Analysis – Page 274 – MIL Submissions Engine

April 24, 2026

« Nudges » et « boosts » : comment s’articulent-ils ?

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Pascale Tugayé, Doctorante en management public, Université Côte d’Azur

« Nudge » et « boost » peuvent être utilisés pour obtenir un comportement particulier d’une personne. Mais comment ces deux leviers se combinent-ils ? Lequel utiliser ? Dans quelles conditions ?

Le « nudge » a acquis une grande visibilité depuis que Thaler et Sunstein ont développé le concept au début de ce siècle. Sur la base des travaux dans le domaine de l’économie comportementale de Richard Thaler, prix Nobel d’économie en 2017, de nombreuses expérimentations ont permis de se pencher sur nos processus de décision.

Moins médiatisé, le « boost » appartient à un autre champ d’intervention concernant les comportements. Inspiré des travaux de Gigerenzer sur les prises de décisions rapides et basées sur des informations faites d’idées schématiques, son but est de développer davantage des compétences basiques, très techniques mais pertinentes, dans le but de faire un choix plus construit.

Comportement réel ou désirable ?

En effet, le nudge est intégré au sein de ce que Thaler et Sunstein appellent une architecture de choix. Cette dernière doit être étudiée pas à pas et revisitée dans des contextes distincts comme une cantine, une rue voire un relevé de banque, pour mettre en évidence la différence observée entre le comportement réel chez les individus et le comportement désirable.

Par « désirable », il est entendu privilégié par la collectivité (par exemple, jeter moins de mégots dans l’espace public) ou tout simplement préféré sur le long terme par un individu concerné (finaliser un rapport difficile à rédiger). En l’occurrence, chacun se doit de prendre de nombreuses décisions quotidiennement.

Deux systèmes sont traditionnellement identifiés lors de la prise de décision individuelle. Le cerveau a l’habitude de prendre la majorité de ses décisions sur la base d’un système de pensée rapide et peu réflexif. C’est le fameux « système 1 » de pensée de Kahneman sur lequel sont en partie fondées les théories du nudge et du boost. Le « système 2 » de la pensée, quant à lui, nécessite une vraie réflexion coûteuse pour l’organisme, qu’il ne met en place que pour des problèmes complexes ou nouveaux.

Le nudge est conçu pour venir inciter les individus à prendre une décision plus favorable sans coercition, c’est-à-dire sans restreindre les possibilités qui s’offrent à chacun. Profondément ancrés dans une démarche de paternalisme – les hommes ont parfois besoin d’être orientés vers des choix plus pertinents – sans renoncer à l’espace de liberté de chacun, les nudges sont vus comme des instruments peu coûteux et complémentaires de démarches plus globales.

Le cousin malveillant

Souvent ludiques, ils se veulent imperceptibles et ne doivent être qu’un coup de pouce, une incitation douce, à mieux décider au sein du système rapide de pensée. Mais les nudges peuvent être considérés par certains comme des outils inquisiteurs et manipulateurs. En réponse, Thaler et Sunstein ont développé la notion de sludge (dont la traduction pourrait être boue épaisse). Soit le « cousin malveillant » du nudge qui aurait pour objectif de rendre les actions plus difficiles à réaliser, notamment par une complexification des procédures ou un temps de réalisation excessivement long. Ainsi, le simple fait de vous faire décocher l’autorisation de recevoir des actualités commerciales dans le cadre d’une offre promotionnelle est assimilable à une tentative de sludge.

Une intuition avantageuse

Le boost, de son côté, repose sur l’idée que le passage par un système de pensée long et complexe, dans certains cas, pourra nuire à l’individu et l’empêcher de prendre la meilleure décision. Gigerenzer prend l’exemple d’une expérience dans un hôpital pour orienter les patients avec une douleur cardiaque sur la base de 3 ou 19 critères. Le système frugal, basé sur 3 critères, permet de mieux traiter les patients dans leur ensemble et n’empêche pas de revoir un patient avec une problématique complexe pour des processus médicaux plus longs et complets. Le travail de Gigerenzer se base ainsi sur des méthodes dites heuristiques. Herzog et Hertwig ont récemment publié un article décrivant les processus heuristiques comme des règles générales très basiques délaissant certaines informations et permettant de faire des choix plus rapidement.

Revenons à notre exemple précédent : d’aucuns pourraient croire que poser trois questions à chaque patient ne suffirait pas à les orienter en cas d’urgence. Or, ces trois questions décisives seront mieux canalisées que 19 critères, de plus, elles sont basées sur des vérités scientifiquement démontrées : ces trois axes directeurs suffiront à guider l’intuition des professionnels. En étant orientés plus rapidement, les cas les plus urgents auront davantage de chance de guérison et les cas plus complexes feront des analyses plus poussées.

En réalité, tout un chacun peut initier un travail en réalisant une carte mentale (parfois aussi appelée carte heuristique) : ce schéma pourra servir de guide ou de synthèse d’une découverte. Il est rarement complet mais permet de tracer en quelques minutes les grands axes de la pensée. Le boost nous invite à apprécier notre intuition tout en l’aidant à dépasser ses limites : les biais. En effet, les décisions basées sur une pensée heuristique sont souvent assimilées à des biais cognitifs. Alison Gopnik explique que les bébés se forment à notre monde en calculant des probabilités. En grandissant, nous intégrons peu à peu les informations autour de nous en déduisant des probabilités de notre vécu. Nous nous créons des biais cognitifs sous forme de pensée heuristique, d’intuition, des autoroutes de la pensée pour aboutir plus facilement, au risque parfois d’adopter des comportements qui nous desservent.

Ces heuristiques rapides, lorsqu’elles sont réalisées sur la base de statistiques et probabilités démontrées comme dans un boost, permettent à chacun de prendre des décisions plus rationnelles. Ces boosts pourront prendre plusieurs formes détaillées par Herzog et Hertwig : apprentissage des réelles statistiques liées à une situation, création de règles de séparation financière entre vie privée et vie professionnelle, voire un self-nudge. Ce dernier boost bien précis consiste à observer notre architecture de choix et les biais qui nous causent des tracas. Il s’agit alors de prévoir des nudges soi-même pour parvenir à un meilleur comportement. Dans ce cas, l’adhésion de l’individu est entière. Concrètement, s’imposer une période sans notification et sans appel sur son poste de travail peut être une forme de self-nudge. L’individu boosté s’autorise cette intervention sur son espace de travail pour mieux achever son but.

Former ou inciter, faut-il choisir ?

Une analyse fine de plusieurs nudges à dimensions écologiques est parue en 2023 afin de savoir lesquels étaient les plus efficaces. Cette analyse réalisait une classification des nudges en fonction de deux leviers principaux que sont la faisabilité (comment ?) et la désirabilité (pourquoi ?).

Au sein du levier « faisabilité », il s’agit de jouer sur l’architecture de choix en cadrant l’information, ou en donnant de la visibilité au meilleur choix, ou encore en facilitant l’information. Ainsi, des hôtels asiatiques ont placé un autocollant à un seuil écoresponsable de remplissage en eau des baignoires. Cette première catégorie de nudges verts semble mieux fonctionner que les autres car elle réduirait la distance psychologique à la mise en œuvre d’une action.

Un effet boomerang

Au sein du levier de la désirabilité, se cache entre autres un type de nudge extrêmement connu et décrié qu’est celui de la désirabilité sociale : dévoiler aux yeux de tous sa conduite, en forçant chacun à employer des sacs poubelles transparents par exemple ; ou encore, être comparé à une norme parfois lointaine et vague, comme il a pu être observé sur certaines factures d’électricité décrivant l’écart de consommation d’un foyer à la norme. En dépit d’un effet positif avéré, ces dispositifs sont susceptibles de générer un effet contre-productif. C’est ce que certains chercheurs appellent un effet boomerang : se sentant manipulée, une frange de la population adopte par réaction le comportement non désiré. L’ensemble de ces types de nudges ne permettent pas aux individus de prendre du recul sur leur comportement.

