A-level results in 2025 show the increasing popularity of Stem (science, technology, engineering and maths) among students. For students taking three A-levels – the majority – the most popular combination of subjects was biology, chemistry and maths.
The subject with the greatest rise in entries from 2024 is further maths, followed by economics, maths, physics and chemistry. Maths remains the most popular subject, with entries making up 12.7% of all A-level entries.
There is considerable incentive for young people who may be looking beyond school and university to the job market to study Stem. Research has found that Stem undergraduate degrees bring higher financial benefits to people and to the public purse than non-Stem subjects.
Many of the world’s fastest-growing jobs need Stem skills. These include data analysts, AI specialists, renewable energy engineers, app developers, cybersecurity experts and financial technology experts.
Within Stem itself, science alone is a broad church that spans astronomy to zoology and all letters of the alphabet between. Add to this the many variations of technology, engineering and maths and the range of subjects and specialisms is enormous.
It might come as no surprise, then, that young people have considerable scope in the possible careers and employment they might follow in life. From accountancy to the environment, medical engineering to computer technology, etymology to vulcanology, the possibilities are vast. There is little doubt that this very broad arena is attractive as possible employment.
Young people are choosing to study science, technology, engineering and maths. Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock
What’s more, maths, engineering and the sciences are now vital parts of careers that might have once seemed unrelated. It was once the case that the division between arts and science was seen as unbridgeable: you were firmly on one side or the other. Today this is far less evident.
Artists, in their many manifestations, are almost by default material scientists. Architects, photographers, musicians, video-makers, sound and lighting technicians are (arguably) technical engineers. Landscape gardeners are environmentalists, chefs are food scientists.
Everyday Stem
Stem affects everyday life at all levels. Wearing a smart watch to track our health and fitness, as so many of us do, requires analysis of data, averages and percentages. We need maths skills to navigate our personal finances. Following directions means programming a Satnav.
Young people take their attitudes, advice and directions from a multitude of sources. Concern about the environment may lead teens to consider careers in areas such as ecology or environmental engineering. The ubiquity of social media apps and the tech companies that run them raises awareness of the use of computer science or tech skills.
And leaving aside Instagram, TikTok and other social media, Sir David Attenborough’s TV series Blue Planet prompted a surge of interest in marine ecology and plastic pollution.
Nor are young people immune to social influences more broadly. In more diffuse ways, peers and parents are also influential in shaping career choices, as are science centres, museums, botanical gardens, planetariums, aquariums, environmental centres, city farms and such like.
Then there are teachers and schools. Positive experiences in school Stem prompt further study. There is increasing evidence that individual project work, industrial placements, role-model scientists, school outreach and class visits all play an important part in promoting career intentions and aspirations.
One important factor here is imbuing students with a positive Stem identity. When young people think they are good at Stem subjects and are able to be successful, they are much more likely to choose a Stem career.
The upshot here is that, as the world changes, and changes quickly, so does the realisation that Stem is an essential and invaluable dimension of life and that career prospects are varied and available at many, many levels. It seems little wonder that students have to come to see this and are enrolling in study and employment in greater numbers than before.
Mike Watts 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 – in French – By François Langot, Professeur d’économie, Directeur adjoint de l’i-MIP (PSE-CEPREMAP), Le Mans Université
Jacques Chirac, Nicolas Sarkozy, François Hollande puis Emmanuel Macron ont été confrontés à la problématique de la dette et de ses intérêts. Comment la conjoncture économique (inflation et croissance) agissent sur cette dette ? Qui a bénéficié d’une bonne ou d’une mauvaise conjoncture ?
La dette n’a cessé de croître au cours de ces trente dernières années. Elle est la somme de tous les déficits publics accumulés depuis le milieu des années 1970. Afin de comparer le montant de cette dette à une capacité de financement, elle est exprimée en pourcentage du produit intérieur brut (PIB) – ratio dette/PIB, ce qui indique combien d’années de création de richesses (le PIB) sont nécessaires à son remboursement.
À la fin du premier trimestre 2025, la dette de la France représente 3 345,4 milliards d’euros, soit 113,9 % du PIB. Si cet endettement résulte évidemment de choix politiques, déterminant les recettes et les dépenses du pays, il dépend également de la conjoncture économique… qui peut plus ou moins faciliter la gestion de cette dette.
Crise des subprimes en 2008, pandémie de Covid-19, zone euro en récession, bulle Internet, embellie des années 2000, les gouvernements de Jacques Chirac, Nicolas Sarkozy, François Hollande et Emmanuel Macron ont connu des conjonctures économiques aussi assombries que radieuses. Avec quels arbitrages ? Explication en graphiques.
Influences de la conjoncture sur la dette
La conjoncture économique peut être analysée à travers deux paramètres, qui sont tous les deux des taux : le taux d’intérêt (r), fixé par la Banque centrale européenne (BCE) et qui détermine la charge d’intérêt à payer sur la dette, et les taux de croissance (g comme growth) qui mesurent l’accroissement annuel de richesses créées (le PIB). La conjoncture économique est à l’origine de deux effets :
Un premier effet est défavorable aux finances publiques. Il se produit lorsque la conjoncture conduit le taux d’intérêt (r) à être supérieur au taux de croissance (g), soit r-g > 0. Dans ce contexte, le surplus de richesse créée induit par la croissance est inférieur aux intérêts à payer sur la dette. De facto, la dette croît, même si les choix politiques conduisent les recettes de l’État à financer ses dépenses (hors charges des intérêts de cette dette), c’est-à-dire si le déficit primaire est nul.
Le schéma (Figure 1) indique que cette conjoncture défavorable s’est produite sous le mandat de Jacques Chirac. En cette période, la somme des déficits primaires, soit les dépenses de l’État hors charge de la dette, et les recettes, est quasiment stable (courbe bleue). La dette est en hausse à cause d’intérêts élevés (r entre 2,5 % et 5 %), conjugués avec une croissance modérée (g est autour de 4 %) qui font croître cet endettement (courbe rouge).
Un deuxième effet est favorable aux finances publiques. Si le taux d’intérêt réel est inférieur au taux de croissance (r-g < 0), alors la dette (ratio dette/PIB) peut être stabilisée, même si les dépenses, hors charges des intérêts, sont supérieures aux recettes, c’est-à-dire même si les choix politiques induisent un déficit primaire. En effet, dans ce cas, l’accroissement annuel de la richesse créée (la croissance du PIB) est supérieure à la charge des intérêts.
Le schéma (Figure 1) indique qu’une telle conjoncture s’est produite sous les mandats d’Emmanuel Macron. Pendant cette période, la somme des déficits primaires a fortement crû (courbe bleue) : les choix politiques ont conduit les dépenses de l’État (hors charges des intérêts sur la dette) à être supérieures à ses recettes. Toutefois, la dette a augmenté plus faiblement (courbe rouge), car les taux d’intérêts sont restés plus faibles que la croissance (moins de 2 % pour les taux d’intérêt, r, contre plus de 2,5 % pour la croissance, g).
