. Reliability is key to unlocking widespread confidence in the EV charging infrastructure and ensuring that it can keep pace with the growing number of electric vehicles on the road.
Alan Jenn receives funding from the California Energy Commission and is a participant in the National Charging Experience Consortium (ChargeX)
The 67 million Americans eligible for Medicare make an important decision every October: Should they make changes in their Medicare health insurance plans for the next calendar year?
The decision is complicated. Medicare has an enormous variety of coverage options, with large and varying implications for people’s health and finances, both as beneficiaries and taxpayers. And the decision is consequential – some choices lock beneficiaries out of traditional Medicare.
Beneficiaries choose an insurance plan when they turn 65 or become eligible based on qualifying chronic conditions or disabilities. After the initial sign-up, most beneficiaries can make changes only during the open enrollment period each fall.
The 2024 open enrollment period, which runs from Oct. 14 to Dec. 7, marks an opportunity to reassess options. Given the complicated nature of Medicare and the scarcity of unbiased advisers, however, finding reliable information and understanding the options available can be challenging.
We are health carepolicy experts who study Medicare, and even we find it complicated. One of us recently helped a relative enroll in Medicare for the first time. She’s healthy, has access to health insurance through her employer and doesn’t regularly take prescription drugs. Even in this straightforward scenario, the number of choices were overwhelming.
The stakes of these choices are even higher for people managing multiple chronic conditions. There is help available for beneficiaries, but we have found that there is considerable room for improvement – especially in making help available for everyone who needs it.
The choice is complex, especially when you are signing up for the first time and if you are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid. Insurers often engage in aggressive and sometimes deceptive advertising and outreach through brokers and agents. Choose unbiased resources to guide you through the process, like http://www.shiphelp.org. Make sure to start before your 65th birthday for initial sign-up, look out for yearly plan changes, and start well before the Dec. 7 deadline for any plan changes.
2 paths with many decisions
Within Medicare, beneficiaries have a choice between two very different programs. They can enroll in either traditional Medicare, which is administered by the government, or one of the Medicare Advantage plans offered by private insurance companies.
Within each program are dozens of further choices.
Traditional Medicare is a nationally uniform cost-sharing plan for medical services that allows people to choose their providers for most types of medical care, usually without prior authorization. Deductibles for 2024 are US$1,632 for hospital costs and $240 for outpatient and medical costs. Patients also have to chip in starting on Day 61 for a hospital stay and Day 21 for a skilled nursing facility stay. This percentage is known as coinsurance. After the yearly deductible, Medicare pays 80% of outpatient and medical costs, leaving the person with a 20% copayment. Traditional Medicare’s basic plan, known as Part A and Part B, also has no out-of-pocket maximum.
People enrolled in traditional Medicare can also purchase supplemental coverage from a private insurance company, known as Part D, for drugs. And they can purchase supplemental coverage, known as Medigap, to lower or eliminate their deductibles, coinsurance and copayments, cap costs for Parts A and B, and add an emergency foreign travel benefit.
The Medicare Advantage program allows private insurers to bundle everything together and offers many enrollment options. Compared with traditional Medicare, Medicare Advantage plans typically offer lower out-of-pocket costs. They often bundle supplemental coverage for hearing, vision and dental, which is not part of traditional Medicare.
Understanding the tradeoffs between premiums, health care access and out-of-pocket health care costs can be overwhelming.
Turning 65 begins the process of taking one of two major paths, which each have a thicket of health care choices. Rika Kanaoka/USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics
Different Medicare Advantage plans have varying and large impacts on enrollee health, including dramatic differences in mortality rates. Researchers found a 16% difference per year between the best and worst Medicare Advantage plans, meaning that for every 100 people in the worst plans who die within a year, they would expect only 84 people to die within that year if all had been enrolled in the best plans instead. They also found plans that cost more had lower mortality rates, but plans that had higher federal quality ratings – known as “star ratings” – did not necessarily have lower mortality rates.
While many Medicare Advantage plans boast about their supplemental benefits , such as vision and dental coverage, it’s often difficult to understand how generous this supplemental coverage is. For instance, while most Medicare Advantage plans offer supplemental dental benefits, cost-sharing and coverage can vary. Some plans don’t cover services such as extractions and endodontics, which includes root canals. Most plans that cover these more extensive dental services require some combination of coinsurance, copayments and annual limits.
Even when information is fully available, mistakes are likely.
At 65, when most beneficiaries first enroll in Medicare, federal regulations guarantee that anyone can get Medigap coverage. During this initial sign-up, beneficiaries can’t be charged a higher premium based on their health.
