Academic Analysis – Page 880 – MIL Submissions Engine

July 5, 2025

Vaping hits alarming levels among South African teens – new study of fee-paying schools

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Sam Filby, Research Officer, Research Unit on the Economics of Excisable Products, University of Cape Town

It’s become common to see kids, some in their school uniforms, puffing on a vape.

The World Health Organization points to the enticing flavours and targeted marketing to young people as the key reasons behind this trend.

In the US, e-cigarettes are the most commonly used tobacco product among middle and high school students aged 12 and older, with 5.9% of students reporting use.

Surveys from the UK indicate that 20.5% of children (aged 11–17) have tried vaping, and that 7.6% of children currently vape. Similar usage rates ranging from 3.3% to 11.8% have been found in south-east Asia. Evidence on vape use among adolescents living in Africa is more scarce.

We are public health researchers who have studied the phenomenon in South Africa. Our latest study, published in The Lancet’s eClinical Medicine, found that vaping among South African pupils is sky high. We surveyed over 25,000 South African high school students across 52 schools in eight of South Africa’s nine provinces.

An estimated 16.8% of the sampled learners currently use e-cigarettes.

Research has shown conclusively that children should not use these products because of the health risks.

Our findings in South Africa show that high rates of adolescent vaping are not restricted to high income countries.

Harmful impact on young minds and bodies

In a 2016 report, the US surgeon general called vaping among young people an “urgent public health problem”.

One reason for this is that these products commonly deliver nicotine. Nicotine use during adolescence harms the developing brain, with potential long-term effects on learning, memory and attention.

Nicotine is also an addictive substance. Addictive behaviour in general is associated with the development of mental illness, further fuelling the mental health problems experienced by some adolescents.
Substance abuse can lower their inhibitions, leading to increased high-risk behaviours.

Non-nicotine vapes are also bad for health. The chemical composition of specific flavours such as cherry, cinnamon and vanilla have also been shown to cause damage to the lung lining and blood vessels.

The rising popularity of e-cigarette use among adolescents globally should make helping young people with quitting vapes a priority.

Surveying South African schools

We approached schools predominantly in major centres like Cape Town, Johannesburg, Pretoria and Durban. All were “fee-paying” schools. We were not able to include less well resourced schools without easy internet access or non-fee-paying schools.

We categorised the schools into three brackets:

lower-fee schools: annual fees between R20,000 and R40,000 (US$1,100-2,100)
medium-fee schools: annual fees between R40,000 and R90,000 (US$2,100-4,800)
high-fee schools: annual fees more than R90,000 (over US$4,800).

Around 17% of pupils in our sample attended lower-fee schools, 64% attended mid-fee schools, and 19% attended high-fee schools. Around 31% of learners attended co-ed schools, 41% attended all-boys’ schools, and 29% attended all-girls’ schools.

Students were asked about their use of four products in the 30 days preceding the survey: e-cigarettes, tobacco cigarettes, cannabis and hookah pipes.

Students who indicated that they currently vaped were asked additional questions
about their vaping history and habits. We also asked students about their
reasons for starting and continuing to vape.

Using this data, we studied e-cigarette use, nicotine dependence, and the mental
health and social stressors associated with vaping among a large sample of South
African high school learners.

Alarming rates

Our study found that 16.8% of high school learners we surveyed were currently using e-cigarettes. There were far lower rates of tobacco cigarette use (2%), cannabis use (5%) and hookah pipe use (3%).

The proportion of learners reporting e-cigarette use increased by grade: around 9% of grade 8 students reported using vapes, but this rose sharply to an average of 29.5% among grade 12 pupils (who will turn 18 in their final school year). Some schools had usage rates as high as 46% among grade 12 pupils.

Among the learners who indicated that they vaped, 38% vaped daily, and more than half of the learners in our sample reported that they vaped four or more days per week.

Around 88% of pupils reported using vapes that contained nicotine. About 47% reported that they vaped within the first hour of waking up – this is highly suggestive of nicotine addiction. We estimate that up to 61% of high school learners who vape could be seriously addicted to nicotine.

Why adolescents start and continue vaping

We found that the primary reasons for starting vaping differed from the main reasons for continuing to vape.

Just over half (50.6%) of the students who vaped cited social influences
(family, friends, peer pressure, the need to fit in) as reasons for starting. Around 20% of learners indicated that they’d started vaping to cope with stress and anxiety, while 16.2% said they had started out of general curiosity.
Common reasons cited for continuing their vape use were to cope with
anxiety, depression or stress (28.4%), or because they were addicted (14.9%).

Some learners explicitly stated addiction in their reasoning:

It’s an addiction, no matter what I try I can’t stop. (female, 17)

Others described it more as a habit:

It has become a habit. I have to consume something constantly. (female, 18)

Less than 10% of students identified social influences as the reason they continued to vape.

Around 46% of students did not list addiction as a reason for continuing to vape, although their reported vaping habits aligned with patterns typically seen in individuals who are highly addicted. This suggests that many learners in our sample may lack awareness of what constitutes addiction.

What needs to be done

Our research underscores the urgent need for a coordinated public health response
to address the vaping crisis among high school learners.

The South African government must pass the Tobacco Products and Electronic
Delivery Systems Control Bill. This legislation will ensure that vapes cannot be sold near schools or online.

The restrictions on the advertising of vaping products provided for in the bill may aid with this as well as the deglamorisation of vaping among young people – reducing the general curiosity that leads many young people to begin in the first place.

The dangerous myth that “vaping is safe” also needs to be debunked.

Finally, we need to help addicted teenagers to stop vaping.

Punishing students for vaping is unlikely to be an effective strategy. Parents must be more aware of the signs of vaping and the underlying issues driving it.

Healthcare professionals should ask young people about their vape use during routine checkups.

And school counsellors should teach coping strategies to help teens navigate life’s challenges.

Sam Filby receives funding from the African Capacity Building Foundation and Cancer Research UK and has previously received funding from the CDC Foundation and the US Department of State.

Richard van Zyl Smit 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.

– ref. Vaping hits alarming levels among South African teens – new study of fee-paying schools – https://theconversation.com/vaping-hits-alarming-levels-among-south-african-teens-new-study-of-fee-paying-schools-244843

July 5, 2025

Sugary drinks are a killer: a 20% tax would save lives and rands in South Africa

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Susan Goldstein, Associate Professor and Director of the SAMRC/Wits Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science – PRICELESS SA (Priority Cost Effective Lessons in Systems Strengthening South Africa), University of the Witwatersrand

Non-communicable diseases such as diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular conditions account for over 70% of global deaths annually.

In South Africa, non-communicable diseases cause more than half of all deaths. Diabetes ranks as the second leading cause after tuberculosis.

A major contributor to rising diabetes rates is the high consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, including cooldrinks.

The World Health Organization recommends a tax of at least 20% on sugary drinks as an effective tool to help reduce consumption and curb related health risks.

South Africa introduced a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, officially known as the Health Promotion Levy, in 2018.

The tax applies at R0.0221 ($0.0012) per gram of sugar beyond a 4g/100ml threshold, amounting to an 8% of final selling price. The tax has increased slightly since it was introduced, but not in line with inflation. The Health Promotion Levy therefore falls short of the original 20% target as industry pressure led to a watered-down version of it.