Figure 1 : L’écart entre la ligne rouge et la ligne bleue mesure la contribution des charges d’intérêt nette de la croissance (r-g) à l’évolution du ratio dette/PIB. Données Insee. Fourni par l’auteur
Contribution de la conjoncture à la dette
L’histoire récente classe en deux groupes les mandats présidentiels. Celui où une « mauvaise » conjoncture explique majoritairement la hausse de la dette (ratio dette/PIB) – dans la figure 1, la courbe rouge croît davantage que la courbe bleue. Celui où les déficits primaires contribuent majoritairement à sa hausse – dans la figure 1, la courbe bleue croît davantage que la courbe rouge.
Le premier regroupe les mandats de Jacques Chirac et Nicolas Sarkozy. Le second, ceux de François Hollande et d’Emmanuel Macron.
Les données montrent que sous les deux mandats de Jacques Chirac (1995-2007), le ratio dette/PIB a augmenté de 8,99 points (0,75 point par an). Cette augmentation est due à une « mauvaise » conjoncture pour les finances publiques (effet de r-g > 0) qui a fait croître le ratio dette/PIB de 10,07 points, la dynamique des déficits primaires ayant contribué à le réduire de 1,08 point. Pendant cette période, les taux d’intérêt sur la dette publique étaient très élevés – entre 4 et 6 %.
Sous le mandat de Nicolas Sarkozy (2007-2012), le ratio dette/PIB a crû de 22,76 points (4,55 points par an), dont 11,01 points induits par les déficits primaires, soit 48 % de la hausse totale, et 11,75 points à la conjoncture (52 % du total). Les taux d’intérêt ont continué à être élevés – entre 3 et 4 %. Les déficits primaires importants ont suivi les choix politiques visant à amortir la crise des subprimes.
A contrario, pendant le mandat de François Hollande, c’est la hausse des déficits primaires qui expliquent à 71,5 % de la hausse totale du ratio dette/PIB (9,13 points parmi les 12,74 points de hausse totale, soit 2,55 points par année). Les taux d’intérêt ont continué à baisser, passant de 3 % à moins de 2 %, alors que les déficits primaires n’ont pas été contrôlés, même si les crises des subprimes puis des dettes souveraines étaient passées.
Déficits primaires sous Emmanuel Macron
Les mandats d’Emmanuel Macron, jusqu’en 2024, accentuent encore le trait. La dette n’a augmenté que de 10,8 points (1,35 point par an), car la conjoncture l’a fait baisser de 15,31 points, les taux d’intérêt devenant très faibles, passant sous les 1 % en 2020. La hausse de la dette s’explique uniquement par la très forte hausse des déficits primaires qui l’ont fait croître de 26,11 points, pendant une période où la pandémie de Covid-19 et la crise de l’énergie ont conduit l’État à assurer les Français contre de trop forte baisses de pouvoir d’achat.
La période future, allant de 2025-2029, se classe dans la seconde configuration où la conjoncture facilitera de moins en moins la gestion de la dette publique (r-g < 0). Même avec un objectif politique de maîtrise de l’endettement, la réduction des déficits primaires pourra alors se faire graduellement. Toutefois, avec ces déficits qui continueront à peser sur la dette, la conjoncture facilitera de moins en moins la gestion de la dette publique, car la croissance compensera de moins en moins un taux d’intérêt en hausse.
Le budget présenté par François Bayrou, le 25 juillet dernier, fera croître le ratio dette/PIB de 4,6 points (0,92 point par an), dans un contexte où la conjoncture le réduira de 1,7 point. Les déficits primaires l’augmenteront donc de 6,3 points. Dans ce contexte, l’effort budgétaire proposé par le gouvernement Bayrou permettra de stabiliser le ratio dette/PIB autour de 117 %, certes loin de la stabilisation autour de 60 % des mandats de Jacques Chirac…
Équilibre entre dépenses et recettes
L’évolution du déficit primaire (écart entre les dépenses, hors charges d’intérêt, et les recettes) indique que sur les vingt-neuf dernières années, il y a eu dix années où il s’est accru. Trois hausses majeures se dégagent : en 2002, de 1,82 point avec le krach boursier, en 2009 de 4,2 points, avec la crise des subprimes et, en 2020, de 6,1 points, avec la pandémie de Covid-19.
En 2002, la hausse du déficit était partagée avec 1,1 point lié aux hausses des dépenses et 0,72 point aux réductions des recettes. Les fortes hausses de 2008 et de 2020 sont majoritairement dues à des hausses de dépenses : 95 % des 4,2 points de 2009 et 97 % des 6,1 points de 2020. Afin de contenir la dette, les recettes ont fini par augmenter après les crises, entre 2004 et 2006, puis entre 2011 et 2013 et, enfin, entre 2021 et 2022. Mais il n’y a jamais eu de réduction des dépenses ni après 2011 ni après 2023.
C’est donc leur persistance à un niveau élevé qui explique l’accroissement du ratio dette/PIB. Seule la période très récente (en 2023) avec la crise ukrainienne a conduit l’État à réduire les recettes afin de préserver le pouvoir d’achat dans un contexte de forte inflation.
Contrôle des dépenses publiques
Le plan du gouvernement Bayrou, en faisant peser les trois quarts de l’ajustement sur les dépenses, propose de reprendre le contrôle des dépenses publiques afin qu’elles représentent 54,4 % du PIB en 2029 – ce que l’on observait avant la crise de 2007. Au-delà de stabiliser le ratio dette/PIB, ce choix politique permet aussi d’envisager la possibilité de gérer une éventuelle crise future. La question qui se pose alors est : quels postes de dépenses réduire en priorité ?
Variation d’un type de dépense par mandat. La variation mesure l’écart en point de PIB entre la dépense en fin de mandat (2023 pour Emmanuel Macron) et la dépense en début de mandat. Données Insee. Fourni par l’auteur
Les postes de dépenses qui ont crû depuis 1995 sont ceux liés à l’environnement (+0,8 point de PIB), à la santé (+3,2 points de PIB), aux loisirs, à la culture et au culte (+0,6 point de PIB) et à la protection sociale (+1,3 point de PIB). Ceux qui ont baissé sont ceux liés aux services généraux des administrations publiques (-4,1 points de PIB), à la défense (-1,1 point de PIB) et à l’enseignement (-1,5 points de PIB). À l’avenir, un budget réallouant les dépenses en faveur de la défense et l’enseignement via un meilleur contrôle des dépenses de santé et de protection sociale devra donc être perçu comme un simple rééquilibrage.
François Langot 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.
