Friday essay: ‘nothing quite like it in the history of espionage’ – the Russian spies who pretended to be American

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Alexander Howard, Senior Lecturer, Discipline of English and Writing, University of Sydney

In the thrilling finale of the TV series The Americans, set during the Reagan administration, deep-cover KGB operatives Philip and Elizabeth Jennings are faced with a difficult decision. Posing as an ordinary American married couple, for decades they have raised children, filed tax returns and slipped effortlessly into the rhythms and routines of everyday suburban existence in Washington, D.C.

All the while, they’ve been spying – gathering intelligence and surreptitiously feeding it to their communist masters in Soviet Moscow. Now, with the FBI closing in and their cover on the brink of collapse, they must decide whether to stay and face arrest or flee the country they’ve come to call home. There’s also their teenage children to consider.

The story seemed too incredible to be true – but in fact it was based in part on Donald Heathfield and Ann Foley, subsequently outed as Andrei Bezrukov and Elena Vavilova, a Russian couple who had spent more than 20 years masquerading as Canadians. At the time of their unmasking, they were living quietly in the United States with Tim and Alex, their two sons.


Review: The Illegals: Russia’s Most Audacious Spies and the Plot to Infiltrate the West – Shaun Walker (Profile)


A new book, The Illegals, tells of a network of Russian agents operating across the US, during the late 20th and early 21st centuries – including Bezrukov and Vavilova. It opens with their dramatic 2010 arrest, part of ten Russian spies (mostly illegals like them) detained by the FBI.

Author Shaun Walker, the Guardian’s central and eastern Europe correspondent, draws on declassified archival material and first-hand interviews. The result is an engrossing, eye-opening account of the secret world of the Soviet “illegals programme”: embedded spies who lived surreptitiously in the West without the safety blanket of diplomatic protection.

As Walker explains, “legals” were Russian operatives working under official cover – as diplomats or embassy staff, privy to diplomatic immunity. By contrast, “illegals” operated off the grid. They crept silently into Western countries under false identities, often stolen from the dead. This made them harder to detect, but left them far more vulnerable if exposed.

One of the most high-profile figures in the 2010 spy bust was Anna Chapman. Unlike many other illegals, Chapman didn’t even bother to disguise her Russian identity. Instead, as Walker recounts, she entered America using a British passport – acquired through a brief marriage to a UK citizen – and worked as a New York real estate broker.

Her photogenic looks and media-friendly persona made her the public face of the scandal. After being deported, Chapman reinvented herself as a television host, runway model and pro-Kremlin influencer.

The real Americans

Walker outlines how Bezrukov and Vavilova first met in the early 1980s, as history students in Siberia. There, KGB “spotters” identified them for potential recruitment. Later, he adds,

they progressed to an arduous training programme lasting several years, moulding their language, mannerisms and identities into those of an ordinary couple. They left the Soviet Union separately in 1987, staged a meeting in Canada, and began a relationship as if they had just met.

Having married under their assumed names, Andrei and Elena adopted the habits and customs of an ordinary middle-class life. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the couple were cut off from Moscow, but by the end of the decade they were reactivated by the SVR, Russia’s new foreign intelligence agency. Around this time, Andrei won a place at Harvard’s Kennedy School, allowing the family to move to Massachusetts and integrate further into American society.

As Andrei networked in academic and policy circles, Elena maintained the illusion of domestic normality, fashioning herself as a doting “soccer mom”, raising the kids and keeping house. Meanwhile, she was secretly decoding encrypted radio messages in the back room.

This went on for years. Then, one day, an unexpected knock on the door as they celebrated their son Tim’s 20th birthday brought the charade crashing down. FBI agents burst in, handcuffed the couple in front of their sons and marched them out into the street.

Soon after their arrest, Andrei and Elena were deported to Russia in a high-profile spy swap. They were awarded state honours by Vladimir Putin and briefly became minor celebrities in Moscow. Their sons, both born in Canada, were left reeling.

In 2016, Walker tracked the sons down for a piece he was writing for The Guardian: they were in the process of suing the Canadian government to have their citizenship reinstated, having been stripped of it when everything kicked off. In 2019, a court ruled Tim and Alex (who was 16 when the FBI arrested his parents) could keep their citizenship. Both insisted they had known nothing about their parents’ espionage work.