Older Americans who enroll in a Medicare Advantage plan but then want to switch back to traditional Medicare after more than a year has passed lose that guarantee. This can effectively lock them out of enrolling in supplemental Medigap insurance, making the initial decision a one-way street.
For the initial sign-up, Medigap plans are “guaranteed issue,” meaning the plan must cover preexisting health conditions without a waiting period and must allow anyone to enroll, regardless of health. They also must be “community rated,” meaning that the cost of a plan can’t rise because of age or illness, although it can go up due to other factors such as inflation.
People who enroll in traditional Medicare and a supplemental Medigap plan at 65 can expect to continue paying community-rated premiums as long as they remain enrolled, regardless of what happens to their health.
In most states, however, people who switch from Medicare Advantage to traditional Medicare don’t have as many protections. Most state regulations permit plans to deny coverage, impose waiting periods or charge higher Medigap premiums based on their expected health costs. Only Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and New York guarantee that people can get Medigap plans after the initial sign-up period.
Deceptive advertising
Information about Medicare coverage and assistance choosing a plan is available but varies in quality and completeness. Older Americans are bombarded with ads for Medicare Advantage plans that they may not be eligible for and that include misleading statements about benefits.
A November 2022 report from the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance found deceptive and aggressive sales and marketing tactics, including mailed brochures that implied government endorsement, telemarketers who called up to 20 times a day, and salespeople who approached older adults in the grocery store to ask about their insurance coverage.
The Department of Health and Human Services tightened rules for 2024, requiring third-party marketers to include federal resources about Medicare, including the website and toll-free phone number, and limiting the number of contacts from marketers.
Although the government has the authority to review marketing materials, enforcement is partially dependent on whether complaints are filed. Complaints can be filed with the federal government’s Senior Medicare Patrol, a federally funded program that prevents and addresses unethical Medicare activities.
Nearly one-third of Medicare beneficiaries seek information from an insurance broker. Brokers sell health insurance plans from multiple companies. However, because they receive payment from plans in exchange for sales, and because they are unlikely to sell every option, a plan recommended by a broker may not meet a person’s needs.
Help is out there − but falls short
An alternative source of information is the federal government. It offers three sources of information to assist people with choosing one of these plans: 1-800-Medicare, medicare.gov and the State Health Insurance Assistance Program, also known as SHIP.
Telephone SHIP services are available nationally, but one of us and our colleagues have found that in-person SHIP services are not available in some areas. We tabulated areas by ZIP code in 27 states and found that although more than half of the locations had a SHIP site within the county, areas without a SHIP site included a larger proportion of people with low incomes.
Virtual services are an option that’s particularly useful in rural areas and for people with limited mobility or little access to transportation, but they require online access. Virtual and in-person services, where both a beneficiary and a counselor can look at the same computer screen, are especially useful for looking through complex coverage options.
As one SHIP coordinator noted, many people are not aware of all their coverage options. For instance, one beneficiary told a coordinator, “I’ve been on Medicaid and I’m aging out of Medicaid. And I don’t have a lot of money. And now I have to pay for my insurance?” As it turned out, the beneficiary was eligible for both Medicaid and Medicare because of their income, and so had to pay less than they thought.
The interviews made clear that many people are not aware that Medicare Advantage ads and insurance brokers may be biased. One counselor said, “There’s a lot of backing (beneficiaries) off the ledge, if you will, thanks to those TV commercials.”
Many SHIP staff counselors said they would benefit from additional training on coverage options, including for people who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid. The SHIP program relies heavily on volunteers, and there is often greater demand for services than the available volunteers can offer. Additional counselors would help meet needs for complex coverage decisions.
The key to making a good Medicare coverage decision is to use the help available and weigh your costs, access to health providers, current health and medication needs, and also consider how your health and medication needs might change as time goes on.
This article is part of an occasional series examining the U.S. Medicare system.
Grace McCormack receives funding from the Commonwealth Fund and Arnold Ventures.
Melissa Garrido receives funding from Commonwealth Fund, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health for Medicare-related research, including research discussed in this piece.
Donald Trump accuses others of acts he has done at an Oct. 3, 2024, rally in Michigan.AP Photo/Carlos Osorio
Donald Trump has a particular formula he uses to convey messages to his supporters and opponents alike: He highlights others’ wrongdoings even though he has committed similar acts himself.
On Oct. 3, 2024, Trump accused the Biden administration of spending Federal Emergency Management Agency funds – money meant for disaster relief – on services for immigrants. Biden did no such thing, but Trump did during his time in the White House, including to pay for additional detention space.