In William Blake’s painting The Ghost of a Flea (1820) a huge muscled figure fills the frame. He steps forward, the right side of his body towards the viewer. In one outstretched hand he holds a bleeding bowl (used to catch the blood released during bloodletting) made from an acorn. In the other, a curved thorn stands in for a knife. His tongue protrudes from between his teeth and his eyes bulge from his head. His ears are pointed with frills, or gills, almost reptilian.
White paint dots his eye, so that he appears to be both looking ahead and looking at us. He is stood on a stage between curtains with a backdrop of stars, one falling in a blaze of light. He is at once light and heavy, balanced on his toes as if he is engaged in a dance, or creeping towards his victim.
Painted in thick brown tempera (a pigment bound in water and egg, or oil and egg) and cracked with age, it is gold leaf that gives the painting its light. It’s in the creature’s muscles, the stars that fall behind him, the rim of the acorn bowl, the curtains he parts with his bulk and the boards of the stage that break into undulations at his step. The whole effect is one of movement, and of a creature occupying a space that is both vast and framed. But the painting is tiny – a rectangular hardwood panel measuring only 8.42 by 6.23 inches.
This article is part of Rethinking the Classics. The stories in this series offer insightful new ways to think about and interpret classic books and artworks. This is the canon – with a twist.
The Ghost of the Flea is a development of an original sketch from a group of visionary heads (chalk and pencil drawings of historical and mythical characters seen in visions) that Blake had drawn for watercolour artist and astrologer John Varley. Blake claimed to have seen and spoken with spirits since he was a child and in a series of late night seances, Varley persuaded Blake to draw the images of these visions to illustrate his book, Treatise on Zodiacal Physiognomy (1828).
My poem of the same title, in my 2018 collection, A Perfect Mirror, recalls Blake’s vision of the flea’s ghost as a way of writing about a series of terrifying experiences I had as a child. Blake’s monstrous “ghost” is the perfect embodiment of a horror I could neither name nor give shape to for many years: “The corner of the bedroom housed him / gigantic in a speck of dust.”
These experiences, triggered by trauma, involved a level of disassociation where I would lose all sense of scale, my body in space becoming both impossibly tiny and horrifically vast: “at once huge / and far away, immensely tiny and close.”
Blake’s painting captures the paradox of this disembodiment. The flea’s ghost is not what we expect of the tiniest of creatures, but instead expresses the flea’s innermost essence.
I grew up during the cold war, when the threat of nuclear annihilation was close at hand. This threat affected me deeply. My sense of horror was not only a personal one, but one that stretched to imagining the millions of souls that would be released from their bodies by nuclear catastrophe. In my poem, the white eyes of the flea’s apparition become “soft white pods of spider nests / where the million bodies might / any minute come rushing”.
While acknowledging the horror and giving it form, the poem self-consciously steps back from it. Now I am the poet, looking back on the experience and framing it through art. The process of writing, or any other artistic process, is only therapeutic in how far writing (or painting) is able to distance the traumatic experience from the writer.
The artist or writer does this through the process of shaping, crafting, rewriting and editing. The very act of “framing” draws attention to the artistic process. As Blake “frames” his monster in paint between draped curtains on the tiny hardwood panel I, the poet, frame and shape the frightening memories and images in lines and stanzas. This is the “stage” whereby experience is transmuted through the artifice of the painting or poem.
William Blake in Conversation with John Varley by John Linnell (1818). Wiki Commons
Images are central to this process in poetry and in visual art, but it is often in visual art that these images are more readily available. Powerful visual images can work like dreams, coding meaning and experience in ways that reach the subconscious mind and impart understanding that might otherwise stay hidden. Without needing to fully articulate an experience, it must be “proved upon our pulse”, as the poet John Keats put it.
This is only one of the reasons I am drawn to ekphrastic writing (writing that describes another art form). To my mind, the purpose of ekphrasis goes far beyond this. The poem must do more than simply recreate or describe the work of art – it should be a conversation between art forms that can range from discussing to expanding, or stepping off from the ideas and motifs the original works evoke. Most importantly, ekphrastic work should not only be a synthesis of the original and of new ideas and thinking, but a new work of art that stands in its own right.
My intention in my poem The Ghost of a Flea was to hold such a conversation with Blake through his painting, The Ghost of a Flea. Blake is a poet and artist who speaks profoundly to my own personal and artistic experience – and whose work remains a well of inspiration and encouragement.
Beyond the canon
As part of the Rethinking the Classics series, we’re asking our experts to recommend a book or artwork that tackles similar themes to the canonical work in question, but isn’t (yet) considered a classic itself. Here is Sarah Corbett’s suggestion:
An image of the doomsday clock opens Laurie Anderson’s artwork, the “opera” Ark, which blends song and story with images in a three-hour essay about the apocalypse.
As a child, I would “see” the doomsday clock on my bedroom wall, counting me down to my own destruction. I had to count back from 100 to hold in balance the second hand of the clock that threatened to strike the hour of midnight. At the last moment I would find the courage to escape from my room, and the nightmare would vanish, only to return the next evening.
Despite the multiple threats humanity now faces, from nuclear war to AI to climate collapse, Anderson’s performance looks for ways to bring us together in a collective healing. I found poetry – or perhaps, more accurately, poetry found me. The function of art is not only to awaken us to the truths around us, but to give us ways to re-imagine our future.
This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.
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.
Sarah Corbett received funidng from the AHRC for Doctoral study, 2007 – 10
Poohsticks, the game in which Piglet and Winnie the Pooh throw sticks into the river from one side of a bridge, and then rush over to the other side to see whose stick appears first, is all about current flow. Disappointingly, neither Piglet nor Pooh mention fluid dynamics despite its pivotal importance in determining who won.
Unlike sticks, though, animals can respond to those flows. The movement of water and air – with their winds and currents – can affect flying and swimming animals profoundly. And as we recently discovered, penguins are far more tuned in to these dynamics than anyone realised.
Anyone who’s ever swum in the sea will know how cross-currents can drag you along the coast, even when you’re trying to swim straight in. Magellanic penguins, a South American penguin, face this challenge daily, but they appear to have found a clever solution.
Penguins can swim far from land but seem to know exactly where they are. More importantly, they seem to know how to get back to their breeding colonies, whether currents are confounding them or not.
To understand how they do this, our team – which included researchers from Argentina, Germany, Japan and the UK – fitted high-tech tracking tags to Magellanic penguins breeding in Argentina. These birds often forage up to 43 miles offshore, far beyond the range of visual landmarks. And it’s unlikely they’re using the seafloor as a map, as Magellanics rarely dive that deep.
The tech we placed on the penguins recorded some pivotal information. Global positioning systems (GPS) gave the birds’ positions when they were at the surface between dives. And trajectories underwater could be calculated using dead reckoning. This is what a car navigation system does when it goes into a tunnel – it starts with the last GPS position and uses vectors on the car heading and speed to work out the path.