France Culture 2022.

Au contraire, le boost fonctionne sur des cartes mentales et se propose de donner de nouvelles compétences. Il peut s’agir d’améliorer la compréhension de la fixation d’un prix pour un service complexe, par exemple. Certaines formes de boosts peuvent même être déclenchées volontairement par les individus ou bien par un tiers, à l’instar de ceux permettant de développer la motivation pour un apprentissage.

Nudge et boost visent chacun à modifier le système rapide de pensée. Le nudge joue au sein de la prise de décision sur l’action elle-même, alors que le boost reconfigure, via un processus légèrement plus énergivore lors de la découverte, les choix réalisés. S’il faut effectivement choisir l’outil, il s’agit toujours de composer avec les limites de l’esprit humain.

Un horizon temporel différent

Les effets des nudges semblent ne pas perdurer dans le temps. Ennui, lassitude, détérioration… Les nudges associés à la préservation de l’eau ou de l’énergie, par exemple, ont un effet direct et notable mais qui s’estompe en quelques mois.

Le boost, au contraire, n’a pas toujours d’effet direct sur les choix réalisés. Un temps d’adaptation ou de motivation est toléré entre le moment où un individu rencontre un boost et la mise en place du comportement rationnel et désirable. En revanche, le boost serait plus pérenne dans le temps. Il implique une meilleure compréhension des raisonnements heuristiques de l’individu et suppose un engagement de la part de l’individu boosté.

Les nudges et les boosts fonctionnent différemment mais ont tous deux pour objectif de faciliter les prises de décision rapides et efficaces au quotidien. Il existe encore des zones grises où chacun pourra déterminer ce qui relève du nudge ou du boost. Leurs effets sont souvent positifs, neutres et parfois, contre-productifs, surtout lorsque la logique sous-jacente est proche d’une certaine forme de manipulation. Dans tous les cas, ils ne peuvent suffire à eux-mêmes et doivent être considérés comme des outils possibles, par définition non neutres.

Tugayé Pascale est membre du laboratoire GRM et de l’Association des Doctorants Francophones en Gestion. Elle recevra des financements de la Chaire partenariale l’Eau dans les territoires des Alpes-Maritimes pour ses recherches.

– ref. « Nudges » et « boosts » : comment s’articulent-ils ? – https://theconversation.com/nudges-et-boosts-comment-sarticulent-ils-268785

April 24, 2026

Ce que les paiements en cryptomonnaies exigés par l’Iran disent du rôle millénaire de la monnaie

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Mikael Fauvelle, Associate Professor and Researcher, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Lund University

Alors que s’érode la domination du dollar américain, le recours aux cryptomonnaies met en lumière un des rôles historiques de la monnaie. PicsPD/Pixnio, CC BY

Du bronze aux cryptomonnaies, l’histoire montre que la monnaie sert d’abord à commercer à distance, entre inconnus. Les pratiques actuelles de l’Iran et de la Russie en offrent une illustration contemporaine.

Lorsque l’Iran a commencé à exiger un paiement en échange d’un passage sécurisé dans le détroit d’Ormuz, Téhéran a ouvert la porte à des règlements en cryptomonnaies. Même logique du côté du réseau opaque de pétroliers qui, depuis l’invasion à grande échelle de l’Ukraine en 2022, écoule clandestinement du pétrole russe sur les marchés mondiaux : ces flux sont souvent réglés de cette manière.

Partout dans le monde, les acteurs illicites se tournent de plus en plus vers les cryptomonnaies pour commercer en échappant aux sanctions américaines. En procédant ainsi, des États comme la Russie et l’Iran réactivent une fonction ancienne de la monnaie, déjà à l’œuvre dès l’âge du bronze : permettre des échanges entre inconnus, au-delà des frontières politiques.

Dans mon ouvrage Shell Money (2024, non traduit en français), qui explore certaines des plus anciennes formes de monnaie au monde, je montre que des dynamiques similaires traversent toute l’histoire.

Les monnaies modernes comme le dollar américain ou l’euro reposent sur la confiance accordée aux institutions financières des États — à l’image des premières pièces métalliques de l’Antiquité, frappées par les cités grecques pour lever l’impôt et rémunérer les soldats. À la préhistoire, en revanche, de nombreux systèmes monétaires se sont développés sans l’appui d’un pouvoir étatique, à l’image des lingots de bronze.

Cuivre, étain et échanges à longue distance

L’âge du bronze (environ 2500 à 500 av. J.-C.) est marqué par des voyages à longue distance et une forte connectivité interrégionale. Dans ce contexte, disposer d’un moyen d’échange commun était essentiel pour entretenir les réseaux commerciaux.

Car les outils en bronze étaient fabriqués à partir de cuivre et d’étain, deux ressources disponibles seulement dans certaines régions du monde ancien. En Europe du Nord, le cuivre provenait notamment du pays de Galles, des Alpes, de l’Autriche, de la Sardaigne ou de la péninsule Ibérique, tandis que l’étain venait principalement de Cornouailles et du Devon. Cela impliquait que, par exemple, tout le cuivre utilisé en Scandinavie devait être acheminé via des échanges à longue distance.

Une grande partie de ces échanges reposait sur des lingots de bronze — anneaux, barres ou têtes de hache — dont le poids et la forme étaient fortement standardisés d’une région à l’autre. Cette standardisation les rendait interchangeables, une propriété essentielle de toute forme de monnaie. Les objets en bronze étaient également fragmentés en unités de taille compatibles avec des échanges de type marchand.

Le besoin de monnaie à l’âge du bronze

Voyager à l’âge du bronze n’avait rien d’aisé. Les déplacements sur de longues distances étaient périlleux et pouvaient durer des mois. Un marchand itinérant n’avait aucun moyen de savoir si ses partenaires commerciaux seraient encore présents au moment du voyage de retour. Les formes de réciprocité propres aux communautés locales ne s’appliquaient plus : les échanges devaient devenir transactionnels.

Dans ce contexte, le bronze s’est imposé comme un moyen d’échange standardisé. En transportant des lingots de bronze, un voyageur pouvait commercer à grande distance, avec l’assurance que cette forme de valeur serait acceptée où qu’il se rende.

Dans d’autres régions du monde ancien, des coquillages et des perles de coquillage faisaient office de monnaie. Le caractère chinois 貝 (bèi) provient ainsi d’un pictogramme représentant un coquillage cauri, et entre aujourd’hui dans la composition de centaines de caractères liés à la finance, notamment ceux signifiant acheter, vendre, richesse ou profit. Importés depuis l’océan Indien, les cauris ont été utilisés comme monnaie en Chine sous la dynastie Zhou.

En Amérique du Nord, de petites perles de coquillage servaient également de monnaie et circulaient à l’intérieur du continent, à des milliers de kilomètres des littoraux où elles étaient collectées et produites. Ces exemples montrent que la monnaie d’échange ne se limitait pas aux métaux : elle pouvait émerger à partir de tout bien à la fois désirable et rare.

Le recul du dollar américain

La domination des monnaies fiduciaires émises par les États — c’est-à-dire non adossées à une matière première comme l’or — repose sur la confiance qu’elles inspirent, leur liquidité et le soutien institutionnel dont elles bénéficient.

Aujourd’hui, le commerce international est largement dominé par le dollar américain. Mais à mesure que le monde devient de plus en plus multipolaire — avec des centres de gravité concurrents en Amérique du Nord, en Europe et en Chine — on peut s’attendre à voir le rôle du dollar s’éroder.

En réalité, certains indices suggèrent que ce mouvement est déjà à l’œuvre. Le rôle du dollar comme principale monnaie de réserve mondiale — c’est-à-dire détenue en grandes quantités par les États et les banques centrales pour stabiliser leurs économies — est passé d’environ 70 % à la fin des années 1990 à moins de 60 % aujourd’hui. Une tendance appelée à se poursuivre, dans un contexte marqué par des signes d’isolement croissant des États-Unis, des tensions au sein de la coopération transatlantique, et la montée en puissance économique de la Chine.