Alex Valivov, son of Russian ‘illegal’ spies disguised as Americans, talked to the media after he won a court bid to keep his Canadian citizenship.

Putin ‘beside himself’

As Walker recounts, the raid had been coordinated by then-FBI director Robert Mueller. It had been timed to avoid derailing a carefully planned diplomatic summit.

In 2009, Barack Obama launched a high-profile “reset” of relations with Russia. Obama wanted to woo Dmitry Medvedev – a moderate political figurehead standing in for Putin, who remained the real power behind the scenes in Russia.

A planned summit in Washington intended to cement the spirit of renewed cooperation. But as the scale of Russia’s covert operation became apparent, the White House was faced with a dilemma: how to respond without jeopardising the reset.

According to Walker, Obama was irked by the whole situation. He quipped that it felt like something out of a John Le Carré novel. Eventually, a compromise was reached: the arrests would happen, but only after Medvedev’s visit, so as not to cause undue embarrassment.

Colonel Aleksandr Poteyev, deputy head of Directorate “S” of the SVR, was the man overseeing the illegals scheme. After the arrests were made, he quietly walked out of the agency headquarters in Yasenevo for the last time. He was the mole who had tipped off the Americans. From there, he made his way to Ukraine, where the CIA could safely extricate him to the US. On hearing the news, Putin was reportedly beside himself with rage, Walker writes.

Intrigued by this “twisted family story”, Walker started to look into the illegals venture in greater depth. He quickly realised “there was nothing quite like it in the history of espionage”. At times, various intelligence agencies had deployed operatives as foreign nationals, “but never with the scope or scale of the KGB programme”.

A century of dramatic, bloody history

The illegals were, in Walker’s reckoning, something uniquely Russian, rooted in the country’s complex historical experience. The more he read, the more he came to view the programme as a lens through which he could “tell a much bigger story, of the whole Soviet experiment and its ultimate failure, a century of dramatic and bloody history”.

To understand how the illegals project came about, Walker winds the clock all the way back to 1917, when the Bolsheviks seized power – and espionage became a cornerstone of the nascent Soviet state. He reminds us while Lenin and his comrades had won formal control of the nation, “they still faced the colossal task of implementing and retaining it across the vast Russian landmass”.

Gripped by his belief in the predictive principles of historical materialism,

Lenin was sure that state institutions would eventually wither away, the evolving worker’s paradise rendering them meaningless. However, to achieve this happy end point, he believed an interim period of ruthless state violence was required.

The Cheka: precursor to the KGB

This helps to explain why he established the Cheka, a secret police force tasked with crushing counterrevolutionary activity and enforcing Bolshevik rule. At its head was Feliks Dzerzhinsky, a fanatical Polish ideologue who had spent years in Siberian exile. Far from a temporary measure, the Cheka “quickly grew to a huge fighting force that could be unleashed on political and class enemies”, Walker writes.

Feliks Dzierzynski was the head of the Cheka, the Russian secret police force that preceded the KGB.
Wikimedia Commons

The Cheka was an important player in the Russian Civil War, which pitted Lenin’s Reds against the Whites – a loose alliance of pro-tsarist regiments and foreign mercenaries, often united by little more than their implacable hatred of Bolshevism. The situation on the ground was chaotic and unpredictable; both sides engaged in ruthless violence.

Here, in this blood-drenched crucible, the Bolsheviks honed their clandestine methods – konspiratsiya (subterfuge) – perfecting the use of disguises, false identities and underground communication. In areas where the Whites gained a territorial foothold, agents were ordered to stay behind and coordinate resistance, laying the groundwork for what would become the illegals programme.

When the Bolsheviks emerged victorious in 1921, the Cheka was not disbanded – but repurposed. The practice of planting operatives deep inside enemy lines survived the war and expanded in scope. Lenin’s idea of combining legal diplomatic work with illegal undercover infiltration became a defining feature of how the Soviet Union would run its intelligence services for the next 70 years.

Stalin’s secret police

Under Lenin’s successor, Joseph Stalin, the secret police was transformed into an all-encompassing instrument of surveillance, repression and domination.