Our team did this with the penguins’ data, calculating the underwater pathways for every second of their one to three day trips. We then integrated this with the currents. This was no simple undertaking because currents change dramatically over the tidal cycle and vary with position.
So what could the penguins do in such a dynamic environment? One option (assuming they somehow knew both where they were and where home was) would be to head straight for the colony. But doing this would often have meant swimming against strong currents, sometimes of up to 2 metres per second (around 4.5mph). That’s about the same speed as an Olympic swimmer.
Although penguins can cruise at that speed, going faster to beat the current would cost them a lot of extra energy.
Interestingly, we found that during slack water, when the currents were trivial, the penguins headed directly home. So, somehow they knew where they were in relation to the colony. Theories about how animals might do this include them using magnetic field sensing, celestial cues, or even using smell to find their way but it’s a mysterious and hotly debated topic among experts.
When the current was strong, the penguins generally aimed in the right direction to return home. But they often combined this with swimming in the same general direction as the current, which typically flowed across the direct line to the nest. So, some birds appeared set to overshoot the colony, probably landing further down the coast.
However, the yin and yang of tidal currents means that what flows one way on the rising tide reverses on the ebb. The penguins seemed to understand this. They swam roughly equivalent, but mirror-imaged, trajectories on both incoming and outgoing tides, according to the direction of the current.
This strategy effectively cancels out potential overshoots over the course of a tidal cycle. Once they were close enough to the colony, the penguins launched into a final burst of power and made a direct line for home. This strategy increases the length of the path to get home. But it’s easy travelling since much of the work to move is done by the current and the increased distance gives the penguins opportunities to find prey.
Navigational experts
This suggests that Magellanic penguins can detect both the direction and speed of ocean currents. While some theories propose that animals sense small-scale turbulence to gauge flow, the mechanisms remain poorly understood.
Still, what these penguins manage is remarkable. It’s a kind of navigational party trick that helps ensure they return reliably to feed their chicks, seemingly untroubled by shifting currents.
Ocean and air circulation patterns are becoming more chaotic with climate change. If penguins, and other marine animals, can keep navigating our waters with skill and instinct, it’s one small piece of good news in a rapidly changing world.
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.
At a high-stakes meeting at the White House on August 18, the US president, Donald Trump, and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, tried to hammer out the broad contours of a potential peace agreement with Russia. The tone of their encounter was in marked contrast to their last joint press conference in Washington back in February which ended with Zelensky’s humiliation by Trump and his vice president, J.D. Vance.
The outcomes of the presidential get-together, and the subsequent, expanded meeting with leaders of the European coalition of the willing, were also a much more professional affair than Trump’s summit with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on August 15. The results of the meetings in the White House were still far from perfect. But they are a much better response to the reality in which Ukrainians have lived for the past more than three-and-a-half years than what transpired during and after the brief press conference held by the two leaders after their meeting in Alaska.
This relatively positive outcome was not a foregone conclusion. Over the weekend, Trump had put out a statement on his Truth Social platform that: “President Zelenskyy (sic) of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately”. But this came with the proviso that Zelensky would need to accept Ukraine’s loss of Crimea to Russia and forego his country’s future Nato membership. This, and similar ideas of land swaps between Russia and Ukraine, have already been roundly rejected by the Ukrainian president.
Importantly, Kyiv’s position has been fully backed by Ukraine’s European allies. Leaders of the coalition of the willing issued a joint statement on August 16 to the effect that any territorial concessions were Ukraine’s to make or refuse.
On Nato membership, their statement was more equivocal. European leaders asserted that Russia should not be allowed to have a veto on Ukraine’s choices.
But the coalition’s reiteration of the commitment that it is “ready to play an active role” in guaranteeing Ukraine’s future security opened up a pathway to Trump to “Article 5-like protections” for Ukraine against future Russian aggression and promising “a lot of help when it comes to security”. Nato’s Article 5 guarantees that an attack on one member is an attack on all and commits the alliance to collective defence.
A possibly emerging deal – some territorial concessions by Ukraine in exchange for peace and joint US and European security guarantees – appeared to become more certain during the televised meeting between Trump and his visitors before their closed-door discussions. In different ways, each of the European guests acknowledged the progress that Trump had made towards a settlement and they all emphasised the importance of a joint approach to Russia to make sure that any agreement would bring a just and lasting peace.
As an indication that his guests were unwilling to simply accept whatever deal he had brought back with him from his meeting with Putin in Alaska, the US president then interrupted the meeting to call the Russian president. Signals from Russia were far from promising with Moscow rejecting any Nato troop deployments to Ukraine and singling out the UK as allegedly seeking to undermine the US-Russia peace effort.
Peace remains elusive
When the meeting concluded and the different leaders offered their interpretations of what had been agreed, two things became clear. First, the Ukrainian side had not folded under pressure from the US, and European leaders, while going out of their way to flatter Trump, held their ground as well. Importantly, Trump had not walked away from the process either but appeared to want to remain engaged.
Second, Russia had not given any ground, either. According to remarks by Putin’s foreign policy advisor, Yuri Ushakov, posted on the Kremlin’s official website, Russia would consider “the possibility of raising the level of representatives of the Ukrainian and Russian parties”. His statement falls short of, but does not rule out, the possibility of a Zelensky-Putin summit, which Trump announced as a major success after the White House meetings yesterday.
Such a meeting was seen as the next logical step towards peace by all the participants of the White House meeting and would be followed, according to Trump, by what he called “a Trilat” of the Ukrainian, Russian and American presidents. The lack of clear confirmation by Russia that such meetings would indeed happen raises more doubts about the Kremlin’s sincerity.
But the fact that a peace process – if it can be called that – remains somewhat intact is a far cry from an actual peace agreement. Little if anything was said in the aftermath of the White House meeting on territorial issues. Pressure on Russia only came up briefly in comments by European leaders, whose ambitions to become formally involved in actual peace negotiations remain a pipe dream for the time being. And, despite the initial optimism about security guarantees, no firm commitments were made with Zelensky only noting “the important signal from the United States regarding its readiness to support and be part of these guarantees”.
Peace in Ukraine thus remains elusive, for now. The only tangible success is that whatever Trump imagines as the process to a peace agreement did not completely fall apart. But as this process unfolds, its progress, if any, happens at a snail’s pace. Meanwhile the Russian war machine deployed against Ukraine grinds forward.
At the end of the day, yesterday’s events changed little. They merely confirmed that Putin keeps playing for time, that Trump is unwilling to put real pressure on him and that Ukraine and Europe have no effective leverage on either side.
Trump boldly claimed ahead of his meetings with Zelensky and the leaders of the coalition of the willing that he knew exactly what he was doing. That may be true – but it may also not be enough without knowing and understanding what his counterpart in the Kremlin is doing.