Pour autant, la fragmentation politique ne signifie pas la fin du commerce international. L’histoire regorge de périodes — dès l’âge du bronze — où morcellement politique et dynamisme des échanges coexistaient. Pour ceux qui cherchent à s’affranchir du contrôle des États, cela pourrait se traduire par une évolution des formes de monnaie utilisées.

Video: Bloomberg Television.

De nouvelles formes de monnaie

Les différences sont nombreuses entre les cryptomonnaies contemporaines et les monnaies-marchandises de la préhistoire. Les cryptomonnaies restent peu utilisées et rarement acceptées dans les transactions du quotidien, leur valeur est très volatile et, comme les monnaies fiduciaires modernes, elles ne possèdent pas de « valeur d’usage » au sens où pouvaient en avoir des lingots de bronze ou même des perles de coquillage.

Elles n’en constituent pas moins, toutes deux, des formes de monnaie « par le bas » — c’est-à-dire non contrôlées par les États — qui existent en dehors de la supervision d’un gouvernement unique ou d’un grand acteur financier.

C’est précisément cette absence de contrôle étatique qui pousse des pays sous sanctions comme l’Iran ou la Russie à exiger des paiements en cryptomonnaies. À mesure que le levier financier des États-Unis s’affaiblit, ces transactions deviennent plus difficiles à bloquer ou à sanctionner, ce qui pourrait transformer en profondeur le financement des conflits à venir.

Dans ce contexte, les cryptomonnaies pourraient tirer leur épingle du jeu, en continuant d’assurer l’une des fonctions les plus anciennes de la monnaie : permettre de commercer avec des inconnus.

Mikael Fauvelle reçoit des financements de la Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation et de la Marcus and Amalia Wallenberg Foundation. Il est l’auteur de « Shell Money: A Comparative Study » (Cambridge University Press).

– ref. Ce que les paiements en cryptomonnaies exigés par l’Iran disent du rôle millénaire de la monnaie – https://theconversation.com/ce-que-les-paiements-en-cryptomonnaies-exiges-par-liran-disent-du-role-millenaire-de-la-monnaie-281264

April 24, 2026

In a fractured world order, where does the global south fit in?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer – National Security College, Australian National University

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney was one of the first world leaders to speak out about the “ruptured” world order caused by the Trump administration in the United States. He called for middle powers to band together to safeguard what’s left of the liberal world order.

But what role will the global south play in all of this?

Some believe it will be decisive. Earlier this year, Finland’s president, Alexander Stubb, said at a conference in India, “the global south will decide what the next world order will look like”.

The global balance of power has shifted. The global south has both demography and economy on its side. The era of a Western-dominated world order is over. This is obvious, but it will take some time to sink in across the West.

So, how can the global south influence which direction the world takes?

What is the global south?

It may be too early to declare the end of the Western-dominated world order. While the war in Iran may be leading some countries to question the current system – in which might appears to make right – the global south is far from a unified bloc.

First, there is no agreed definition or scope of the “global south”. The name infers countries located in the southern hemisphere, but many global south countries are north of the equator, while Australia and New Zealand are considered part of the “global north”.

Some lump Africa, Latin America and Asia together in the global south grouping, but this is too simplistic. And what to make of a major economy like China? Some include it in the global south, while others do not.

An important feature of the global south is there is no single state widely accepted as its leader, nor is there strong support for such leadership.

While China is influential in parts of the developing world through its “non-interference” foreign policy approach, India, with its strong ties to the West, is unlikely to accept Chinese global leadership.

Economic classification of the world’s countries and territories by the UN Conference on Trade and Development in 2023. It’s important to note there is disagreement about which countries belong in this framework.
Wikimedia Commons

The global south and the Iran war

Whatever definition one uses, the behaviour of some states in the global south shows they are trying to conduct foreign policy with multiple players, joining different clubs to pursue their national interests above all else.

These groups, however, haven’t proven to be very effective or united in responding to recent conflicts, raising questions about their level of influence.

Take the BRICS, for example. The coalition has expanded in recent years to ten countries, including Iran and the United Arab Emirates (which has been attacked by Iran in the current war).

Yet the group has failed to take a unified position on the war. China and Russia have condemned the US–Israeli attacks on Iran, while other members such as India have taken a cautious approach, calling for de-escalation.

Some commentators have noted a central problem: the BRICS members remain divided on many core strategic issues, without a central platform to resolve disputes.

When it comes to the Iran conflict and the future of the Middle East, individual nations in the global south have their own agendas, as well.

China, for instance, would lose a key partner if the Iranian regime were to collapse. Iran is a member of the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and an important partner in China’s efforts to create alternatives to Western-dominated governance. Moreover, China relies on a stable, secure access to oil and gas shipments through the Strait of Hormuz.

Pakistan has emerged as a key mediator between the US and Iran. This is a chance for it to take a much bigger role on the global stage. But it is also keen to ensure its defence partner, Saudi Arabia, is not drawn into a wider war. Under their defence arrangement, Pakistan would have to assist Saudi Arabia if the kingdom were attacked.

And India maintains an independent foreign policy based on “strategic autonomy”, allowing it to manage relations across competing blocs. As Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar has noted, India is not a Western country, nor is it “anti-Western”. This allows it to remain a key strategic partner to the United States, while also renewing purchases of Iranian oil and gas.

Other ways to exert influence

In his recent book, The Triangle of Power, Stubb argues the world is dividing into three parts – the global west (still led by the US), the global east (led by China and Russia) and the global south (comprised of middle and small powers in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia).

According to Stubb, the global order is at a crossroads between west and east, with the south being the pendulum that will decide which way the world swings. To maintain the old liberal world order, the west needs to get the south on its side.

But again, this is too simplistic a view. I believe nations in the global south have a preference for multipolarity, this is, a world order not dominated by one power, such as the United States or China.

They are also interested in having their voices heard in the global arena. Because many global south countries are former colonies of Western powers, they want to address the harm or injustices of colonialism they perceive as continuing in the current international system. South Africa’s move to hold Israel accountable at the International Court of Justice for its war in Gaza is an example of this.

At the same time, the current rupture in the international system has reinforced the importance of alternative diplomatic spaces and flexible alignments, allowing states to shift partnerships where it best serves their interests.

That means cooperating with the West when it suits them, while simultaneously cooperating with China, Russia or other blocs and powers.

Indonesia is a case in point. In the past month, it has signed a major defence agreement with Washington, while its president, Prabowo Subianto, also visited Moscow to meet with President Vladimir Putin.

The global south is clearly becoming more relevant in today’s power politics. Just how these nations choose to exert their influence remains to be seen.

Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva 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. In a fractured world order, where does the global south fit in? – https://theconversation.com/in-a-fractured-world-order-where-does-the-global-south-fit-in-278410

April 24, 2026

Linces que matan gatos

Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Miguel Clavero Pineda, Científico titular CSIC, Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD-CSIC)

Programa de Conservación Ex-situ del Lince Ibérico”

Las mascotas pueden actuar como depredadoras de fauna silvestre, pero también pueden convertirse en presas, especialmente cuando tienen libertad para salir de las casas o viven directamente en la calle. Por ejemplo, los perros son presas frecuentes de los cocodrilos en Australia y de leopardos en ciudades de India.

En los últimos días se ha difundido en redes sociales y en la prensa el caso de un lince ibérico que ha matado a varios gatos callejeros en Cabañas de Yepes (Toledo). La espectacularidad de la noticia reside en la confianza con la que el animal se mueve por el entorno urbano, aparentemente indiferente a la cercanía de personas y vehículos.

No es el primer caso registrado de linces que atacan a gatos y, gracias a la notable recuperación del lince ibérico, es previsible que sigamos viendo situaciones similares en el futuro.