I lead the South African Medical Research Council/Wits Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science – PRICELESS SA, which has been studying various aspects of the levy for over 10 years.

PRICELESS SA is still in the process of measuring the health and financial impact of not implementing the Health Promotion Levy at the recommended 20%. A lack of recent data adds to this challenge. But it is worth noting that the World Obesity Report shows that obesity is still a severe problem in South Africa.

Without interventions, obesity in South Africa is projected to affect 30 million adults and 10 million children by 2035. In 2019 there were 55,238 deaths in South Africa from non-communicable diseases attributable to obesity, and with an annual increase of 2.3% in obesity, deaths are going to increase.

Taxing sugary beverages is effective

Despite the sugar industry’s claims that the Health Promotion Levy is ineffective, global evidence strongly suggests otherwise. Countries that have implemented such taxes have seen significant declines in sugar consumption.

Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes have been implemented in 103 countries and territories globally and have been shown to be effective in many countries.

In Ireland there was a 30.2% reduction in sugar intake through these beverages.

In California a study showed a decrease in overweight and obesity among young people living in cities where there was a sugary beverage tax.

In Mexico, a sugar-sweetened beverages tax at 1 peso ($0.05) per litre was introduced in 2014, and by 2016, sugary drinks sales had dropped by 37%.

Similarly, in the UK, a tax introduced in 2018 led to a 35.4% reduction in sugar consumption from taxed beverages.

The levy has had a positive impact in South Africa. Studies show decreased purchasing of these beverages. There were greater reductions in sales among lower socioeconomic groups and in sub-populations with higher sugary drink consumption.

Mean sugar from taxable beverage purchases fell from 16.25 g/capita per day from the pre-health promotion levy announcement to 10.63 g/capita per day in the year after implementation.

Lower-income households, which initially purchased more taxable sugary beverages than wealthier households, showed the most significant reductions in consumption after the tax was enforced.

This is particularly important as non-communicable diseases disproportionately affect poor and vulnerable populations.

Stronger taxation on sugary beverages not only decreases consumption but also encourages reformulation by manufacturers, leading to healthier products.

The levy does not cause job losses

Sugar-related industries often argue that the tax has led to massive job losses.

Our research contradicts these claims.

A recent study carried out by PRICELESS SA, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies through the University of North Carolina and the South African Medical Research Council, showed no significant association between the levy and employment levels. It showed that the levy had not been associated with job creation or job losses in sugar-related industries. These include agriculture, beverage manufacturing and commercial enterprises that sell food and beverages.

The study suggests several factors that may explain this:

Firstly, firms may reallocate labour within their operations rather than
cut jobs.

Secondly, many beverage producers have responded to the tax by reformulating their products, reducing the sugar content and using non-nutritive sweeteners rather than reducing production.

Thirdly, demand for taxed sugary drinks has not declined enough to affect employment.

Finally, consumers often switch to untaxed alternatives produced by the same companies, preventing financial losses to the industry.

Increasing the levy is beneficial to the public purse

The recent delay of South Africa’s budget speech, due to disagreements within the government over the proposed value added tax increase of two percentage points, highlights the urgent need for additional and alternative revenue sources.

South Africa’s health system is experiencing a massive financial burden due to overweight and obesity, costing R33 billion (US$1.78 billion) annually. This expense accounts for 15.38% of the government’s health expenditure and 0.67% of the country’s GDP. On a per-person basis, the annual cost of overweight and obesity is R2,769 (US$150).

On the other hand, the levy generated R5.8 billion (US$313m) in revenue over its first two fiscal years.

Beyond raising funds, a higher tax rate would provide public health benefits and savings for health services.

Based on our research, increasing the levy to 20% in South Africa could reduce obesity rates by 2.4 to 3.8 percentage points, prevent 85,000 strokes, and save 72,000 lives over two decades.

These improvements potentially save over R5 billion (US$270m) in medical costs.

Unlike other taxation measures, which affect all consumers equally, the levy primarily targets discretionary purchases, making it a fairer fiscal tool.

Therefore, government must act – raise the Health Promotion Levy to 20% and cut the sugar-fuelled health crisis at its root.

Raising the levy to 20% would be a smarter tax for a healthier nation.

Darshen Naidoo, Legal Researcher and Associate Lecturer at PRICELESS SA, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg contributed to the article.

Susan Goldstein on behalf of PRICELESS receives funding from the Bloomberg Foundation, the SAMRC and the National Institutes for Health Research

– ref. Sugary drinks are a killer: a 20% tax would save lives and rands in South Africa – https://theconversation.com/sugary-drinks-are-a-killer-a-20-tax-would-save-lives-and-rands-in-south-africa-251393

July 5, 2025

Indonesia can expand its gastrodiplomacy via plant-based meals in Europe: Research

Source: The Conversation – Indonesia – By Meilinda Sari Yayusman, Researcher in International Relations and European Studies, Badan Riset dan Inovasi Nasional (BRIN)

Raw vegetable and lettuce salad with Indonesian fried tempeh. Gekko Gallery/Shutterstock

Gastrodiplomacy as the practice of a country’s diplomacy by promoting its cuisine, is now gaining popularity in several countries across the globe, including South Korea and Thailand.

South Korea, for example, has introduced its so-called “Kimchi Diplomacy” in the world for the past years as part of the country’s soft power in promoting culinary culture. Thailand, meanwhile, has been spreading the influence of Thai food and expanding Thai restaurants around the globe, attracting the global communities to eat authentic Thai cuisine.

Indonesia, with diverse food and beverages as well as indigenous spices, has also started to resort to this strategy to promote the country in the global forum.

Our unpublished observation based on fieldwork in May 2023 and literature reviews since mid-2021 resulted in a recommendation for the Indonesian government to take advantage of its diverse menu for its gastrodiplomacy agenda.

We recommend Indonesia emphasise plant-based dishes for its gastrodiplomacy strategy in Europe, given the region’s rising trend of plant-based food consumption.

Why plant-based food

A growing number of people are increasingly considering plant-based food as a dietary alternative to maintain their health following global concerns on the negative impacts of processed foods on health, society and the environment.

Gado-gado (Indonesian authentic salad with peanut dressing).
Endah Kurnia P/Shutterstock

Indonesia has a lot of ingredients and spices to create plant-based menus that have met global healthy standards.

Among them are tempeh, a traditional Indonesian food made from fermented soybeans. The fermentation increases its nutritional quality. Tempeh has been known in the Netherlands and already has consumers in Europe. However, it is not widespread yet in the whole continent.

Gado-gado, the famous Indonesian salad with its authentic peanut butter dressing, has also seen an emerging popularity in the global market. From our fieldwork, we have learned that almost all Indonesian restaurants worldwide, such as in The Hague and Amsterdam, the Netherlands, usually have gado-gado on their menus.

Other plant-based cuisines that have potential to gain popularity abroad are asinan (fruit salad preserved with vinegar) and gudeg (jackfruit stewed in coconut milk).

However, our observation shows that Indonesian vegan menus have yet to be widely known in Europe and other continents. Indonesia should promote them in the global market.

Why Europe

Plant-based food trend has been currently growing in many industrialised countries, especially in Europe.