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.
Modern warfare is high-tech, violent and often incomprehensible. It is also widespread with one in eight people globally exposed to conflict last year.
The shocking images which daily fill news reports and social media feeds can leave us feeling confused and helpless. But researchers can at least offer context to help us better understand these turbulent times.
This was the motivation behind a recent series of events organised by the Independent Social Research Foundation (ISRF), which The Conversation UK works with via its subsidiary Universal Impact. And a common theme was the argument that imperialism laid the foundations for many contemporary power struggles.
In these lectures on decolonisation, Martin Thomas, Julia Laite and Adam Hanieh detailed how the world we know today was shaped by the rise of empire.
For centuries, the world’s wealthiest nations forcibly acquired territory and access to natural resources, not least oil.
For Adam Hanieh oil runs through the history of Empire and decolonisation.
Adam Hanieh, Professor of Political Economy and Global Development at the University of Exeter, explained how oil propelled the allies to victory in the First and Second World Wars. Not just by fuelling their militaries but also as the raw material behind the petrochemicals essential for developing the atomic bomb.
To ensure ongoing control over oil supplies, Hanieh told how the US has forged connections in the Middle East, establishing two pillars of “influence and domination”: Israel on one side and the Gulf States, and particularly Saudi Arabia, on the other.
He said that the Middle East is one of the world’s biggest importers of arms, mainly from the US, so “petrodollar wealth is recirculating into American markets and American war making companies”.
“The centrality of both war making and the ways our lives are run through global finance gives the Middle East a central role in American power globally,” Hanieh said.
“One of the root causes of conflict, of violence, is the kind of deep ways in which global power depends upon the Middle East and controlling and building alliances with those states.”
Martin Thomas looked at how successful decolonialisation has been in remaking the modern world.
According to Martin Thomas, this global financial order has thwarted many aspirations of the former colonies which fought for self-determination after the Second World War.
Thomas, Professor of Imperial History at the University of Exeter, explained how many newly independent countries were embroiled in “Cold War rivalries which condemned third world states to subservience to the rich world’s economic demands”.
Thomas views the Soviet Union as “undoubtedly an empire”. He argued that following its fall, Russia’s governing elite was unable to “come to terms with the reality of a decolonising world”. Consequently, it is now waging a “war of imperialism” in Ukraine.
“Central to President Putin’s claims is the fact that in his, or in the Russian leadership’s, world view Ukraine is not an authentic nation state that self-determination could legitimately apply to,” Thomas said.
“I don’t accept that. I don’t think most Western governments accept that. And therefore I do see this as, crudely put, imperial bullying with dreadful human consequences.”
Ukraine’s rare mineral reserves have been at the centre of the war, as a reason for both the Russian invasion, as well as the involvement of the United States as a self-styled peacemaker. Indeed, if there’s a consistent theme running through the history of colonialism it is this struggle over natural resources.
Another example is Newfoundland where, as Julia Laite, Professor of History at Birkbeck, University of London, explained, cod was another prized commodity of empire. This unfashionable but extremely profitable product provided, in its dried salted form, one of the main food sources for enslaved people working on plantations.
Laite revealed how Newfoundland — which became England’s “very first transatlantic colonial possession” in 1583 — was one of the earliest places “to experience the environmental cost of this avarice”.
It was also the site of one of the most “totalising destructions of an indigenous culture in British imperial history” with Laite explaining how indigenous culture of the Beothuk people was destroyed by the “particular brand of negligent extractive colonialism” practised in Newfoundland.
Julia Laite’s family has been on Newfoundland since 1635.
Laite told the story of Shanawdithit, the final known living member of the Beothuk, and how her artwork is the last remaining first-hand account of their history and culture.
“Shanawdithit’s story is also the story of these imperial entanglements, the violence and the greed that underwrote them, and the price that people and the planet paid.
“She single-handedly ensured the survivance – however fragile and slight – of an entire culture of people. She reminds us of what an act of hope it is to tell a story, even at the end of the world.”
The ISRF’s mission is to find new solutions to some of today’s most pressing social issues.
Few things seem more pressing than halting the bloodshed in Ukraine, Palestine and Sudan. But while peace currently seems unimaginable – the end of empire once seemed unimaginable, too.
Universal Impact offers specialist training, mentoring and research communication services – donating profits back to The Conversation UK, our parent charity. If you’re a researcher or research institution and you’re interested in working together, please get in touch – or subscribe to UI’s weekly newsletter to find out more. Universal Impact is a partner of the ISRF
The last time Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited the White House earlier this year, he was berated by Donald Trump.
On Monday, he returned with European leaders by his side. He emerged with some signs of progress on a peace deal to end Russia’s war against Ukraine.
The presence of the European leaders no doubt had a great impact on the meeting. After Trump’s recent summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, they were concerned he was aligning the United States with the Russian position by supporting Putin’s maximalist demands.
We see from Trump’s statements over the last couple of months, the only pullback from his erratic pronouncements, largely based on Russian disinformation, seems to come when a body politic around him brings him back to a more realistic and informed position. So, this show of European unity was very important.
Security guarantees remain vital
There was considerable progress on one critical part of the negotiations: security guarantees for Ukraine.
It is significant that the US is to be involved in future security guarantees. It was not that long ago Trump was placing all the responsibility on Europe. So, this signals a positive development.
I listened to the briefing Zelensky gave outside the White House in Ukrainian for Ukrainian journalists. He explained it will take time to sort out the details of any future arrangement, as many countries would be involved in Ukraine’s future security guarantees, each with different capabilities to assist. Some would help Ukraine finance their security needs, others could provide military assistance.
Zelensky also emphasised that funding and assistance for the Ukrainian military will be a part of any future security arrangement. This would involve strategic partnerships in development and production, as well as procurement.
Zelensky made a point of this at a news conference in Brussels prior to Monday’s meeting. It is a priority for Ukraine to have a military strong enough to defend itself from future Russian attacks.
Reports also indicate the security guarantees would involve Ukraine buying around US$90 billion (A$138 billion) of US military equipment through its European allies. Zelensky also suggested the possibility of the US buying Ukrainian-made drones in the future.
According to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, there was also discussion about an Article 5-type security guarantee for Ukraine, referring to the part of the NATO treaty that enshrines the principle of collective defence for all members.
However, contrary to popular belief, NATO’s Article 5 does not actually commit members of the alliance to full military intervention if any one member is attacked. It allows NATO states to decide what type of support, if any, to provide. This would not be enough for Ukraine.
Ukraine has already seen the result of a failed security arrangement. In the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia guaranteed to respect Ukraine’s borders and territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world.
However, look what happened. Russia invaded in 2014 without any serious consequences, and then launched a full-scale invasion in 2022.