Purges consumed the party. Ideological fervour curdled into show trials and murderous terror. And paranoia became an organising principle of Soviet political life. The demand for vigilance intensified – not just at home, where informants and denunciations became routine, but also abroad. Real and purported enemies were seen lurking in the democratic institutions of the West.

Ironies abound here. The very methods that helped to sustain the early Soviet state – secrecy, trickery, duplicity – soon became grounds for suspicion on Stalin’s watch. The generation of illegals trained and embedded during the 1920s and early 1930s were among those earmarked for liquidation, Walker writes. Stalin, ever wary of plots against him, came to view his own spies as potential traitors.

He ignored – or wilfully dismissed – much of the intelligence they had risked their lives to gather, often with disastrous consequences. When advance warnings of Operation Barbarossa, Hitler’s secret plan to betray Stalin and launch a massive invasion of the Soviet Union, landed on his desk in 1941, for instance, they were waved away as provocation or outright fabrication. In some cases, he had his spies tortured or shot. Loyalty was no protector against paranoia.

Dmitry Bystrolyotov was a legend in Soviet intelligence circles.
Alchetron

Among the casualties was Dmitry Bystrolyotov, who Walker describes as “perhaps the most talented illegal in the history of the programme”. A truly chameleonic figure, Bystrolyotov was a dashing and multilingual agent whose exploits in Western Europe made him a legend in Soviet intelligence circles. “His speciality was the recruitment of agents who had access to diplomatic codes and ciphers,” the Russian scholar Emil Draitser attests, “and his modus operandi involved women”.

Through a series of painstakingly crafted affairs, Bystrolyotov gained access to confidential dispatches, internal memos and state secrets. His work offered Stalin a rare glimpse into the inner workings of Europe’s ruling elite. But when The Great Terror rolled around in 1937, none of it mattered. He was arrested, sentenced and dispatched to the Gulag, callously tossed aside by the system he had served with such distinction.

Walker emphasises:

the history of the illegals offers a neat reflection of the story of Russia itself. The early programme, with its soaring ambition, its obsession with subterfuge, and its disregard for the well-being of individuals, holds up a mirror to the fiery utopianism of the early Soviet Union.

Did the Cold War really end?

These were people expected to vanish into enemy territory, sacrifice their identifies and live double lives, all in service of a revolutionary vision. But by the time the Soviet Union spluttered to an ignominious halt in 1991, that dream had long since died.

As Walker shows, most of the operatives who followed in the footsteps of Bystrolyotov were not darkly romantic infiltrators scaling embassy walls or charming secrets out of countesses. They were “sleepers” – often efficient, occasionally incompetent – blending quietly into Western cities and suburbs, awaiting a call to action that, in many cases, never came. The glitz had given way to the grind.

The Americans ends with Phillip and Elizabeth, the couple based on Bezrukov and Vavilova, gazing out across the Moscow skyline. Two weary spies coming in from the cold, they have returned to a rapidly unravelling motherland that may not understand – let alone appreciate – the sacrifices they have made in the service of its ideology.

As Walker discovered, Berzukov, when he isn’t being paid handsomely by an oil company, now lectures in international relations at one of Russia’s most prestigious universities. Vavilova, fittingly enough, now writes spy fiction.

Yet in real life, the story doesn’t end quite there. Under Putin, a former KGB officer who cut his teeth in the culture of espionage, Russia’s intelligence services have returned to the illegals programme with a renewed sense of purpose (though stripped of the ideological zeal that once propelled it).

Walker is careful not to indulge in idle speculation, but he points to compelling evidence suggesting the illegals programme has evolved rather than vanished. High-profile attacks on UK soil – including the poisoning of form spy Sergei Skripal – suggest Russian intelligence agencies remain willing to operate far beyond their national borders.

In the same breath, Walker describes what might be termed the digital turn of the illegals programme. In the place of suburban sleepers decoding radio signals, Russia has backed teams of online operatives – “troll illegals” – tasked with wrecking havoc across Western social media platforms.

These paid agents don’t gather intelligence so much as sow discord. They stoke culture wars, amplify political divisions and undermine trust in democratic institutions. Walker offers Russia’s meddling in the rancorous 2016 American election as an illustrative case in point.