Gudeg, a traditional Javanese dish from Indonesia’s Yogyakarta, is made from young unripe jack fruit stewed for several hours with palm sugar, and coconut milk.
Ricky_herawan/Shutterstock

In Europe, the value of plant-based food sales increased by 49% between 2018 and 2020. This includes an expansion in the market for plant-based substitutes for meat and dairy.

In the Netherlands, for example, sales rose by 50% during the same period. Germany and Poland have also witnessed a notable surge in the sales of plant-based food products, with an increase of 97% and 62%, respectively.

With the change in people’s food consumption habits, Europe can be a significant, promising market for Indonesia to expand the promotion of its plant-based food products.

Taking advantage of current presence

The fact that Indonesia’s culinary presence in Europe is already evident, particularly in the Netherlands, should benefit Indonesia.

Based on our finding, no less than 392 Indonesian restaurants are operating in West and South Europe, majority of which (295) is in the Netherlands. They have become popular since the 1970s.

For hundreds of years, the Netherlands colonised parts of what is now Indonesia. The colonial history between the two nations has created a sense of romanticism, including what and how they ate in the past.

Many Indonesian citizens living in European countries own Indonesian cuisine restaurants, and recently, they have started to develop plant-based menus in their kitchens.

The Netherlands offers a promising hub for introducing Indonesian foods and establishing Indonesian restaurants in other parts of Europe.

Tofu is an Indonesian traditional food made from soybean.
Erly Damayanti/Shutterstock

As part of our observation, we visited some Indonesian restaurants in the Netherlands that are developing plant-based menus in their kitchens for vegans and vegetarians, in response to the rising popularity of plant-based food in European society.

Among them were De Vegetarische Toko, Toko Kalimantan, Bali Brunch 82 and Praboemoelih. They serve gado-gado, variants of tempeh and tofu and tumis buncis (vegetable stir-fry).

De Vegetarische Toko, for example, has creatively transformed some authentic Indonesian foods into vegan and vegetarian-friendly versions. They replace the meats in menus like rendang (slow-cooked beef stew in coconut milk and spices) and semur (beef stew) with tempeh, tofu, beans and peanuts.

With these creative innovations, these restaurants may have an excellent opportunity to extend and promote Indonesian plant-based meals more widely to other parts of Europe, thus supporting Indonesia’s gastrodiplomacy.

More support needed

Indonesia has acknowledged its gastrodiplomacy potential through several programs.

In 2021, Indonesia launched “Indonesia Spice Up the World”. It becomes the country’s first-ever concrete initiative to promote Indonesian cuisine and attract investment opportunities in local spices and herbs.

The initiative aims to increase Indonesian spice exports to US$2 billion, launch approximately 4,000 Indonesian restaurants abroad by 2024 and make Indonesia a culinary destination in the future.

To support this kind of initiative, the Indonesian government should regularly and intensively communicate with all stakeholders involved in the Indonesian culinary industry. The partnership should aim to support Indonesian diaspora entrepreneurs looking to start businesses in the food sector abroad.

One example is offering soft loans to these food entrepreneurs.
Bank BNI, Indonesia’s fourth-largest bank, has begun offering this kind of loan.

It is time for Indonesia to strengthen its international existence through gastrodiplomacy by taking advantage of the rising consumption of plant-based meals among global communities. Tempeh, gado-gado, asinan and gudeg can become a powerful weapon of Indonesia’s soft diplomacy on the global stage.

Meilinda Sari Yayusman receives funding by the Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia.

Andika Ariwibowo receives funding by the Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia.

Prima Nurahmi Mulyasari receives funding by the Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia.

Ahmad Nuril Huda tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Indonesia can expand its gastrodiplomacy via plant-based meals in Europe: Research – https://theconversation.com/indonesia-can-expand-its-gastrodiplomacy-via-plant-based-meals-in-europe-research-209193

July 5, 2025

Difficult work arrangements force many women to stop breastfeeding early. Here’s how to prevent this

Source: The Conversation – Indonesia – By Andini Pramono, Research officer, Department of Health Economics, Wellbeing and Society, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University

Research shows that six months of exclusive breastfeeding, and continuing until two years old or beyond, provide multiple benefits for the baby and mother.

It can prevent deaths both in infants and mothers – including in wealthy nations like the United States. It also benefits the global economy and the enviroment.

However, after maternity leave ends, mothers returning to paid work face many challenges maintaining breastfeeding. This often leads mothers to stop breastfeeding their children before six months – the duration of exclusive breastfeeding recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and others.

According to the WHO, less than half of babies under six months old worldwide are exclusively breastfed.

In Indonesia, research shows 83% of mothers initiate breastfeeding, but only 57% are still breastfeeding at around six months. In Australia, 96% of mothers start breastfeeding, but then there is a rapid fall to only 39% by around three months and only 15% by around five months.

Among the key reasons for low rates of exclusive breastfeeding are the difficult work conditions women face when they return to paid work.

So how can governments and workplaces – especially in countries that have yet to do enough, like Indonesia and Australia – better support breastfeeding mothers, particularly at work?

Half a billion reasons to change

For more than a century, the International Labour Organization (ILO) has set global standards for maternity protection through the Maternity Protection Convention and accompanying recommendations, as well as the ILO Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, aiming to protect female workers’ rights.

So far, only 66 member states have ratified at least one of the Maternity Protection Conventions, while 43 have ratified the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention. Unfortunately, Indonesia has not ratified either convention. So far, Australia has only ratified the family responsibilities convention.

In some countries, protections are aligned with the ILO Conventions. For example, in Denmark and Norway, the governments offer maternity leave of at least 14 weeks. During leave, mothers’ earnings are protected at a rate of at least two-thirds of their pre-birth earnings. Public funds ensure this is done in a manner determined by national law and practice, so the employer is not solely responsible for the payment.

A Canadian study highlights the proportion of mothers exclusively breastfeeding to six months increased by almost 40% when paid maternity leave was expanded from six to 12 months. At the same time, average breastfeeding duration increased by one month, from five to six months.

Evidence shows paid maternity leave and providing an adequate lactation room at work both contribute positively to breastfeeding rates.

Despite this, half a billion women globally still lack adequate maternity protections.

For example, welfare reforms in the US encouraging new mothers’ return to work within 12 weeks led to a 16–18% reduction in breastfeeding initiation. It also saw a four to six week reduction in the time babies were breastfed.

Indonesia and Australia aren’t doing enough

Neither Indonesia or Australia are currently doing enough to meet the ILO’s maternity protection standards.

In Indonesia, the 2003 Labour Law urges companies to give 12 weeks of paid maternity leave for women workers to support breastfeeding. Furthermore, the 2012 regulation on exclusive breastfeeding obligates workplace and public space management to provide a space or facility to breastfeed and express breast milk. However, the monitoring of its implementation is weak.

In Australia, paid parental leave (PPL) policy supports parents who take time off from paid work to care for their young children.

Eligible working mothers or primary carers are entitled to up to 20 weeks (or 22 weeks if the child is born or adopted from 1 July 2024) of government paid parental leave within the first two years of the birth or adoption of a child.

In the Federal Budget announced on 15 May 2024, the Australian government has added payment of superannuation contributions to the parental leave package for births and adoptions on or after 1 July 2025. However, the PPL is a low amount, paid at the national minimum wage ($882.80 per week)].

Some mothers can combine the government payment with additional paid leave from their employer. However in 2022-2023, only 63% of Australian employers offered this, leaving nearly half of new mothers with only minimum financial support.