Given this, any future security guarantee for Ukraine will need to be rigorous. Ukrainians are very cognisant of this.
Loss of Ukrainian territory
Prior to his Alaska summit with Trump, I would have said Putin is not interested in any kind of deal. We saw how in previous meetings in Istanbul, Russia sent low-level delegations, not authorised to make any decisions at all.
However, I think the scenario has changed because, unfortunately, in Alaska, Trump aligned himself with Putin in supporting Russia’s maximalist demands. It’s highly likely Putin now believes he has an advocate for those demands in the White House.
This could mean Putin now perceives there is a realistic chance Russia could secure Donbas, the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.
I don’t believe Ukraine would ever agree to any formal or legal recognition of a Russian annexation of Crimea or any of the other four regions that Russia now partly occupies – Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.
Zelensky has been adamant Ukraine would not cede territory to Russia in any peace deal. And he alone cannot make such a decision. Changing any borders would need a referendum and a change to the constitution. This would not be easy to do. For one thing, it’s a very unpopular move. And Ukrainians living in Russian-occupied territory would not be given a free and fair vote.
Putin’s war against Ukraine is an attempt at illegally appropriating very valuable land. In Alaska, he demanded Russia essentially be gifted the entire regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, including land not currently occupied by the Russian military.
This land has extensive Ukrainian military fortifications. Giving up this territory would leave Ukraine completely exposed to future Russian invasions – the country would effectively have no military protection along its eastern border regions. This would put Russia in a very advantageous position in future plans to regroup and attack again.
Even if Zelensky felt compelled to agree to some kind of temporary occupation and a frozen conflict along the current front lines, I don’t believe Ukraine could give up any land still under Ukrainian control.
In a recent Gallup poll, 69% of Ukrainians favoured a negotiated settlement to the war as soon as possible. In my view, this reflects the fact the United States, under the Trump administration, is proving to be an unreliable partner.
A settlement that rewards Russia for its genocidal war against Ukraine would set a very dangerous precedent, not only for the future of Ukraine but for Europe and the rest of the world.
At recent negotiations between the two sides in Istanbul, the head of the Russian delegation reportedly said “Russia is prepared to fight forever”.
That has not changed, no matter what niceties have occurred between Trump and Putin. They are prepared to continue to fight.
Sonia Mycak 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 – (in Spanish) – By José Ygnacio Pastor Caño, Catedrático de Universidad en Ciencia e Ingeniería de los Materiales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM)
Es una mañana cualquiera y estamos descalzos en la cocina, preparándonos un café sin prisas, mientras sentimos el contacto de nuestros pies con el suelo. El mundo aún se está empezando a desperezar y, distraídos, contemplamos las baldosas que nos transmiten el frescor del alba: perfectamente alineadas como teselas de un puzle obsesivamente preciso. ¿Cuánto mide cada una de ellas? No son de 30 centímetros exactos, ni tampoco 33,3. Se nos pasa por la mente que pueden estar diseñadas en medidas anglosajonas, pero tampoco miden 30,48 cm (un pie o doce pulgadas). Y tampoco son un múltiplo de 3,14159… como 31,4 cm. ¡Ufff, y esto, a algunos, nos llevaría a algún mal recuerdo del número pi y las matemáticas!
De repente, surge ante nosotros un número extraño, casi mágico: 3,16 decímetros (dm), es decir, 31,6 centímetros. Es como si alguien hubiera decidido jugar con nuestra mente, escondiendo un enigma matemático justo bajo nuestros pies, en algo tan cotidiano y aparentemente anodino como las baldosas del suelo.
Una idea brillante de Charles Renard
A estas alturas, lector, es posible que ya haya empezado a medirlas, sorprendido porque ni siquiera son cuadradas. Pero no dejaremos que las modernas tendencias en porcelánicos nos arruinen una fascinante historia que se remonta al siglo XIX. Todo comenzó con Charles Renard, un ingeniero francés cuya brillante idea fue racionalizar las dimensiones industriales, facilitando así tanto la fabricación como el transporte de mercancías. Lo que parecía simplemente una manía ingenieril, para ordenar el caos numérico en secuencias armoniosas, acabó conectando con fenómenos mucho más profundos y misteriosos de la Física.
El ingeniero e inventor francés Charles Renard (1847-1905). Wikimedia Commons.
Y es que la intuición de Renard no se quedó atrapada en las fábricas ni en los almacenes, sino que extendió sus tentáculos hacia terrenos sorprendentes, enlazando con ámbitos tan diversos como los decibelios, esas curiosas unidades con las que medimos la intensidad del sonido – es la base del “decibelio medio”: 10 · log₁₀(10sqrt{10}) ≈ 5 dB–, y la mismísima constante de Planck, esa misteriosa cifra que gobierna el mundo microscópico de las partículas elementales y la estructura íntima del universo –en cálculo dimensional, 10√10 conecta con la constante de normalización de Planck en unidades físicas naturales–.
Una medida común en el siglo XX
Lo cierto es que esta medida de 3,16 nunca llegó a convertirse en un estándar universal, sino más bien en una sugerencia práctica. Una recomendación amable, podríamos decir. Desde finales del siglo XIX y, especialmente, con el intenso florecimiento de la industria cerámica en España a mediados del siglo XX, esta curiosa cifra reinó cómodamente como la dimensión más habitual en baldosas y azulejos.
¿Y hasta cuándo duró el reinado del intrigante 3,16? Pues, aunque sigue utilizándose hoy día, hay que admitir que ha perdido bastante protagonismo frente a formatos más grandes, más audaces, con nuevas proporciones y simetrías sugerentes (como esos elegantes 30×60, 45×90 o los imponentes 60×120). La culpa es de las modas contemporáneas, los porcelánicos rectificados y esas ganas tan nuestras de innovar para dejar atrás lo de siempre. Pero no desesperen los nostálgicos: la humilde baldosa de 3,16 decímetros todavía se fabrica, sobre todo en gamas clásicas o series destinadas a reposiciones.
10 baldosas de 31,6 cm dan como resultado un metro cuadrado. Ruth Maicas.
La lógica interna del 3,16
Volviendo ahora a nuestra realidad más inmediata, esa extraña cifra, esos 31,6 centímetros, no son producto de un error del fabricante ni de un capricho estético pasajero (las actuales, sí). Las dimensiones aparentemente azarosas de las baldosas poseen, en realidad, una lógica interna fascinante. Ese pequeño decimal, ese insignificante 0,16, esconde una sorprendente maravilla de diseño industrial y eficiencia matemática, un detalle magistral de ingenio que, aunque invisible para nosotros durante años, siempre ha estado ahí, esperando descubrirse.
Lo primero que tenemos que saber es que estas baldosas no están solas en el universo de los revestimientos cerámicos. Son piezas de un engranaje mucho mayor, una estructura modular que conecta múltiples escalas. Precisamente, 31,6 cm es una medida estándar muy utilizada por fabricantes europeos para pavimentos y revestimientos cerámicos cuadrados.