In Putin’s merciless autocracy, secrecy has once again became a virtue – and the spy, far from being a dusty relic of the 20th century, is once again a symbol of national strength.

In that sense, The Illegals is not just a history of espionage. It is a timely reminder that, at least for some, the Cold War never really ended. It just burrowed deeper underground.

The Conversation

Alexander Howard 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. Friday essay: ‘nothing quite like it in the history of espionage’ – the Russian spies who pretended to be American – https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-nothing-quite-like-it-in-the-history-of-espionage-the-russian-spies-who-pretended-to-be-american-260063

AI is now part of our world. Uni graduates should know how to use it responsibly

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Rachel Fitzgerald, Associate Professor and Deputy Associate Dean (Academic), Faculty of Business, Economics and Law, The University of Queensland

MTStock Studio/ Getty Images

Artificial intelligence is rapidly becoming an everyday part of lives. Many of us use it without even realising, whether it be writing emails, finding a new TV show or managing smart devices in our homes.

It is also increasingly used in many professional contexts – from helping with recruitment to supporting health diagnoses and monitoring students’ progress in school.

But apart from a handful of computing-focused and other STEM programs, most Australian university students do not receive formal tuition in how to use AI critically, ethically or responsibly.

Here’s why this is a problem and what we can do instead.

AI use in unis so far

A growing number of Australian universities now allow students to use AI in certain assessments, provided the use is appropriately acknowledged.

But this does not teach students how these tools work or what responsible use involves.

Using AI is not as simple as typing questions into a chat function. There are widely recognised ethical issues around its use including bias and misinformation. Understanding these is essential for students to use AI responsibly in their working lives.

So all students should graduate with a basic understanding of AI, its limitations, the role of human judgement and what responsible use looks like in their particular field.

We need students to be aware of bias in AI systems. This includes how their own biases could shape how they use the AI (the questions they ask and how they interpret its output), alongside an understanding of the broader ethical implications of AI use.

For example, does the data and the AI tool protect people’s privacy? Has the AI made a mistake? And if so, whose responsibility is that?

What about AI ethics?

The technical side of AI is covered in many STEM degrees. These degrees, along with philosophy and psychology disciplines, may also examine ethical questions around AI. But these issues are not a part of mainstream university education.

This is a concern. When future lawyers use predictive AI to draft contracts, or business graduates use AI for hiring or marketing, they will need skills in ethical reasoning.

Ethical issues in these scenarios could include unfair bias, like AI recommending candidates based on gender or race. It could include issues relating to a lack of transparency, such as not knowing how an AI system made a legal decision. Students need to be able to spot and question these risks before they cause harm.

In healthcare, AI tools are already supporting diagnosis, patient triage and treatment decisions.

As AI becomes increasingly embedded in professional life, the cost of uncritical use also scales up, from biased outcomes to real-world harm.

For example, if a teacher relies on AI carelessly to draft a lesson plan, students might learn a version of history that is biased or just plain wrong. A lawyer who over-relies on AI could submit a flawed court document, putting their client’s case at risk.

How can we do this?

There are international examples we can follow. The University of Texas at Austin and University of Edinburgh both offer programs in ethics and AI. However, both of these are currently targeted at graduate students. The University of Texas program is focused on teaching STEM students about AI ethics, whereas the University of Edinburgh’s program has a broader, interdiscplinary focus.

Implementing AI ethics in Australian universities will require thoughtful curriculum reform. That means building interdisciplinary teaching teams that combine expertise from technology, law, ethics and the social sciences. It also means thinking seriously about how we engage students with this content through core modules, graduate capabilities or even mandatory training.

It will also require investment in academic staff development and new teaching resources that make these concepts accessible and relevant to different disciplines.

Government support is essential. Targeted grants, clear national policy direction, and nationally shared teaching resources could accelerate the shift. Policymakers could consider positioning universities as “ethical AI hubs”. This aligns with the government-commissioned 2024 Australian University Accord report, which called for building capacity to meet the demands of the digital era.