Carnívoros que matan a otros carnívoros

Que un lince ibérico mate gatos domésticos no deja de ser su comportamiento natural como superdepredador en ecosistemas mediterráneos. Hace ya casi tres décadas, se publicó un estudio de referencia sobre cómo los mamíferos carnívoros matan a individuos de otras especies de ese mismo grupo. El patrón se repite en múltiples sistemas, con leones, leopardos y hienas que matan guepardos, zorros que matan martas y garduñas y linces boreales que llegan incluso a matar lobos.

Pintura que muestra a un gato con restos de un pájaro que ha matado y un zorro que lo mira — Cuadro de Bruno Liljefors ‘Zorro sorprendiendo a un gato’.

Del mismo modo, los linces ibéricos matan zorros, meloncillos y ginetas cuando éstos se encuentran dentro de los límites de sus áreas de campeo. Incluso pueden atacar a tejones, unos animales que en ocasiones les superan en peso.

Como resultado, los territorios ocupados por linces tienen densidades muy bajas de otros carnívoros medianos y pequeños. Esta “limpieza” territorial genera un efecto en cadena: la reducción de los llamados mesocarnívoros favorece a las poblaciones de presas, especialmente las de conejo, el principal alimento del lince ibérico. Se da así la paradoja de que el lince, en lugar de perjudicar al conejo, contribuye a su recuperación.

Malo para los gatos, también para los linces

Un lince no distingue entre un carnívoro silvestre y un gato doméstico y si hay gatos viviendo en su territorio, intentará eliminarlos. Este comportamiento puede generar rechazo en los colectivos dedicados al cuidado de los gatos que viven en colonias. Sin embargo, y aunque estas personas se afanen en los cuidados, conviene recordar que los gatos que viven en la calle lo hacen, en general, en muy malas condiciones, también cuando no interactúan con carnívoros silvestres. Estos animales se enfrentan a peleas, enfermedades, ataques de perros, episodios de maltrato y un elevado riesgo de atropello.

La presencia de gatos en las calles y en el medio natural es por tanto mala para estos animales, pero también para las especies con las que interactúan.

Los gatos domésticos pueden transmitir diversas enfermedades a la fauna, entre ellas la leucemia felina, especialmente preocupante por la gravedad y facilidad de contagio. En 2007, un brote de esta enfermedad, originado por el contacto con gatos en las inmediaciones de El Rocío (Huelva), estuvo a punto de acabar con la población de linces de Doñana. Si los equipos de campo de los proyectos LIFE no hubieran estado trabajando sobre el terreno, es más que probable que una de las dos poblaciones de linces que quedaban en ese momento hubiese desaparecido.

El lince observado en Cabañas de Yepes probablemente no va a contraer leucemia felina, porque está vacunado contra la enfermedad, como ocurre con todos los individuos que han sido reintroducidos o capturados en los programas de conservación. Sin embargo, no es posible garantizar la inmunización de todos los ejemplares de lince, y menos aún a medida que la población continúe expandiéndose.

Lince en una camilla mientras dos veterinarios con mascarillas y bata miran una pantalla — Los linces que pasan por control veterinario (porque han nacido en cautividad o porque han sido capturados) tienen puesta la vacuna de la leucemia felina.
Programa de Conservación Ex-situ del Lince Ibérico

La Ley de Bienestar Animal

La interacción entre linces y gatos en Cabañas de Yepes ha generado una reacción social inesperada. En redes sociales, lejos de celebrar el regreso de una especie emblemática que estuvo a punto de desaparecer, muchos mensajes se centran en el drama de la muerte de los gatos y reclaman medidas contra el lince. Para muchas personas, la protección de los gatos de la calle debería llevar a intervenir contra los linces. En los casos extremos, incluso se llega a plantear su sacrificio. Invariablemente, estos mensajes se apoyan en la reciente Ley de Bienestar Animal.

La Ley 7/2023, de 28 de marzo, de protección de los derechos y el bienestar de los animales, aprobada en contra de gran parte de la comunidad científica y de los colegios profesionales de veterinarios y biólogos, otorga un alto grado de protección a las colonias felinas, estableciendo que los gatos tienen derecho a permanecer en el lugar donde se han asentado. En la mayor parte de los casos ese lugar es simplemente el lugar que alguien eligió para comenzar a aportar comida.

Leer más:
Las leyes de bienestar animal no deberían proteger a gatos callejeros, cotorras y mosquitos

La ley, además, atribuye a los ayuntamientos la responsabilidad sobre el cuidado de estas colonias. Por eso, cuando un lince ataca a los gatos, la gente exige al ayuntamiento que tome cartas en el asunto. Sin embargo, los ayuntamientos no tienen ninguna competencia para intervenir sobre una especie protegida como el lince ibérico.

Lince ibérico tumbado en un terreno con tierra y hierba — Lince ibérico.
Programa de Conservación Ex-situ del Lince Ibérico

Los gatos, mejor en casa

Plantear situaciones como la de Cabañas de Yepes en términos de un conflicto causado por el lince parte de una premisa equivocada: que un pueblo de 300 habitantes no es el hábitat de un lince, pero sí el de los gatos callejeros. Pero los gatos no deberían estar en la calle, por una serie de poderosas razones.

En primer lugar, los gatos matan muchísimos animales. Según nuestras estimaciones preliminares, los gatos domésticos con acceso al exterior o viviendo en él estarían matando centenares de millones de animales al año en España. Esta cifra supera por márgenes amplísimos a las asociadas a atropellos o a la actividad cinegética.

Leer más:
Cuando las mascotas devoran la biodiversidad: un conflicto sin regular en la Unión Europea

Quienes defienden la presencia de gatos en la calle suelen plantear que está en la naturaleza depredadora de los gatos matar otros animales, obviando que no es parte de la naturaleza que los gatos vivan y sean cuidados fuera de los hogares. En cualquier caso, el argumento sería el mismo para normalizar que un depredador salvaje mate a los gatos con los que se encuentre.

Además, los gatos callejeros suponen un enorme riesgo sanitario tanto para la fauna como por las enfermedades parasitarias que transmiten a las personas. El impacto de salud pública que tienen parásitos como Toxoplasma gondii, que se cree relacionado con un tercio de los casos de esquizofrenia, es en general ignorado. La costumbre de los gatos de enterrar sus excrementos en sustratos sueltos hace que un porcentaje muy alto de los parques infantiles, especialmente sus areneros, tengan huevos de Toxocara cati, un parásito responsable de la larva migrans visceral.

En la calle, los gatos viven mal y poco y, a menudo, mueren de forma violenta. A veces, las menos, porque se encuentran con un lince. La solución no es, por tanto, limitar al lince, sino entender que, por su seguridad, por la salud pública y por la integridad de la fauna, el lugar de los gatos domésticos no es la calle, sino el hogar, o, cuando esto no sea posible, recintos confinados.

La verdadera noticia no debería ser la pérdida de unos gatos domésticos en un entorno que no les corresponde, sino el triunfo, notable por infrecuente, de una naturaleza salvaje que vuelve a reclamar su espacio.

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.

– ref. Linces que matan gatos – https://theconversation.com/linces-que-matan-gatos-281389

April 24, 2026

Why the world’s banks are so worried about Anthropic’s latest AI model

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Toby Walsh, Professor of AI, Research Group Leader, UNSW Sydney

The legendary American bank robber Willie Sutton spent 40 years robbing banks because, as he claimed in his autobiography, he loved doing it. And when asked why he chose banks of all places to rob, he allegedly replied “Because that’s where the money is.”

Back in 2017, I wrote a book predicting it wasn’t just lovable rogues like Sutton who would soon be robbing banks, but artificial intelligence (AI).

That day, it appears, could now be about to arrive. Banks around the world are seriously worried cyber criminals will soon take advantage of the latest advances in AI to try to rob them.

The digital back door into the vault

The finance world’s concern rests on the impressive cyber capabilities of a product called “Mythos”. This is the latest and most capable AI model from Anthropic, the company behind the popular Claude chatbot.