This is not the first time he has accused someone of something he had done or would do in the future. In 2016, Trump criticized opponent Hillary Clinton’s use of an unsecured personal email server while secretary of state as “extreme carelessness with classified material.” But once he was elected, Trump continued to use his unsecured personal cellphone while in office. And he has been criminally charged with illegally keeping classified government documents after he left office and storing them in his bedroom, bathroom and other places at his Mar-a-Lago estate.
After complaining about how Hillary Clinton handled classified documents, Donald Trump stored national secrets in a bathroom. Justice Department via AP
More recently, the Secret Service arrested a man with a rifle who was allegedly planning to shoot Trump during a round of golf. In the wake of this event, Trump accused Democrats of using “inflammatory language” that stokes the fires of political violence. Meanwhile, Trump himself has a long history of making inflammatory remarks that could potentially incite violence.
As a scholar of both politics and psychology, I’m familiar with the psychological strategies candidates use to persuade the public to support them and to cast their rivals in a negative light. This strategy Trump has used repeatedly is called “projection.” It’s a tactic people use to lessen their own faults by calling out these faults in others.
Projection abounds
There are plenty of examples. During his Sept. 10, 2024, debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump claimed that Democrats were responsible for the July 13 assassination attempt against him. “I probably took a bullet to the head because of the things that they say about me,” he declared.
Earlier in the debate he had falsely accused immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, of eating other people’s pets – a statement that sparked bomb threats and prompted the city’s mayor to declare a state of emergency.
Trump isn’t the only politician who uses projection. His running mate, JD Vance, claimed “the rejection of the American family is perhaps the most pernicious and the most evil thing the left has done in this country.” Critics quickly pointed out that his own family has a history of dysfunction and drug addiction.
Projection happens on both sides of the political aisle. In reference to Trump’s proposed 10% tariff on all imported goods, the Harris campaign launched social media efforts to condemn the so-called “Trump tequila tax.” While Harris frames this proposal as a sales tax that would devastate middle-class families, she deflects from the fact that inflation has made middle-class life more expensive since she and President Joe Biden took office.
How it works
Projection is one example of unconscious psychological processes called defense mechanisms. Some people find it hard to accept criticism or believe information that they wish were not true. So they seek – and then provide – another explanation for the difference between what’s happening in the world and what’s happening in their minds.
In general, this is called “motivated reasoning,” which is an umbrella phrase used to describe the array of mental gymnastics people use to reconcile their views with reality.
Some examples include seeking out information that confirms their beliefs, dismissing factual claims or creating alternate explanations. For example, a smoker might downplay or simply avoid information related to the link between smoking and lung cancer, or perhaps tell themselves that they don’t smoke as much as they actually do.
Motivated reasoning is not unique to politics. It can be a challenging concept to consider because people tend to think they are fully in control of their decision-making abilities and that they are capable of objectively processing political information. The evidence is clear, however, that there are unconscious thought processes at work, too.
Influencing the audience
Audiences are also susceptible to unconscious psychological dynamics. Research has found that over time, people’s minds subconsciously attach emotions to concepts, names or phrases. So someone might have a particular emotional reaction to the words “gun control,” “Ron DeSantis” or “tax relief.”
And people’s minds also unconsciously create defenses for those seemingly automatic emotions. When a person’s emotions and defenses are questioned, a phenomenon called the “backfire effect” can occur, in which the process of controlling, correcting or counteracting mistaken beliefs ends up reinforcing the person’s beliefs rather than changing them.
For instance, some people may find it hard to believe that the candidate they prefer – whom they believe to be the best person for the job – truly lost an election. So they seek another explanation and accept explanations that justify their beliefs. Perhaps they choose to believe, even in the absence of evidence, that the race was rigged or that many fraudulent votes were cast. And when evidence to the contrary is offered, they insist their views are correct.
Vice President Kamala Harris has campaigned with Liz Cheney, right, a prominent Republican who formerly served in Congress. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein
A way out
Fortunately, research shows specific ways to reduce people’s reliance on these automatic psychological processes, including reiterating and providing details of objective facts and – importantly – attempting to correct untruths via a trusted source from the same political party.
For instance, challenges to Democrats’ belief that the Trump-affiliated conservative agenda called Project 2025 is “dangerous” would be more effective coming from a Democrat than from a Republican.
Similarly, a counter to Trump’s claim that the international community is headed toward World War III with Democrats in the White House would be stronger coming from one of Trump’s fellow Republicans. And certainly, statements that Trump “can never be trusted with power again” carries more weight when it comes from the lips of former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney than from any member of the Democratic Party.
Critiques from within a candidate’s own party are not out of the question. But they are certainly improbable given the hotly charged climate that is election season 2024.
April Johnson 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.