Unlike Indonesia, Australia has no legal requirement for employers to offer paid breastfeeding breaks in their workplace, so mothers can express and take home their breastmilk. This can badly impact women’s and children’s health.

While Australia’s support for breastfeeding mothers is welcome, it’s still inadequate to meet the ILO’s international standard – particularly Australia’s low payment rate of government PPL (at the minimum wage, rather than two-thirds of previous earnings) and the lack of legislation for paid breastfeeding breaks.

How employers and colleagues can help

Globally, the barriers to maintain breastfeeding include not only lack of maternity leave duration and pay, but also unavailability of breastfeeding and breast pumping facilities at workplaces, sometimes unsupportive colleagues and supervisors, and lack of time at work to breastfeed or expressing breastmilk.

Breastfeeding a baby should not preclude women from earning a living. In 2022, female workers were 39.5% of total workers globally, while in Australia and Indonesia they made up 47.4% and 39.5% respectively.

An accessible facility or space for breastfeeding or breast pumping is vital to support breastfeeding working mothers.

In Indonesia, a 2013 Ministry of Health regulation outlines the procedure for an employer to provide a space and facility for mothers to breastfeed and breast pump.

The minimum specifications of this facility are described as a lockable, clean and quiet room, with a sink for washing, suitable temperature, lighting and flooring. While these specifications are technically mandatory, monitoring is weak, meaning if employers fail to meet the requirements there are no specific consequences.

But a breastfeeding space alone is not enough. In many jobs, mothers cannot leave their tasks during working hours, even if there is a lactation room.

Supportive employers need to regulate time and flexibility to breastfeed and express breastmilk, including providing flexible working arrangements and paid breastfeeding breaks during working hours. Supportive attitudes from co-workers and managers are also important.

Suitable staff training on breastfeeding and policies supporting mothers, such as providing time and facility to express breastmilk in work hours, are crucial. Training on how to support co-worker can include anything from basic information breastfeeding, to what to say (or not say) with a breastfeeding co-worker.

Access to supportive childcare is another issue globally.

For those families who can access childcare, childcare centres can also help by:

encouraging and accommodating mothers to visit for breastfeeding
having written policies supporting breastfeeding
providing parents with resources on breastfeeding
and referring parents to community resources for breastfeeding support.

Practical ways to support more families

The Australian Breastfeeding Association has an accreditation program that helps workplaces to be breastfeeding-friendly. Workplace policies, including adequate time and space for pumping, are positively associated with longer breastfeeding duration.

The program assesses workplaces for three aspects: time, space and supportive culture. This means, workplaces are encouraged to provide a special space and time for breastfeeding and breast pumping in a supportive culture and flexible working hours.

Mothers should consider to prepare how to align breastfeeding with work early – during pregnancy. Start by discussing your breastfeeding goals with healthcare professionals and finding a baby-friendly hospital.

Discuss your breastfeeding plan with your supervisor at work during your pregnancy, including finding out your maternity leave (paid and unpaid) entitlements. Also consider childcare arrangements that will work best for you with breastfeeding.

For further information and support, you can find resources from local breastfeeding support groups, such as the Indonesian Breastfeeding Mothers Association and Australian Breastfeeding Association.

Julie P. Smith is a qualified breastfeeding counselor and honorary member of the Australian Breastfeeding Association.

Andini Pramono dan Liana Leach tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Difficult work arrangements force many women to stop breastfeeding early. Here’s how to prevent this – https://theconversation.com/difficult-work-arrangements-force-many-women-to-stop-breastfeeding-early-heres-how-to-prevent-this-211831

July 5, 2025

We discovered Raja Ampat’s reef manta rays prefer staying close to home – which could help us save more of them

Source: The Conversation – Indonesia – By Edy Setyawan, Marine Ecologist, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

The reef manta ray (Mobula alfredi) is a tough swimmer. They can travel hundreds of kilometres to feed themselves. The longest recorded movement for an individual reef manta ray was 1,150km, observed in eastern Australia.

But even though they are able to swim long distances, our study on reef manta rays in Raja Ampat, Southwest Papua, discovered they are more likely to swim short distances. They appear to prefer staying close to their local habitats, strengthening their social bonds and forming distinct populations.

Our research – involving researchers from Indonesia, New Zealand and Australia and published in the Royal Society Open Science journal in April – increases our understanding of this globally vulnerable species.

Policymakers can use our findings to enhance conservation efforts for the species in Raja Ampat waters, which currently are facing challenges due to fishing and tourism.

Why don’t reef manta rays roam far?

Our study found reef manta rays occupy three distinct habitats within Raja Ampat. As of February 2024, we recorded 1,250 individual manta rays around Waigeo Island’s extensive coral reef ecosystem in the northwest of Raja Ampat; 640 manta rays around the coral reef ecosystem in the southeast of Misool, southern Raja Ampat; and no more than 50 manta rays in the Ayau atoll ecosystem up north.

Within their own habitat, the manta rays tend to move around from one area to another, sticking to relatively short distances within 12 kilometres. They only occasionally make longer trips to similar areas in other habitats across Raja Ampat.

We believe there are a few reasons why reef manta rays in Raja Ampat do not often venture far. The first reason is the presence of natural barriers, such as deep waters – over 1,000 metres below sea level – between Ayau Atoll and Waigeo Island, as well as the sea between Misool and Kofiau, which is 800-900 metres deep.

Travelling through deep waters poses increased risks to reef manta rays due to potential encounters with natural predators, such as killer whales (Orcinus orca) and large sharks, which frequently inhabit deep open water.

The second reason is that each habitat is well-equipped with sufficient resources, such as food and cleaning stations, reducing the need for the reef manta rays to travel extensively.

Our previous research has identified dozens of feeding areas and cleaning stations in each habitat occupied by local populations of reef manta rays in Raja Ampat.

Raja Ampat’s ‘small town’ of reef manta rays

The habits of reef manta rays in Raja Ampat are gradually forming a unique population.

We have found that they do not form a single large population, but instead split into three local populations, creating a metapopulation. A metapopulation consists of several local populations of the same species, each occupying its own habitat but all situated within the same geographic region.

Think of a metapopulation as a small town, consisting of three hamlets. When each hamlet has enough food and water, the people prefer to stay in their own settlement. But they still live in the same town and occasionally visit each other.

We found this movement pattern based on our tracking process from 2016 to 2021 using acoustic telemetry, which functions similarly to office check-in systems.

In the tracking process, we combined this acoustic tracking with network analysis to map out the movement network of the manta rays, consisting of nodes and links. Nodes represent important areas for the manta rays, like cleaning stations and feeding areas, and links represent the movement between these key areas.

The metapopulation occurs because individual manta rays migrate between local populations. Based on our observation, the migrating manta rays usually head back to their original area — it is often seasonal – while those that spread out generally do not return.

This movement pattern means there is less mixing of individuals between local populations compared to within a single local population.

How to better protect reef manta rays

Some conservation policies and efforts have successfully increased the populations of reef manta rays in Raja Ampat.

But increased human activities such as fishing and tourism in eastern Indonesia still pose challenges. While manta rays are not directly caught or hunted, they often get entangled in fishing lines and nets, which may cause harm and sometimes death.