As a member of the public, you can’t access or use this model – for now. That’s because Anthropic (and many others) believe Mythos is too capable to launch upon an unsuspecting world.

Internal testing of Mythos has uncovered thousands of severe security vulnerabilities across every major operating system and web browser.

Some of these vulnerabilities have gone undetected for decades. Many are what tech insiders call “zero day” vulnerabilities – attacks that are so dangerous that developers need to fix them in zero days’ time.

Not for public use

To counter this emerging threat, Anthropic has made the model available to a dozen partners of a defensive coalition that includes Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, Apple, Cisco and the Linux Foundation.

The company has also committed US$100 million (about A$140 million) in usage credits and US$4 million (about A$5.6 million) in open-source grants to start finding and fixing these bugs.

In addition, more than 40 additional organisations – including a number of US banks – have also received access. But worryingly, as far as we know, Anthropic has not yet granted access to any banks in Australia, the United Kingdom or Europe.

To add to concerns, on Wednesday, Anthropic confirmed it was investigating claims in a Bloomberg report that a small group of unauthorised users had gained access to Mythos. However, at this stage, there is no suggestion this alleged access was for malicious purposes.

Should you be worried?

Last week, regulators and policymakers from around the world gathered at the International Monetary Fund spring meeting in Washington. The Iran war was a major focus. But attendees also issued a series of warnings about this emerging cybersecurity threat to the banking industry.

Not only are banks an attractive target, being where the money is, but the industry runs on many legacy systems, decades old technology that may be especially vulnerable to these sorts of attacks.

You personally don’t need to be too worried. Many countries have strong protections for bank customers. In Australia, for example, the first A$250,000 of a customer’s deposits are insured through the government-backed Financial Claims Scheme.

And the Australian Securities and Investments Commission ensures banks investigate and reimburse fraudulent transactions where the customer is not at fault.

So, it’s probably not a wise idea to withdraw your cash and put it under the mattress. But banks should be (and are) rushing to plug these vulnerabilities.

I would recommend you regularly update your computer and smartphone to have the latest operating system and banking apps. There are likely to be many more updates in the near future as new vulnerabilities are uncovered and patched.

And, as I’m sure you have been, you need to be ever vigilant for phishing attacks by email and SMS trying to obtain your banking credentials.

The evolving threat landscape

In the longer term, Mythos exposes the challenge that defence is much harder than attack. Software is one of the most complex products humanity builds. It is therefore almost impossible to ensure it is bug-free.

That puts us in an unending race against the “bad guys” to uncover and fix faults before they get exploited.

For example, with significant fanfare, the European Union just released its age verification app, designed to be a cornerstone to the emerging laws on access to social media, pornography and other age-restricted content. However, within hours, security experts found cyber vulnerabilities that underage users could easily exploit.

In the most critical settings, we can try to prove mathematically that our software is bug-free. For instance, the Beneficial AI Foundation just announced an ambitious “moonshot” project to prove that the popular messaging app Signal is bug-free and protects privacy as claimed.

But such efforts are the exception today rather than the norm. Perhaps further advances in AI could soon help reverse this.

Toby Walsh receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a Laureate Fellowship on trustworthy AI.

– ref. Why the world’s banks are so worried about Anthropic’s latest AI model – https://theconversation.com/why-the-worlds-banks-are-so-worried-about-anthropics-latest-ai-model-281218

April 23, 2026

Heavy rain on snow is testing aging dams across Michigan and Wisconsin – this is the future in a warming world

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Richard B. (Ricky) Rood, Professor Emeritus of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, University of Michigan

In the upper Midwest, aging infrastructure, from dams to city drains, was overwhelmed by floodwater in April 2026. Jonathan Aguilar/Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service/CatchLight via Getty Images

Michigan and parts of Wisconsin are in the midst of a historic flooding event in spring 2026. Days of heavy rainfall on top of snow have sent lakes and rivers over their banks and threatened several dams in both states, forcing people to evacuate homes downstream.

By April 20, 2026, nearly half of Michigan’s counties were under a state of emergency. In Cheboygan, Michigan, large pumps were brought in to lower pressure on a century-old dam in the city.

The region’s aging water infrastructure was never designed for the volume of water it is facing. That’s a troubling sign for the future, with flooding becoming more common as global temperatures rise.

In many areas, the damage has been exacerbated by a culture of building homes and cabins on the shores of inland lakes and along riverine lakes behind small, often privately owned dams. Many of these dams were built over 100 years ago, with some long forgotten.

Michigan State Police captured scenes of stressed dams and flooding across Cheboygan County, near the tip of the Lower Peninsula, including the century-old dam in the city of Cheboygan that was nearly overwhelmed by flood water.

I am a professor emeritus of meteorology at the University of Michigan whose work focuses on helping communities adapt to climate change. The warming climate is worsening the flood risk, and disasters like the one Michigan is experiencing are setting higher benchmarks for safety as communities plan future infrastructure.

Where is all the water coming from?

For much of Michigan and Wisconsin, as well as northern Illinois, 2026 has been the wettest March and April on record.

In March, much of that precipitation fell as snow, including in an enormous blizzard that brought 3 feet of snow to parts of Michigan. In mid-April, persistent rains began. The rain, on top of all that snow, sent floodwaters running into rivers, streets and homes. The water carries large amounts of ice that damages shores, infrastructure and homes.

The moisture for much of these storms has been funneled northward from the warm Gulf of Mexico, thanks in part to a high pressure system sitting over the southeastern U.S.

A US map showing the highest increase in rainfall from extreme downpours across the Upper Midwest and Northeast. — Extreme downpours are becoming intense across the United states. This map shows the percentage change in total precipitation falling on the heaviest 1% of rainy days from 1958 to 2021.
NOAA/adapted from Fifth National Climate Assessment

The problem of warming winters

The kind of flooding Michigan and Wisconsin are experiencing in 2026 is what forecasters expect to see more of as global temperatures rise.

Winters have been warming faster than other seasons across the U.S. In Michigan and Wisconsin, winter months used to be reliably below freezing, but that’s changing. In the Cheboygan area, near the tip of Lower Michigan, March temperatures used to be below freezing on all but a few days. By the 1991-2020 period, the region averaged 10 days above or close to the freezing point – about twice as many as the 1951-1980 period.

Charts show the shift toward warmer March weather. — March is warming, as a comparison of daily high temperatures in the Cheboygan area in 1991-2020 and 1951-1980 shows. The bar chart comparison shows that the number days above freezing is rising.
GLISA

The air coming in from the south is also warmer than in the past. Nationally, 2026 was the warmest March on record in 132 years of record-keeping in the contiguous U.S., with an average temperature more than 9 degrees Fahrenheit (5 degrees Celsius) higher than the 30-year average. So, in addition to snowmelt starting earlier, melting is happening faster.

Michigan’s average wintertime temperature rose by more than 4 F (2.3 C) from 1951 to 2023. Though winter 2026 in Michigan was colder than the 1991-2020 average, the Gulf of Mexico, where the moisture originated, was warmer than average, accelerating the snowmelt.

How warming leads to downpours and flooding

A few aspects of a warming climate can lead to flooding.

First, temperatures are increasing. In higher temperatures, moisture evaporates faster from the ground, plants and surface water. That moisture, once in the atmosphere, eventually falls again as precipitation. However, for each degree Celsius that temperatures increase, the atmosphere can hold about 7% more moisture, resulting in more heavy downpours.

A warmer winter also means more melting snow and more rain-on-snow events that can quickly increase the amount of runoff into rivers.

Much of the upper Midwest was exceptionally wet in March and April 2026. — Since March 1, 2026, most of Michigan and Wisconsin have experienced their wettest stretch in the 134 years that the region’s precipitation has been recorded.
Iowa Environmental Mesonet

The Great Lakes region and much of the Northeast already experience more precipitation than in the past. Winters with more persistent wetness – not just snow but also rain – prime the region for floods. With continued warming in the coming decades, 2026 might be among the least disruptive in the future.