Razones industriales y económicas
Pero ¿por qué usar módulos de 31,6 cm y no 33,3 cm? Uniendo tres piezas de 33,3 cm nos daría un metro. La respuesta a esta pregunta tiene su origen en las decisiones industriales tomadas décadas atrás, cuando las fábricas comenzaron a utilizar moldes y planchas cerámicas con dimensiones pensadas para maximizar el aprovechamiento de materiales.
Cuando vamos a comprar esas placas en el almacén, el precio que nos dan es el de un metro cuadrado y eso corresponde exactamente a diez baldosas. Aquí está la sorpresa, un metro cuadrado son 100 decímetros cuadrados, eso quiere decir que cada baldosa tiene 10 decímetros cuadrados y la raíz cuadrada de 10 es 3,16, en nuestro caso decímetros, es decir 31,6 centímetros. Este curioso número nos da un equilibrio perfecto entre economía, estética y sistema métrico.
Además, existe otro factor silencioso, pero clave en su instalación: las juntas. Estas baldosas no habitan aisladas, sino que se separan por pequeñas líneas que rellenamos con cemento o lechada. Cuando incluimos este espacio (habitualmente entre 1 y 2 milímetros), las dimensiones totales se ajustan con precisión: se logra que tres losetas formen un metro, y logramos un encaje perfecto entre piezas de distintos tamaños. Parece una danza matemática cuidadosamente orquestada, invisible para la mayoría de nosotros, pero fundamental para constructores, arquitectos y diseñadores.
¿Y por qué nadie nos había contado esto antes? ¿Por qué consideran que somos unos zotes en matemáticas? No, no es eso. Resulta que los detalles se quedan atrapados en las fábricas y los laboratorios, alejados de la vida cotidiana y de nuestra mirada curiosa.
Las matemáticas de la vida
Estas dimensiones, lejos de ser triviales, encajan con una filosofía de la construcción que busca eficiencia, sostenibilidad y precisión. La decisión de utilizar baldosas de 31,6 cm no solo es estética, también es económica y ecológica, al reducir el desperdicio de materiales en la fabricación y colocación. Este enfoque refleja una armonía interna que conecta cada pequeña baldosa con el universo de nuestras vidas.
El misterio del 3,16 abre una puerta a preguntas aún más fascinantes ¿Cuántas otras decisiones invisibles determinan las dimensiones de objetos aparentemente triviales? ¿Qué otros enigmas matemáticos aguardan escondidos en los elementos cotidianos de nuestro entorno natural y artificial? ¿Por qué existe una relación ideal entre las distintas partes de nuestro cuerpo?
Al final, el suelo de nuestros hogares esconde más que un simple patrón geométrico: es un pequeño homenaje a la perfección silenciosa de la vida. Ahora, cada vez que miremos esas baldosas, tendremos la oportunidad de descubrir no solo una cifra peculiar, sino una invitación a explorar el mundo cotidiano con una mirada diferente y, de paso, vacilar a nuestros amigos con un dato curioso y sorprendente.
Las personas firmantes no son asalariadas, ni consultoras, ni poseen acciones, ni reciben financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y han declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado anteriormente.
Pero aquí nos interesa la lingüística de una etimología que indica sobre todo elevación, que asciende –‘trans’ (a través, más allá) y ‘scandere’ (escalar)–, que nos hace superar un límite y subir de escala. La trascendencia nos obliga a mirar arriba, a lo más alto.
Otra acepción alude en lenguaje llano a lo que es importante. Por eso, si planteamos la trascendencia del arte contemporáneo, cuestionamos su papel en nuestra sociedad de consumo, preguntando qué quedará para la posteridad del arte del presente.
Vídeo resumen del I Seminario Trascendencia y Arte Contemporáneo en El Paular.
Ars mutandi
La creación de los siglos XX y XXI es un campo de operaciones fértil para todo tipo de mezclas tanto estéticas como éticas. Durante más de cien años, los artistas han roto sus propios patrones y criterios en reformas y contrarreformas sucesivas, adentrándonos en el extrañamiento y en lo inverosímil.
Todavía hoy confirmamos la desvinculación del artista secular con lo sacro, al menos aparentemente. Si, como dice el filósofo José Luis Pardo, el populismo identitario es la nueva religión católica, puede haber una vía de desidentificación que permita huir de los dogmas actuales. Las tendencias del arte influidas por las corrientes posmodernas han seguido políticas ideológicas (decoloniales, feministas o ecologistas) en gran medida dirigidas por poderosas agendas museísticas y estatales. A priori no hay ningún mensaje masivo que marque un camino negativo, que vaya a contracorriente. Pero esto puede estar cambiando.
Artistas de inspiración cristiana
Siempre latente, sin embargo, sin hacer ruido, espera el abismo divino abajo, cabizbajo. Dios ¿humano o inhumano?, inexistente en el discurso oficial de los millenials, empieza tímidamente a escucharse.
De inmediato irrumpen ejemplos donde vemos resurgir la pregunta exaltada por el sentido trascendente de la vida. Ya gozaron años de bonanza los artistas malditos, ¿pasaremos ahora a los benditos? La actriz y directora de escena Angélica Liddell se adelanta rabiosa, y sus dramaturgias crean obras laicas que no son panfletos ni publicidad misionera ni catequesis pastoral.
Vemos el impacto del film Sirat, en el que las raves son trances espirituales, y podemos pensar en los Padres del Desierto, los monjes eremitas que se adentraron en el vacío de la vida despojada en el siglo II para entregarse plenamente a Dios. La aparición del director de la película, Oliver Laxe, en las redes refleja una imagen de Jesucristo predicando en calma profana y profética.
Encontramos resonancias en artistas de vanguardia que indagaron como creyentes en formas devocionales, desde la abstracción de Mondrian, Rothko o Torner a la figuración de Dalí pasando por el cine expandido, de José Valdelomar a Bill Viola. Perejaume dialoga con la cruz, Llorenc Barber con el campanario y el venerable Gaudí comienza a ser canonizado. En los límites de lo conceptual y la canalización como médium se encuentra Eulàlia Valldosera. Algo indica que una fina línea une la espiritualidad, la mística y los artistas gracias a su peculiar carisma.
Previo a la Guerra Civil Española, un joven estudiante de arquitectura con aspiración artística, Rafael Arnaiz, ingresó en 1934 en el Monasterio de San Isidro de Dueñas y hoy ya es considerado un santo del siglo XX.
Monasterios abiertos
Creadores como Federico García Lorca o Luis Buñuel frecuentaban el Monasterio de El Paular, así como los pintores becados en este enclave monástico de Rascafría (Madrid) y que vivían en las mismas celdas sencillas, donde encontraron lugares de retiro para inspirar sus trabajos. Un artista ordenado es alguien que necesita de una rutina y repetición, y un espacio aislado permite la concentración.