Additionally, with the increasing popularity of Raja Ampat as a top tourism destination, overcrowding and aggressive behavior by divers and snorkelers in Raja Ampat disrupt manta ray cleaning and feeding, which may affect their health and fitness.

Conservation strategies for reef manta rays require a more precise and targeted approach to effectively address these growing challenges.

The recognition of these rays as a metapopulation comprising three distinct local populations can inform a strategy shift in conservation management.

Recently, we have presented our research findings and recommendations to the authorities responsible for managing the Raja Ampat Marine Protected Area (MPA) network.

We recommend the MPA management authority in Raja Ampat create and implement three separate management units, each tailored to the specific needs of one of the local manta ray populations.

Separate units are necessary because each habitat has different demographics and is far apart, making it difficult to manage them as a single unit. This strategy is feasible because local rangers in each habitat already conduct regular patrols and monitoring.

We also see the urgent need to protect a critical area for various activities of reef manta rays in Raja Ampat called Eagle Rock, which is currently outside existing protected zones. Located in west of Waigeo, Eagle Rock could be effectively safeguarded by expanding the Raja Ampat MPA network to encompass this area.

Protecting Eagle Rock is crucial, not only because it serves as a vital migration corridor connecting significant areas and habitats within the South East Misool MPA, Dampier Strait MPA, Raja Ampat MPA, and West Waigeo MPA, but also due to the increased threat from nickel mining activities on Kawe Island.

MPAs prohibit industrial fishing, restrict tourism and all unsustainable activities — including mining — to minimise environmental impact.

Besides mapping out the movement patterns and networks of key areas and habitats of reef manta rays in Raja Ampat, our research lays the groundwork for future studies, including genetic analysis and satellite tracking.

These advanced techniques can offer deeper insights into the population structure, home range, and distribution of reef manta rays in the region, helping to enhance management and conservation strategies.

Edy Setyawan has received funding from the Manaaki New Zealand Scholarship – Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) New Zealand, and the WWF Russell E. Train Education for Nature Program (EFN), United States.

– ref. We discovered Raja Ampat’s reef manta rays prefer staying close to home – which could help us save more of them – https://theconversation.com/we-discovered-raja-ampats-reef-manta-rays-prefer-staying-close-to-home-which-could-help-us-save-more-of-them-230692

July 5, 2025

Why relying on technology to keep ASEAN’s coal plants running is risky

Source: The Conversation – Indonesia – By Lay Monica, Researcher, Center of Economic and Law Studies (CELIOS)

A recent ASEAN Centre for Energy (ACE) report emphasised that to contribute in tackling climate change, ASEAN countries don’t need to immediately phase out all of their coal fleet.

The report asserted that coal will continue to be an essential part of the energy transition. It also stated that by allowing ASEAN countries more time to improve electricity grids to accommodate more renewables could help smooth the transition to cleaner energy. Put the two together, and it strongly hinted that coal might be squeezed in to buy said time.

In order to reduce damage from coal, ACE urged ASEAN member states to use clean coal technologies in coal-fired power plants. It also recommended to use carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) to replace “old, inefficient, and unabatable coal plants”.

Interestingly, this is also a view promoted by the World Coal Association — now Future Coal – the international coal lobbying group.

At first glance, this plan seems promising. However, relying heavily on technology oversimplifies potential risks and assumes full delivery of promises without thorough risk assessments. In this article, we provide evidence that ACE’s chosen pathway is not as good as it seems and could face significant problems in the future.

False solution

The first “clean coal technology” proposed by ACE – termed “high efficiency, low emissions (HELE)” – is mostly supercritical coal power plant. This means it uses less coal while producing more energy. This is why they’re claimed to be more environmentally friendly than sub-critical or “regular” coal power plants.

But using supercritical technology doesn’t guarantee the emission problem is solved; it has varying degrees of success in reducing coal emissions.

For example, a 2019 Australian paper found supercritical coal power plants underperformed against regular power plants with higher breakdown rates, leading to frequent electricity price spikes during 2018-2019. This was a decade after the technology was first launched in 2007.

Failing to deliver steady electricity supplies would contradict ACE’s stated goal to prevent energy shortage and provide smoother transitions towards renewable energy.

Risks of carbon capture

Another technology that ACE advocates is carbon capture and storage (CCS), which captures carbon emissions from power plants and stores them underground.

However, CCS appears to replicate past project failures. Opponents of CCS often suggest its success rate is relatively small.

The industry claims the technology can capture 95% carbon from each project. Yet, the 2023 reports from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) found that no current project has consistently managed to capture more than 80% of carbon emissions. Some of them only succeeded in capturing 15% of carbon emissions.

Leakage from captured carbon underground is the other risk we might bear. This will have tremendous consequences not only by netting off the so-called mitigated emissions but also by contaminating groundwater and risking communities nearby.

According to carbon capture proponents, when done properly, the risk of leakage is minuscule. Even when it occurs, they claim it will not be catastrophic.

However, a big enough leak is still possible. The margin of safety is very narrow: even a mere 1% leakage every ten years could pose serious consequences in the long-run, mainly rises in temperature. Keeping the “safe level of leakage rate” requires a rigorous monitoring and supervision. Therefore, the risks could be higher in developing countries like Indonesia, which has chronic problems with regulatory governance.

Some other evidence suggests that CCS is not economically viable. One of the strongest arguments against CCS is probably the diminishing returns. As one of the leading experts in carbon capture claims:

The closer a CCS system gets to 100% efficiency, the harder and more expensive it becomes to capture additional carbon dioxide.

This implies potential future costs for bigger equipment, additional time, and additional energy for CCS to achieve that efficiency level.

More importantly, chasing increasingly expensive CCS technology merely prolongs the life of coal-fired power plants, which pose significant environmental risks. The same money and effort could be used to build more renewable energy infrastructure such as wind turbines or solar panels.

In addition to its potential high costs, captured carbon must be sold in the market – for various uses ranging for oil extraction to food preservation – to increase its economic viability.

However, other than CO₂ conversion to fuels, there is a strictly limited usage of CO₂. Commercial use of CO₂ is less than 1% of the global CO₂ emmissions from energy usage. On the other hand, converting CO₂ back to fuels requires carbon-free energy sources.

The conversion will also result in approximately 25-35% of energy losses. Although there have been more research on how to improve the efficiency of the process, CO₂ utilisation has yet to be scalable.

Why the half measure?

ACE must be wary of its reliance on technological solutions. Instead, the centre should consider a double-down on less-risky and less-capital-intensive solutions with many positive impacts, such as setting up community-based renewable energy, aggressive reforestation, or even better, significant halt of deforestation.

Community-based renewable energy offers to help people in energy-poor areas to build their own energy sources. Moreover, people living in close geographical proximity can share costs and resources to install and maintain off grid renewables, encouraging more widespread adoption of cleaner energy sources with minimum problem of land use.

On the other hand, in contrast to CCUS, aggressive reforestation does not require heavy machinery or specialised knowledge and skills to operate complex technology to achieve the same goals of storing emissions. Again, it is an established scientific fact that forests and soil currently store 30% of emissions. Unlike CCS that only stores emissions from sites where it is installed, forests and soil absorb atmospheric carbon emissions. Even well-planned city forests could have more capacity to effectively absorb CO2 than we thought.