Data shows that a scenario of persistent wetness, changes in winter and seasonal runoff is part of the future for Michigan and the other states and Canadian provinces along the Great Lakes Basin, as well as New England.

Fixing dams for the future

All of this means communities across the region will have to pay closer attention to the growing risks facing their vital infrastructure – particularly dams.

Even prior to the 2026 floods, Michigan had a well-documented problem with its aging inventory of 2,600 dams. In May 2020, an intense storm system that stalled over the region brought so much rain that the Edenville and Sanford dams both failed near Midland, Michigan, forcing 10,000 people to evacuate and causing an estimated US$200 million in damage.

After that disaster, a state task force issued recommendations for fixing the state’s water control infrastructure to meet the growing risks. But a member of the task force told The Detroit News in April 2026 that little had been done to address those recommendations.

Water spills from the Cheyboygan dam, where the water level came close to the top, threatening the century-old dam's integrity. — Officials ordered evacuations as floodwater nearly overwhelmed the century-old dam in Cheboygan, Mich., in April 2026.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources via AP

Because warming will continue for the coming decades, the 2026 flooding should be considered at the lower end of capacity for stormwater infrastructure and dams. Rather than relying on the statistics that described floods in the past, planners will have to anticipate the floods of the future.

Michigan is often touted as a climate haven because it is relatively cool and has plenty of water. The state is not, however, immune to the amped-up weather of a warming climate. Environmental security in the future requires improved and more adaptive infrastructure.

Richard B. (Ricky) Rood receives funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

– ref. Heavy rain on snow is testing aging dams across Michigan and Wisconsin – this is the future in a warming world – https://theconversation.com/heavy-rain-on-snow-is-testing-aging-dams-across-michigan-and-wisconsin-this-is-the-future-in-a-warming-world-281221

April 23, 2026

Strait of Hormuz: Iran’s ‘nuclear deterrent’

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor, The Conversation

This is the text from The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email. Sign up here to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

Napoleon Bonaparte is said to have commented in connection with his invasion of Russia that “geography is destiny”. Take a look at a live maritime tracker to see how Napoleon’s aphorism is playing out in the Middle East today. There are presently hundreds of vessels either side of the Strait of Hormuz, idling in either the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Oman. But nothing is passing though.

In normal times, 20% of the world’s oil flows through this waterway. But since the US and Israel began to launch attacks at the end of February, Iran has effectively closed down the Strait, both by depositing mines and by threatening to board any ships trying to pass without their permission.

The US has countered with its own blockade. And both sides have demonstrated how serious they are in recent days by threatening, boarding or forcing vessels to reroute.

That Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz should have come as no surprise to anyone. The leaders of the Islamic Republic have threatened to do so every time they have felt under threat over more than four decades. Christian Emery, an expert in US-Iran relations and Persian Gulf security at University College London, believes this is why no previous US president has chosen to launch a full-scale attack on Iran.

As we’ve already seen, the ability of Iran to hugely disrupt the global economy by shutting down the Strait was obvious: “The only person who seems not to have understood this is Donald Trump,” Emery concludes.

So now there appears to be a deadlock. It’s an unwinnable war, write Bamo Nouri and Inderjeet Parmar, experts in international security at City St George’s, University of London. The US and Israel may enjoy massive military superiority over Iran, but this is beside the point, Nouri and Parmar believe.

While both the US president, Donald Trump, and Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, need to be able to demonstrate to their voters that they have emerged triumphant, Iran isn’t looking to win. It is looking to endure – while making sure that the cost of this conflict becomes unsustainable. And not just for the US and Israel, but for pretty much everybody else besides.

We’re already seeing that. Oil prices have surged and reserves are coming under strain. Supply chains are disrupted. And political friction is stressing relationships, not just between the US and its Nato allies, but – more ominously – with China, which typically buys between 80% and 90% of Iran’s oil exports and said this week that the Strait must be opened without delay.

Iran, our experts conclude, “does not need to win. It only needs to prevent its adversaries from achieving their aims. So far, it has done exactly that.”

There’s a principle in classical game theory which explains why Iran’s position is so strong. It’s known as Rubinstein bargaining, writes Renaud Foucart, an economist at Lancaster University. As Foucart explains it, this holds that in a conflict the respective strength of adversaries each depends on two things: “how badly off it would be without a resolution, and how impatient it is to get things resolved”.

As we’ve heard, all the pressure is on the US, while the leverage is mainly in Iran’s hands. “The US’s position is much weaker than first thought because of a stretch of water the world can’t do without,” he concludes.

On Tuesday, as we waited to see what might happen if the 14-day deadline imposed by Trump on April 8 expired without Tehran opening the Strait, it was clear that both the US and Iran, to varying degrees, were looking for an off-ramp. The blockade is financially ruinous for Iran – whether it is losing US$500 million (£370 million) a day, as Trump claims, we don’t know. But the shutting down of its oil exports is hitting an already parlous economy and this week the social security minister said 2 million people had lost their jobs since the beginning of the war.

For Trump, it’s soaring prices at the gas pumps and the prospect of rising inflation angering voters ahead of November’s midterm elections. The war is very unpopular with Americans – and, significantly, it’s beginning to fracture the Maga coalition which brought Trump to power in the 2024 election.

But there are ways both sides can find off-ramps, writes David Galbreath of the University of Bath. The key thing is to find a settlement that the leaders of both sides can sell as a “win”.

For Iran, this could be an easing of sanctions and access to some of the many billions of dollars of frozen assets held overseas. It could be a recognition of its right to enrich uranium to the level needed for medical uses – particularly given the recent assertion by the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, that such a solution would “safeguard its [Iran’s] national sovereignty”.

We know a little about what Iran is prepared to offer because a great deal of it was on the table in February when the US and Israel launched their strikes. But one of the stumbling blocks for the US president appears to be that Iran’s proposals may too closely resemble the deal struck in 2015 by his predecessor, Barack Obama.

But Galbreath concludes that as things stand, some combination of opening the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of limits on uranium enrichment and agreeing to stringent inspections could be made to appear a “win” for Trump. This could be a starting point, writes Galbreath, in what is known in conflict resolution as “sequenced de‑escalation”. It could deliver an initial settlement and allow negotiators on both sides to get to work and hammer out the details. Obama’s treaty took 20 months to agree. It’s early days yet.

One stumbling block is likely to be that there appears to be something of a power struggle raging at the top of Iranian politics. This was seen very clearly last weekend, when Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, announced that the Strait of Hormuz was completely open, only to be swiftly overruled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which said it would decide when and how the Strait would be opened.

Since then, a new figure has emerged at the head of the IRGC: a longtime guards member and hardline former commander of its elite Quds force, Ahmad Vahidi. And it seems that with Iran’s freshly minted supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, badly injured after the attack that killed his father on February 28, Vahidi is now calling the shots in Iran. Andreas Krieg, an expert in Middle East politics at King’s College London explains the power struggle that has led to Vahidi assuming control.

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

– ref. Strait of Hormuz: Iran’s ‘nuclear deterrent’ – https://theconversation.com/strait-of-hormuz-irans-nuclear-deterrent-281376

April 23, 2026

Why the Southeast is burning – extreme drought is only part of the reason

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Zachary Handlos, Atmospheric Science Educator, Georgia Institute of Technology

Fire crews responded to dozens of wildfires burning in Georgia and northern Florida on April 23, 2026. Georgia Department of Natural Resources via AP

Large parts of the southeastern U.S. are in the midst of an exceptional drought, and it is fueling dozens of wildfires in Florida and Georgia.

One of those wildfires, in southeastern Georgia’s Brantley County, had destroyed more than 50 homes by April 23, and state officials said about 1,000 other homes were at risk. Another fire near the Georgia-Florida border had burned almost 30,000 acres and was only about 10% contained. The smoke from the blazes triggered air quality alerts in Atlanta, in the north-central part of the state.