En España contamos con un número altísimo de monasterios, más de 700, siendo el país con más recintos de clausura de Europa. En los últimos años abren sus hospederías a estancias temporales para mujeres y hombres. Enclavados en paisajes naturales insólitos por su belleza, a través del cántico gregoriano y ritmo de la oración (siete rezos, entre el oficio de lectura y las completas), proporcionan condiciones de observación y meditación terapéuticas.
Rebeldes contra el mundo
Las órdenes monacales han permanecido invariables a través de los siglos, presumiendo de ser una de las experiencias comunitarias más antiguas de Occidente. Por otro lado los artistas modernos buscan modos alternativos de subsistir, nuevos modelos de existencia, precisamente repensando el individualismo en pos de una experiencia común.
En una época de sobreexposición en redes y termómetros asfixiantes, de sometimiento a las cookies y al expolio de datos, los monasterios esperan tranquilos desde la retaguardia, resguardados, y pueden ser una respuesta. En su ocultación, cultivando la austeridad, el anonimato y la huida de la norma convencional, predican el desacato contra el capitalismo más agresivo, más destructivo. Son, desde su inmovilidad y refugio pacífico, los otros rebeldes insumisos de la historia.
Hallamos similitudes entre el deseo de plenitud poética y el ejemplo de la vida contemplativa. ¿Tendría sentido que los dos mundos, el seglar y el monacal, convivieran? Después de todo, los y las monjas transitaron, fueron profanos que más tarde se consagraron en una comunión de solitarios en “libre dependencia de Dios”, alabando con pasión el poder divino.
¿Y podrían de igual modo los creadores sin fe acercarse a estudiar las órdenes desde el respeto, la curiosidad y la observación? Ejemplos no nos faltan: Le Corbusier trabajó por la causa cristiana erigiendo una iglesia magnífica en Ronchamp y el dadaísta Hugo Ball, después de fundar el mítico y anarquista Cabaret Voltaire, se dedicó a la lectura de los místicos y cristianos.
Alicia Grueso Hierro no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
Cuando imaginamos a un bombero, solemos pensar en una persona capaz de un acto heroico como extinción de incendios forestales o rescates en incendios, inundaciones y accidentes. Sin embargo, pocos se detienen a considerar el coste psicológico y emocional que conlleva esta labor.
El síndrome de burnout –un estado de agotamiento emocional, despersonalización y pérdida de eficacia profesional– se ha convertido en una amenaza creciente para estos trabajadores esenciales. Analizando 36 estudios sobre este asunto, nuestro equipo ha llegado a la conclusión de que el desgaste emocional es una realidad frecuente y preocupante en el colectivo de los bomberos. Paradójicamente, la investigación sobre el tema sigue siendo escasa en comparación con otras profesiones de riesgo, como personal sanitario o policías.
Riesgos más allá del fuego
Ricardo comienza su día sabiendo que no volverá a casa hasta el día siguiente. Mientras la mayoría de las personas tienen una jornada laboral de ocho horas, para un bombero el turno dura 24 horas seguidas. Eso significa estar disponible, alerta y preparado desde que entra al parque, a las 8:45 de la mañana, hasta la misma hora del día siguiente.
No es fácil teniendo en cuenta que su labor va mucho más allá de apagar fuegos. A veces le toca abrir la puerta de un anciano que no responde a las llamadas de sus familiares para averiguar si sigue con vida. Otras se ocupa de contener una fuga de gas, o de intervenir en un accidente o incluso de asistir en un intento de suicidio. En suma, su rutina está marcada por la incertidumbre, y cada salida exige no solo destreza técnica, sino también templanza, empatía y capacidad para actuar bajo presión. Y aunque en teoría pueden dormir por la noche, en la práctica rara vez descansa bien: las alarmas pueden sonar en cualquier momento.
El burnout no solo lleva a sufrir cansancio o desmotivación. Sus consecuencias afectan gravemente tanto a la salud del bombero como al servicio que presta a la comunidad. Los estudios incluidos en nuestra revisión muestran una asociación clara con diversos trastornos psicológicos, como la depresión, el estrés postraumático y las alteraciones del sueño .
A nivel físico, el desgaste emocional se ha vinculado con un aumento del riesgo de lesiones musculoesqueléticas. Además, el burnout afecta negativamente al rendimiento, aumentando la posibilidad de errores, el absentismo y los problemas de seguridad laboral.
La paradoja del bombero “vocacional”
Podríamos pensar que tener una fuerte vocación es un factor positivo. Sin embargo, puede volverse en contra en determinadas circunstancias, intensificando el impacto emocional de las situaciones críticas y actuando como un factor de riesgo en contextos de alta carga afectiva. De igual forma, la autocompasión, aunque generalmente protectora, puede convertirse en un riesgo en bomberos cuando no se acompaña de estrategias adaptativas.
Incluso el apoyo social, tradicionalmente valorado como amortiguador del estrés, ha mostrado resultados contradictorios: en contextos organizacionales tensos o poco funcionales, el apoyo entre compañeros puede no ser suficiente o incluso perjudicial, aumentando el agotamiento emocional.
En España no se considera una enfermedad profesional
A pesar de su gravedad, el burnout no está reconocido como enfermedad profesional en España, lo que impide a los bomberos acceder a intervenciones específicas. Esta omisión contrasta con países como Suecia o Canadá, donde existen protocolos estructurados para su prevención, como el modelo de gestión del estrés por incidentes críticos (CISM, por sus siglas en inglés).
Nuestra revisión sistemática señala, además, una preocupante falta de estudios realizados en el contexto español, lo que limita la capacidad de diseñar políticas adaptadas a las particularidades del país . El vacío se torna más grave si se considera el reciente aumento de fenómenos climáticos extremos, como la dana de 2024, que multiplican las exigencias sobre este colectivo.
El burnout en bomberos no es un signo de debilidad, sino una respuesta comprensible ante un entorno laboral desafiante y que exige un nivel de esfuerzo emocional constante. Reconocerlo como riesgo psicosocial y desarrollar políticas públicas de prevención y atención, más allá de las obligaciones mínimas establecidas por la Ley 31/1995 de Prevención de Riesgos Laborales, sería de gran ayuda para este colectivo.
La salud mental de quienes nos protegen no puede esperar. Reconocer el problema, invertir en prevención y adaptar las organizaciones a las necesidades reales del trabajo de emergencias no es solo una cuestión de justicia laboral, sino de responsabilidad social.
Las personas firmantes no son asalariadas, ni consultoras, ni poseen acciones, ni reciben financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y han declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado anteriormente.
.jpg){kind=link}