ACE can also reconsider replacing the “old, inefficient, and unabatable coal plants” with renewables, such as solar and wind, especially those for non-industrial electricity facilities. Those electricity generation costs have been falling rapidly for years.

As most of the ASEAN member states are developing countries, they must carefully select the most suitable technologies to adopt. With limited fiscal capacity, rashly importing an advanced technology that will require substantial startup costs potentially becomes a costly effort, yielding limited benefits.

It is puzzling why we should replace our old coal plants with new ones. It is like when we are replacing our old mobile phone with a slightly better mobile phone – instead of jumping straight to a smartphone. Why the half-measure?

Para penulis tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi di luar afiliasi akademis yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Why relying on technology to keep ASEAN’s coal plants running is risky – https://theconversation.com/why-relying-on-technology-to-keep-aseans-coal-plants-running-is-risky-234918

July 5, 2025

Sea of opportunity: protecting mangroves and seagrass could boost Indonesia’s new climate targets

Source: The Conversation – Indonesia – By Brurce Muhammad Mecca, Senior Analyst, Climateworks Centre

Aerial view of Mangrove forest, Mandalika, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia. (Shutterstock)

Indonesia has signalled it could include blue carbon ecosystems — carbon-rich coastal and marine areas, like mangroves and seagrass — in its new climate targets. This shift follows years of relying heavily on the forestry and land sectors as well as the energy sector.

This could be a turning point, given Indonesia is one of the most important countries globally for ocean-based climate change mitigation. Indonesia’s blue carbon ecosystems are crucial, housing 22% of the world’s mangroves and 5% of seagrass meadows.

However, the country is losing its mangroves and seagrass in recent years due to changes in land use. As of 2019, only 16% of mangroves and 45% of seagrass were inside protected areas. Damage to mangrove and seagrass ecosystems can release carbon into the atmosphere, exacerbating climate change.

For that reason, it’s crucial that Indonesia considers establishing more protected areas for its mangrove and seagrass ecosystems as part of its new climate targets. This could shield them from harmful activities like industrial fishing, unsustainable aquaculture, massive infrastructure development and overtourism.

Two kinds of protected areas

A 2023 Climateworks Centre study highlighted how Indonesia could prevent up to 60 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year by 2030 – equal to Singapore’s 2030 emissions reduction target – by protecting 39,000 hectares per year of mangroves and 8,600 hectares per year of seagrasses. The combined area of these mangroves and seagrasses is almost three-quarters the size of Jakarta.

One way to do this is by including both ecosystems inside two kinds of protected areas. The first is marine protected areas (MPAs), which are areas designated by the government to protect essential ecosystems. The other kind — known as other effective area-based conservation measures (OECM) – are just as crucial for ecosystem protection.

Many activities are prohibited in marine protected areas, such as industrial fishing, mass tourism and mining. The government plans to increase Indonesia’s MPA cover from 8% to 10% by 2030, which is an opportunity to prioritise mangroves and seagrass.

Meanwhile, OECMs can allow Indonesia to target, recognise, and support areas beyond marine protected areas. These other conservation measures can play an important role in protecting blue carbon ecosystems across the country.

For example, the indigenous community of Rote Ndao in Eastern Indonesia’s traditional marine management system protects the local marine ecosystems – despite not being considered an marine protected area. Research shows that Indonesia has more than 390 potential marine OECMs. Many have conservation measures that have been implemented by local communities for centuries.

Key places to protect

While Indonesia still urgently requires broad investment in the collection of high-quality data for mapping blue ecosystems, our findings highlight some key priority locations for mangroves and seagrass to be included in the country’s ocean strategy.

For mangrove ecosystems, we highlight Kalimantan and Papua as areas of particular importance. Between 2009 and 2019, approximately 19% of mangroves in Kalimantan (58,000 hectares) were deforested due to palm oil and aquaculture. By comparison, Papua has a large area of carbon-dense mangroves, and a low historic rate of deforestation.

Meanwhile, protection of seagrass is quite tricky because an Indonesian seagrass map has not been completed.

Before defining specific seagrass areas to be protected, the government can verify the data in provinces such as Maluku, North Maluku, Bangka Belitung Islands, South East Sulawesi, West Papua and South Sulawesi. These areas have the potential for seagrass ecosystems to be included in a protection plan.

The government could also prioritise seagrass ecosystems in the Riau Islands and West Nusa Tenggara. These regions have extensive seagrass areas lacking marine protected area coverage.

A new target for mangrove and seagrass protection

Indonesia can set a clear and measurable area-based target to protect its mangrove and seagrass ecosystems in the upcoming climate targets. This could align the country’s climate actions on ocean and marine to its overall climate ambition. It will also lay the foundation for attracting climate financing, which Indonesia will need to achieve its targets.

Local participation is also important. Indonesia can design and implement its mangrove and seagrass ecosystems protection target with the involvement and consent of local communities. This would align with Indonesia’s existing targets, such as its Blue Economy Roadmap, to ensure coordinated efforts across government agencies.

As the world works towards net zero emissions, Indonesia has a huge opportunity to boost its climate leadership. Protecting and restoring more of the country’s carbon-rich mangroves and seagrass meadows can ensure the future thriving of marine ecosystems that so many Indonesians rely on.

Editor’s Note : In 13 August, 11.57 AM WIB, we made a correction to a sentence in the article’s previous version:

“By comparison, Papua has a large area of carbon-dense mangroves, and a low historic rate of deforestation, with no indication of this changing.”

The previous sentence was inaccurate because while the historic rate was low, the implication was deforestation would continue, when in fact there are indications this could change in the future.

We replaced the sentence with “By comparison, Papua has a large area of carbon-dense mangroves, and a low historic rate of deforestation.”

– ref. Sea of opportunity: protecting mangroves and seagrass could boost Indonesia’s new climate targets – https://theconversation.com/sea-of-opportunity-protecting-mangroves-and-seagrass-could-boost-indonesias-new-climate-targets-229819

July 5, 2025

Why Israel and the U.S. are sure to encounter the limits of air power in Iran

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

The United States has apparently answered Israel’s call to to become involved in the war between Israel and Iran.

President Donald Trump had signalled a willingness for the U.S. to become involved in the conflict. He went so far, in fact, to suggest in social media posts that he could kill Iran’s supreme leader if he wanted to.

Segment on Trump’s threats against Iran’s leader. (BBC News)

The American military can certainly make an impact in any air campaign against Iran. The problem from a military standpoint, however, is that the U.S., based on its forces’ deployment, will almost certainly seek to keep its involvement limited to its air force to avoid another Iraq-like quagmire.

While doing so could almost certainly disrupt Iran’s nuclear program, it will likely fall short of Israel’s goal of regime change.

In fact, it could reinforce the Iranian government and draw the U.S. into a costly ground war.

Israel’s need for American support

The initial stated reason for Israel’s bombing campaign — Iran’s nuclear capabilities — appears specious at best.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has argued several times in the past, without evidence, that Iran is close to achieving a nuclear weapon. U.S. intelligence, however, have assessed that Iran is three years away from deploying a nuclear weapon.

Regardless of the veracity of the claims, Israel initiated the offensive and requires American support.