So why is a region of the U.S. more often known for thunderstorms and humidity in spring seeing so many wildfires?

A forested area with a burned-out vehicle, burned trees and gray ash covering everything. — A fire near the Florida-Georgia line had burned nearly 30,000 acres by April 23, 2026, leaving ash behind.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources via AP

I teach meteorology at the Georgia Institute of Technology, including how weather patterns can lead to conditions conducive to wildfires. Here’s what’s happening to drive these conditions:

Key ingredients for a wildfire

Wildfires need a few key ingredients to spread: low relative humidity, dry fuels and strong winds.

Much of the Southeast has been in a drought since July 2025. From mid-March to mid-April 2026, the region saw less than a quarter of its normal precipitation for that time of year.

A U.S. map showing very dry conditions over much of the eastern U.S., the Southwest and the Great Plains. — A map showing how far above or below average precipitation has been in each region from mid-March to mid-April 2026 shows just how dry much of the U.S. Southeast has been.
Drought.gov

As a result, the U.S. Drought Monitor classified most of this region in “extreme” or “exceptional” drought by mid-April.

In the map of the Southeast, an area of exceptional drought stretches from the Florida Panhandle to central coastal Georgia. much of the rest of the two states are extreme drought. — A map of the U.S. Southeast as of April 21, 2026, shows exceptional drought across the Georgia-Florida border area and extreme drought in many other areas.
Brian Fuchs, National Drought Mitigation Center/U.S. Drought Monitor

Part of the reason for the lack of rainfall has been a persistent high-pressure system over the Southeast.

High-pressure systems are areas where air aloft sinks toward the surface, preventing clouds and precipitation from forming. The Southeast high-pressure system resulted from the presence of a “ridge” in the jet stream, a northward bend in this fast current of air several miles above Earth’s surface.

Another consequence of this high pressure has been the presence of generally southeast winds, which have transported warm and fairly dry air into the area.

The relative humidity – a measure of the amount of moisture in the air relative to the maximum amount the air can contain at its actual air temperature – has also been very low due to warmer-than-usual temperatures and lower-than-usual moisture.

A weather map shows the high-pressure system over the Southeast keeping conditions dry. — A weather map from the Global Forecast System shows the forecasted low-pressure (red L) and high-pressure (blue H) systems.
Pivotal Weather

As a result of these conditions, trees, grass and leaves dry out and can quickly become fuel for wildfires. That kind of dry fuel is widespread throughout rural areas of Georgia and north Florida.

Once a fire starts, whether from lightning, power lines or other human sources, strong winds can spread it rapidly in these conditions.

What’s ahead for the region?

As global temperatures rise, the frequency of drought conditions in the Southeast will increase. This, in combination with less soil moisture content in the summer, could be conducive for increased wildfire activity.

Wildfires do eventually burn out. It takes a combination of help from the atmosphere, with moisture to douse them, and firefighters clearing away dry fuel to stop their spread.

Georgia and Florida may get a reprieve soon from the weather, as multiple low-pressure systems are forecast for the region in late April and early May that could bring rainfall. In the meantime, more than half of Georgia’s counties are under a state of emergency, as several agencies battle the flames to protect homes with helicopters in the air and firefighters on the ground.

Dr. Zachary Handlos receives funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation. He is affiliated with the Georgia Institute of Technology (i.e., “Georgia Tech”) School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences (EAS) and is the Director of their Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (AOS) undergraduate degree program. He is also currently the chair of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) Board on Higher Education (BHE).

– ref. Why the Southeast is burning – extreme drought is only part of the reason – https://theconversation.com/why-the-southeast-is-burning-extreme-drought-is-only-part-of-the-reason-281392

April 23, 2026

Supreme Court’s ‘shadow docket’ brings hasty decisions with long-lasting implications, outside of its usual careful deliberation

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Wayne Unger, Associate Professor of Law, Quinnipiac University

The U.S. Supreme Court is being criticized for decisions that are made quickly and outside of public view. Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The recent publication of confidential Supreme Court memoranda by The New York Times has brought to light a pivotal moment in the court’s history. “The birth of the Supreme Court’s shadow docket has long been a mystery,” wrote reporters Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak. “Until now.”

Originally coined by legal scholar William Baude, the term “shadow docket” refers to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket, which, as Baude wrote, includes “a range of orders and summary decisions that defy its normal procedural regularity.”

That’s law professor-speak for cases that are given abbreviated consideration and accelerated review by the justices, all out of public view – what The New York Times story referred to as the court “sprinting.” These cases aren’t included in the annual list of cases the justices have chosen to consider and that are presented by attorneys in public sessions, called “oral argument,” at the court.

During the second Trump administration, such shadow docket cases have proliferated as President Donald Trump has continued to push boundaries, challenge precedents and expand executive power. These cases have typically involved a request by the presidential administration “to suspend lower court orders” that temporarily block “an administration policy from taking effect,” according to liberal legal advocacy group the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.

The lack of transparency in considering and ruling on the shadow docket, combined with the weight of the issues presented to the court via that docket, mean that the practice has come under strong criticism by many court watchers. Here’s how the process works and what you need to know to evaluate it.

A man with short hair, wearing a black robe over a white shirt and blue tie. — Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts played a key role in pressing for the court to consider a major case first through the shadow docket.
Leah Millis-Pool/Getty Images

The merits docket

The emergency docket is different from the court’s merits docket, which is the customary path for cases to reach the Supreme Court.

Ordinarily, in federal courts, a case begins in a federal district court. An appeal of the decision in the case is made to a federal appeals court. If a party in the case wants to appeal further, they can aim for U.S. Supreme Court review. That requires filing a “petition for writ of certiorari” to the court.

The Supreme Court does not take all the cases for which it has been petitioned. The court holds complete discretion to choose which cases to consider each term and always rejects the vast majority of petitions that it receives. By custom, the court agrees to consider a case if at least four justices vote to grant the writ of certiorari.

For the cases that the court agrees to consider, the parties to that case file briefs – written legal arguments – with the Supreme Court. Third parties can also file briefs with the court to assert their own arguments; these are known as “friend of the court” or amicus curiae briefs.

The justices then read those briefs and hear oral arguments in the case in a public session, during which they can question attorneys for both sides, before they meet and confer. At the end of this conference, the justices vote on the outcome in the case before assigning an author to draft the opinions.

The merits docket – the ordinary process – is methodical. It promotes deliberation and reasoned decision-making resulting in lengthy opinions that explain the justices’ rationale and provide guidance for lower courts in future cases.

The emergency docket

On the other hand, the emergency docket is a process whereby the court makes quick decisions without full briefing and deliberation, and it produces orders and rulings that almost always present little to no explanation.

As Baude wrote, “Many of the orders lack the transparency that we have come to appreciate in its merits cases.”

Most of the court’s rulings and orders in cases on the emergency docket go without explanation. On occasion, however, the court produces short opinions that provide some explanation in emergency docket cases, albeit these are often dissents from the justices who disagree with the ruling.

Transparency is important, especially for the Supreme Court, because it builds trust and legitimacy. According to Gallup, as of September 2025, 42% of respondents approve, 52% disapprove and 6% have no opinion of the Supreme Court. A 2025 Pew Research Center poll found that 48% of Americans have a favorable view of the court, down from 70% five years earlier.

As a constitutional law scholar, I’ve written elsewhere that the low approval might be attributable to the court’s undisciplined overruling of landmark cases regarding individual rights, such as the abortion rights case Roe v. Wade. In my view, it is reasonable to conclude that the court’s lack of transparency, specifically with its growing emergency docket, contributes to distrust in the court.

As the late Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated, “The Court’s power lies … in its legitimacy, a product of substance and perception that shows itself in the people’s acceptance of the Judiciary as fit to determine what the Nation’s law means and to declare what it demands.”

Conversely, a lack of transparency breeds distrust and erodes institutional legitimacy.

Unprecedented action

The 2016 case at the center of the memoranda published by The New York Times –West Virginia v. EPA – concerned environmental regulation. As the justices’ memoranda illustrate, West Virginia, North Dakota and several energy companies sued the Obama administration over its Clean Power Plan and sought to block the new, transformative regulation from going into effect.

The Clean Power Plan would have required states and energy companies to shift electricity production from higher-emitting to lower-emitting production methods to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

After losing at the trial court, the states and energy companies filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court asking the justices to pause the Obama regulation from going into effect while the parties litigated the case in the lower courts.

This was a highly unusual request because, as Taraleigh Davis at SCOTUSblog confirms, “nobody had previously asked the court to halt such a major executive regulatory action before any appellate court had ruled on it.”

The court granted the unprecedented stay on Feb. 9, 2016, without any explanation as to why it temporarily blocked the Clean Power Plan. It eventually struck down the plan on June 22, 2022.

Defenders of the emergency docket frequently claim that the court’s conduct is permissible because its orders are temporary. In West Virginia v. EPA, the court temporarily blocked the Clean Power Plan from going into effect until it eventually struck it down after hearing the case on its merits docket.

What is overlooked, however, is that even temporary orders from the court can have lasting implications that are difficult, and in some cases impossible, to undo.

Damage done

A group of people holding signs and speaking in front of a large, white building with pillars. — Advocates for Haitians holding temporary protected status appear at a press conference on March 16, 2026, in front of the Supreme Court, which has agreed to rule through its shadow docket on whether they can remain in the U.S.
Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images

Consider the example of one of Trump’s immigration actions.

The administration seeks to terminate the temporary protected status for Haitian nationals, which had shielded them from deportation. But a federal district court temporarily blocked the president from doing so as the litigation continued.

The administration then filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court – still pending as of this writing – asking the court to overrule the district court. If granted, the court effectively would allow the administration to revoke TPS for Haitian nationals.

As an amicus brief in the case articulated, if TPS is revoked, Haitians “will be forced to face the untenable options of leaving behind their citizen children and/or partners, bringing family members with them to a country submerged in crisis, violence, and food insecurity, or staying in the U.S. without any legal status or work authorization and facing the constant threat of deportation.”

In other words, if the Supreme Court overrules the district court in this case on its emergency docket, then the Trump administration could deport the Haitian nationals even as their cases challenging the revocation of their TPS continue.

If the Haitian nationals ultimately prevail, reversing their deportation would be exceptionally difficult to do.

Wayne Unger does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Supreme Court’s ‘shadow docket’ brings hasty decisions with long-lasting implications, outside of its usual careful deliberation – https://theconversation.com/supreme-courts-shadow-docket-brings-hasty-decisions-with-long-lasting-implications-outside-of-its-usual-careful-deliberation-281212

April 23, 2026

World Immunization Week: Why postal codes shouldn’t determine RSV protection in Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sophie Webb, Postdoctoral Fellow, Bridge Research Consortium, Simon Fraser University

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a familiar seasonal illness, but the tools to prevent it are new. Canada has recently approved vaccines for older adults and pregnant people, along with a long-acting monoclonal antibody that can protect infants through their first RSV season.

These innovations offer new ways to reduce hospitalizations and severe illness. Yet whether Canadians can access them still depends largely on where they live.

Across the country, provincial RSV programs vary widely in eligibility, scope and public funding — see, for example, Ontario RSV program updates and Alberta immunization program information.

An infant eligible for publicly funded protection in one province may not be eligible in another. Seniors with similar health risks may face different access depending on their province. These differences are often dismissed as routine features of federalism.

But with World Immunization Week upon us, RSV provides the opportunity to ask a broader question: who’s responsible for delivering equitable access to vaccines in Canada?

Immunity and Society is a new series from The Conversation Canada that presents new vaccine discoveries and immune-based innovations that are changing how we understand and protect human health. Through a partnership with the Bridge Research Consortium, these articles — written by experts in Canada at the forefront of immunology, biomanufacturing, social science and humanities — explore the latest developments and their impacts.

New tools, uneven access

RSV prevention now includes vaccines for older adults and pregnant people, and a monoclonal antibody (nirsevimab) that offers season-long protection for infants with a single dose.

National guidance exists. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommends universal infant RSV immunization, but allows provinces to phase this in based on supply and cost. But these recommendations are advisory. Provinces ultimately decide what is publicly funded and for whom.

The result is a patchwork. Some provinces have expanded infant coverage, while others have limited access to those considered high risk. Adult and maternal programs also vary in eligibility, delivery and funding.

Cost plays a key role in these decisions. RSV therapies are expensive, and provinces must weigh them against competing health priorities. Epidemiological differences also matter, as do variations in disease burden and the additional challenges of vaccination in northern and remote communities.

Not all variation is inherently problematic. But together, these factors mean that access to protection is shaped as much by provincial priorities as by medical need.

When equity’s a goal but not a guarantee

In immunization policy, equity generally means ensuring that those at higher risk, or facing barriers to access, are protected first, and financial or geographic differences don’t determine who receives care.

RSV programs often emphasize protecting those at highest clinical risk, such as very young infants and people with underlying conditions. This approach is understandable. But it also narrows how equity operates in practice.

In a system where provinces determine their own budgets and priorities, equity can become something negotiated rather than guaranteed. One province may fund broader access; another may limit eligibility based on cost-effectiveness or capacity. The same intervention is therefore available to some populations and not others.

This shifts responsibility downward. Families must determine eligibility, navigate different rules, and sometimes absorb costs or logistical barriers to access. Equity becomes something people experience unevenly, rather than a guarantee built into the system.

COVID-19 offers a cautionary example. Communities identified as highest risk were often vaccinated later than wealthier neighbourhoods during early rollout phases. This prompted provinces to introduce reactive “hotspot” strategies that in some cases replicated the same effect. Simply naming groups as “equity-deserving” did not ensure timely access.

People in masks are vaccinated by health-care workers in protective gear inside a tent — A pop-up vaccine clinic in a Toronto hotspot neighbourhood in April 2021.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Cole Burston

Governance and accountability

Canada’s immunization system involves multiple entities. Federal bodies approve products and issue recommendations. Provinces decide what to fund. Public health systems implement programs within local constraints.

While each level plays an essential role, none is clearly responsible for national equity, creating a governance gap.

Equity is widely endorsed, but no single body is accountable for delivering it nationally. RSV demonstrates how this plays out in practice — variation in immunization is accepted as a feature of federalism, rather than treated as a policy problem to be addressed.

Procurement adds another layer. Vaccine pricing and contract terms are not routinely disclosed in Canada, and negotiations with manufacturers are often confidential.

During COVID-19, federal vaccine contracts were released only after parliamentary pressure, with key details heavily redacted. Limited transparency makes it difficult to assess whether differences in access reflect pricing, negotiation leverage or policy choices.

Why it matters

RSV is one of the first major post-pandemic tests of Canada’s immunization system. It’s unlikely to be the last. New vaccines and antibody-based therapies are increasingly tailored to specific populations, making decisions about access more complex.

As these technologies evolve, governance matters more, not less. Without clearer accountability, innovations risk reinforcing variation rather than reducing it.

RSV highlights a broader challenge in Canadian immunization policy — equity is widely invoked, but responsibility for delivering it remains diffuse. Without clearer co-ordination, transparency and shared expectations, access to protection will continue to depend on where people live.

For families of infants and seniors, that distinction is not abstract. It determines whether immunity is treated as a public good, or as a matter of postal code.

Cora Constantinescu receives funding from bioMerieux, GSK, merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, with funds being transferred to her University organisation

Sophie Webb 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. World Immunization Week: Why postal codes shouldn’t determine RSV protection in Canada – https://theconversation.com/world-immunization-week-why-postal-codes-shouldnt-determine-rsv-protection-in-canada-278717