Israel’s need for U.S. assistance rests on two circumstances:

While Israel succeeded in eliminating key figures from the Iranian military in its initial strikes, Iran’s response appears to have exceeded Israel’s expectations with their Arrow missile interceptors nearing depletion.
Israel’s air strikes can only achieve so much in disrupting Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Most analysts note that Israel’s bombings are only likely to delay the Iranian nuclear program by a few months. This is due to the fact that Israeli missiles are incapable of penetrating the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, which estimates place close to 300 feet underground.

The United States, however, possesses munitions that have reportedly destroyed the Fordow facility. Most notably, the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (more commonly known as a bunker buster) has a penetration capability of 200 feet and was reportedly used in the attack.

Romanticizing air power

Nonetheless, the efficacy of air power has been vastly overrated in the popular media and various air forces of the world. Air power is great at disrupting an opponent, but has significant limitations in influencing the outcome of a war.

Specifically, air power is likely to prove an inadequate tool for one of the supposed Israeli and American objectives in the war: regime change. For air power to be effective at bringing about regime change, it needs to demoralize the Iranian people to the point that they’re willing to oppose their own government.

Early air enthusiasts believed that a population’s demoralization would be an inevitable consequence of aerial bombardment. Italian general Giulio Douhet, a prominent air power theorist, argued that air power was so mighty that it could destroy cities and demoralize an opponent into surrendering.

Douhet was correct on the first point. He was wrong on the second.

Recent history provides evidence. While considerable ink has been spilled to demonstrate the efficacy of air power during the Second World War, close examination of the facts demonstrate that it had a minimal impact. In fact, Allied bombing of German cities in several instances created the opposite effect.

More recent bombing campaigns replicated this failure. The U.S. bombing of North Vietnam during the Vietnam War did not significantly damage North Vietnamese morale or war effort. NATO’s bombing of Serbia in 1999, likewise, rallied support for the unpopular Slobodan Milosevic due to its perceived injustice — and continues to evoke strong emotions to this day.

Iran’s political regime may be unpopular with many Iranians, but Israeli and American bombing may shore up support for the Iranian government.

Nationalism is a potent force, particularly when people are under attack. The attacks on Iran will rally segments of the population to the government that would otherwise oppose it.

Few positive options

The limitations of air power to fuel significant political change in Iran should have given Trump pause about intervening in the conflict.

Some American support, such as providing weapons, is a given due to the close relationship between the U.S. and Israel. But any realization of American and Israeli aspirations of a non-nuclear Iran and a new government will likely require ground forces.

Recent American experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq show such a ground forces operation won’t lead to the swift victory that Trump desires, but could potentially stretch on for decades.

James Horncastle 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.

– ref. Why Israel and the U.S. are sure to encounter the limits of air power in Iran – https://theconversation.com/why-israel-and-the-u-s-are-sure-to-encounter-the-limits-of-air-power-in-iran-259348

July 5, 2025

‘Canada is not for sale’ — but new Ontario law prioritizes profits over environmental and Indigenous rights

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Martina Jakubchik-Paloheimo, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Environmental and Urban Change, York University, Canada

Despite provincewide protests, Ontario’s Bill 5 officially became law on June 5. Critics warn of the loss of both environmental protections and Indigenous rights.

The law empowers the province to create special economic zones where companies or projects don’t have to comply with provincial regulations or municipal bylaws.

Bill 5, also known as the Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act, reduces the requirements for environmental assessment. By doing so, it weakens ecological protection laws that safeguard the rights of Indigenous Peoples and at-risk species.

Indigenous rights and Indigenous knowledge are critical for planetary health. But the bill passed into law with no consultation with First Nations. Therefore, it undermines the duty to consult while seemingly favouring government-aligned industries.

Indigenous Peoples have long stewarded the environment through sustainable practices that promote ecological and human health. Bill 5’s provisions to allow the bypassing of environmental regulations and shift from a consent-based model to one of consultation violate Aboriginal and Treaty rights. Métis lawyer Bruce McIvor has described the shift as a “policy of legalized lawlessness.”

Compounding environmental threats

Wildfires that are currently burning from British Columbia to northern Ontario are five times more likely to occur due to the effects of climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

On the federal level, Bill C-5, called the Building Canada Act, was introduced in the House of Commons on June 6 by Prime Minister Mark Carney. This bill further compounds the threat to environmental protections, species at risk and Indigenous rights across the country in favour of resource extraction projects.

It removes the need for the assessment of the environmental impacts of projects considered to be of “national interest.”

Ring of Fire — special economic zone?

Ford and Carney want to fast-track the so-called Ring of Fire mineral deposit within Treaty 9 territory in northern Ontario by labelling it a “special economic zone” and of “national interest.” The proposed development is often described as a potential $90 billion opportunity.

But scientists say there are no reliable estimates of the costs related to construction, extraction, benefit sharing and environmental impacts in the Ring of Fire.

The mining development could devastate traditional First Nations livelihoods and rights. It could also worsen the effects of climate change in Ontario’s muskeg, the southernmost sea ice ecosystem in the world.

Northern Ontario has the largest area of intact boreal forest in the world. Almost 90 per cent of the region’s 24,000 residents are Indigenous. The Mushkegowuk Anniwuk, the original people of the Hudson Bay lowlands, refer to this area as “the Breathing Lands” — Canada’s lungs. Cree nations have lived and stewarded these lands for thousands of years.

Journalist Jessica Gamble of Canadian National Geographic says the James Bay Lowlands, part of the Hudson Bay Lowlands, are “traditional hunting grounds” and “the largest contiguous temperate wetland complex in the world.”

This ecosystem is home to 200 different migratory bird species and plays a critical role in environmental health through carbon sequestration and water retention. The Wildlands League has described the area as “home to hundreds of plant, mammal and fish species, most in decline elsewhere.”

Northern Ontario, meantime, is warming at four times the global average.

Jeronimo Kataquapit is a filmmaker from Attawapiskat who is spearheading the “Here We Stand” campaign in opposition to Bill 5 with Attawapiskat residents and neighbouring Mushkegowuk Nations and Neskantaga First Nation. As the spokesperson for Here We Stand, he said: “Ontario’s Bill 5 and Canada’s proposed national interest legislation are going to destroy the land, pollute the water, stomp all over our treaty rights, our inherent rights, our laws and our ways of life.”

Endangered species — polar bears

An estimated 900 to 1,000 polar bears live in Ontario, mostly along the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts.

But there has been a 73 per cent decline in wildlife populations globally since the 1970s, according to the World Wildlife Fund. In Canada, species of global concern have declined by 42 per cent over the same time. Canada’s Arctic and boreal ecosystems, once symbols of the snow-capped “Great White North,” are now at risk.

Polar bears, listed as threatened under the Ontario Endangered Species Act and of “special concern” nationally, are particularly sensitive to human activities and climate change. Polar bears and ringed seals are culturally significant and serve as ecological indicators for ecosystems.

Melting sea ice has already altered their behaviour, forcing them to spend more time on land.

Cree First Nations in Northern Ontario’s biodiverse Treaty 9 territory are collaborating with federal and provincial governments and conservationists to protect polar bears. Right now, there is recognition of the importance of Cree knowledge in planning and the management of polar bears.

The new Ontario law removes safeguards protecting the province’s endangered species, such as the Endangered Species Act. It strips key protections for at-risk wildlife, such as habitat protections, environmental impact assessments and ecosystems conservation.

Climate change and weaker environmental protections will lead to irreversible damage to our environment and biodiversity. The ecosystem services that each animal, insect and plant provides — like cleaning the air we breathe and water we drink — are essential for a healthy province.

The impact of Bill 5 and C-5 on these species is likely to be severe.

Short-term gains at the expense of long-term damage

Ontario could benefit from improved infrastructure and economic growth, but development requires careful planning and collaboration. It should rely on innovative science-based solutions, especially Indigenous sciences. And it should never infringe on Indigenous rights, bypass environmental assessments or threaten endangered species.

While Bill 5 commits to the duty to consult with First Nations, it falls short of the free, prior and informed consent required by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Since becoming Canadian law in June 2021, the federal government has been obligated to align its laws with UNDRIP.

With Bill 5 in place, some of Ontario’s major projects may be fast-tracked with minimal safeguards. Both Bill 5 and the proposed C-5 prioritize short-term economic gains that will cause irreversible environmental damage and violate legal obligations under UNDRIP.

Lawrence Martin, Director of Lands and Resources at the Mushkegowuk Council, contributed to this article.

Martina Jakubchik-Paloheimo works in the Faculty of Environmental and Urban Change (EUC) at York University as a Postdoctoral Fellow, facilitating a collaborative project on human-polar bear coexistence in Hudson Bay and James Bay.

– ref. ‘Canada is not for sale’ — but new Ontario law prioritizes profits over environmental and Indigenous rights – https://theconversation.com/canada-is-not-for-sale-but-new-ontario-law-prioritizes-profits-over-environmental-and-indigenous-rights-258553

July 5, 2025

Is Mark Carney turning his back on climate action?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Deborah de Lange, Associate Professor, Global Management Studies, Toronto Metropolitan University

The G7 summit in Alberta, hosted by Prime Minister Mark Carney, has ended with only passing mention of fighting climate change, including a statement on wildfires that is silent on the pressing need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

This is puzzling. Canadians didn’t opt for Conservative Pierre Poilievre, considered by some to be an oil and gas industry mouthpiece, in the last federal election. Instead, voters gave Carney’s Liberals a minority government.

Carney was the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance and was behind the UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance, so some Canadians might have assumed he’d prioritize climate action if he won the election. Instead, Carney has described developing fossil fuel infrastructure as “pragmatic.”

But it’s unclear how a country grappling with abysmal air quality due to wildfires fuelled by global warming will benefit from further global fossil fuel development and its related emissions.

Warming rapidly

Canada is warming faster than most of the globe. Its leaders should be laser-focused on mitigating climate change by reducing fossil fuel use to the greatest extent possible, as soon as possible.

This decades-long understanding of how to approach climate action has been repeatedly explained by experts and is well known to governments globally. Canada’s prime minister was once one of those experts.

Carney now has a tremendous opportunity to lead by steering Canada in a clean direction.

Canada is at the forefront of clean technology, with numerous business opportunities emerging, particularly in areas like circular economy international trade. These opportunities not only support Canada’s commitment to meeting its Paris Agreement targets but also help expand and diversify its global trade.

Eco-industrial parks

Canada already has exemplar eco-industrial parks — co-operative businesses located on a common property that focus on reducing environmental impact through resource efficiency, waste reduction and sharing resources. Such industrial communities are in Halifax and in Delta, B.C. They represent significant investment opportunities.

Vacant urban land could be revitalized and existing industrial parks could boost their economic output and circular trade by building stronger partnerships to share resources, reduce waste and cut emissions.

Canada would benefit economically and environmentally by building on existing expertise and expanding successful sustainability strategies to achieve economic, environmental and social goals.

But by continuing to invest in fossil fuels, Canada misses out on opportunities to diversify trade and boost economic competitiveness.

The secret to China’s success

Real diversification makes Canada less vulnerable to economic shocks, like the ones caused by the tariffs imposed by United States President Donald Trump.

Fossil fuel reliance increases exposure to global economic risks, but shifting to cleaner products and services reduces climate risks and expands Canada’s global trade options. China’s economic rise is partly a result of this strategy.

That’s seemingly why Trump is so fixated on China. China today is a serious competitor to the U.S. after making smart trade and economic decisions and forging its own path, disregarding American pressure to remain a mere follower.

Investing in its huge Belt and Road Initiative, China also aligned itself with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. It’s building diplomatic bridges with many Belt and Road countries in southeast Asia as Trump’s America alienates its partners, pulling out of the Paris Agreement and cutting foreign aid.

As another one of America’s mistreated partners, Canada was poised to forge its own path under Carney. Instead, Carney is supporting American oil and gas by encouraging Canadian pipeline projects.

Clean innovation is the path forward

Canadian oil and gas is a concentrated industry controlled by a wealthy few, primarily Americans. More pipelines would therefore mean more sales of fossil fuels to other countries, with the beneficiaries mostly American.

Fossil fuel investments reduce Canada’s diversification because the resources used to further these projects could go elsewhere — toward clean diversification. With almost unlimited clean economy options across many sectors, clean diversification would broaden Canada’s economic and trade portfolios and reduce American control.

This is International Business 101, and would make the Canadian economy more competitive through innovation, while reducing the country’s climate risk.

California, often targeted by Trump for its policies, has been a leader in clean innovation, making its economy the envy of the world.

My recent research shows that clear, decisive choices like those made in California will be key to Canada’s future success. Canada must make choices aligned with goals — a core principle of strategic management.

My research also suggests Canada must restructure its energy industry to focus on renewable energy innovation while reducing fossil fuel reliance. Increased renewable energy innovation, as seen in patent numbers, leads to higher GDP.

Contrary to common beliefs, pollution taxes boost the economy in combination with clean innovation. But when the government supports both the fossil fuel industry and clean industries, it hinders Canada’s transition to a cleaner future.

Trapped by the fossil fuel industry?

Do Canadian taxpayers truly want to keep funding an outdated, polluting industry that benefits a wealthy few, or invest in clean industries that boost Canada’s economy, create better jobs and protect the environment? To differentiate Canada from the United States, it would make sense to choose the latter.

Carney should consider refraining from pushing for the fast-tracking of polluting projects. If he doesn’t, Canada will become more uncompetitive and vulnerable, trapped by the fossil fuel industry.

Carney’s support for pipelines may have stemmed from Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s implicit support for Alberta sovereignty. She made veiled threats to Canada at a critical juncture, when Trump was making repeated assertions about annexing Canada.

Missed opportunities

Alberta didn’t vote for Carney. But Canadians who care about mitigating climate change did.

Banks that felt pressure to at least recognize sustainable finance during the Joe Biden administration joined Carney’s Net-Zero Banking Alliance.

But as soon as Trump came to power a second time and walked away from the Paris Agreement, many American banks abandoned the alliance. Canadian banks followed suit, and Carney remarkably missed another moment to show Canadian leadership by stopping their exit.

In fact, Carney seems to have abandoned his own organization to appease Trump as the president made multiple 51st state threats. The prime minister had the chance to differentiate Canada and demonstrate his own leadership. Instead, he seems to have easily turned his back on his principles under pressure from Trump.

Deborah de Lange receives funding from SSHRC and ESRC. She is affiliated with The Liberal Party of Canada and The Writers’ Union of Canada.

– ref. Is Mark Carney turning his back on climate action? – https://theconversation.com/is-mark-carney-turning-his-back-on-climate-action-258737