Today’s students are tomorrow’s decision-makers. If they don’t understand the risks of AI and its potential for error, bias or threats to privacy, we will all bear the consequences. Universities have a public responsibility to ensure graduates know how to use AI responsibly and understand why their choices matter.

The Conversation

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

ref. AI is now part of our world. Uni graduates should know how to use it responsibly – https://theconversation.com/ai-is-now-part-of-our-world-uni-graduates-should-know-how-to-use-it-responsibly-261273

Clawback of $1.1B for PBS and NPR puts rural stations at risk – and threatens a vital source of journalism

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Allison Perlman, Associate Professor of Film & Media Studies, University of California, Irvine

Nathan Heffel and Grace Hood rehearse their Colorado Public Radio public affairs program in Centennial, Colo., in 2017. Andy Cross/The Denver Post via Getty Images

The U.S. Senate narrowly approved on July 16, 2025, a bill that would claw back federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which distributes money to NPR, PBS and their affiliate stations. The US$9 billion rescission package will withdraw $1.1 billion Congress had previously approved for the CPB to receive in the 2026 and 2027 fiscal years. In addition, it makes deep foreign aid cuts. All Democrats present voted against the measure, joined by two Republicans: Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. As long as the House, which approved a previous version, votes in favor of the Senate’s version of the bill by midnight July 18, Trump will be able to meet a budgetary deadline by signing the measure into law in time for it to take effect.

What will happen to NPR, PBS and local stations?

NPR and PBS provide programming to local public television and radio stations across the country. The impact on them will be direct and indirect.

Both NPR and PBS receive money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, an independent nonprofit corporation Congress created in 1967 to receive and distribute federal money to public broadcasters. More than 70% of the money it distributes flows directly to local stations. Some stations get up to half of their budgets from the CPB.

But NPR and PBS get much of their funding from foundation grants, viewers’ and listeners’ donations, and corporate underwriting. And local public radio and TV stations also get support from an array of sources besides CPB.

“There’s nothing more American than PBS,” said the network’s CEO, Paula Kerger, at a congressional hearing on March 26, 2025.

Only about 1% of NPR funding, and 15% of PBS funding, comes directly from the government via the CPB. However, once local radio and television stations lose federal funding, they’ll be less able to pay NPR and PBS for the programs they produce.

The nearly 1,500 public media stations in the U.S. rely on a mix of NPR, PBS and third-party producer programming, such as American Public Media and PRX, for the programs they offer. Local stations also produce and air regional news and provide emergency broadcasts for the government.

In rural areas with few broadcast stations and spotty cellphone coverage, public broadcast stations are vital sources of information about important community news and updates during emergencies. Federal support is essential for the programming and day-to-day operations of many local stations and allows for the maintenance of equipment and personnel to operate these vital community resources.

We believe that stations in communities that most need them, especially in rural locations, would be hit especially hard because they rely heavily on CPB funding.

Why are Republicans taking this step?

Public broadcasting has long been a target of conservative Republicans. They say that with a highly diversified media landscape, the public no longer needs media that is subsidized by federal dollars. They also claim that public broadcasting has a liberal bias and taxpayers should not be required to fund media that slants to the left politically.

Why is public media necessary when there’s news on the internet?

As journalism revenue has plummeted, public broadcasting has remained a vital source for news in communities across the nation. This is especially true in rural communities, where economic and political pressures have threatened the survival of local journalism.

In addition, with much online news coverage placed behind paywalls, public radio and television plays an important role in making quality journalism available to the American public.

An online ad for a program, 'Water News,' on a public radio station.
Want crucial information about water systems in your drought-prone community? Public radio station KVMR in Nevada City, Calif., has a program for you.
KVMR screenshot

Why did Congress approve these funds 2 years ahead?

Public broadcasting has gotten roughly $550 million per year from the federal government in recent years. The CPB has always approved and designated those funds two years in advance, due to a provision in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, after Congress has voted to provide that money. The CPB then has distributed that funding primarily through grants to PBS and NPR affiliate stations to support their technical infrastructure, program development and audience research.

What are the consequences for Native communities?

Dozens of Native American stations are at risk of closing once the CPB is defunded. Native Public Media, a network of 57 radio stations and four TV stations, is a key source of news and information for tribal communities across the nation and relies on CPB support.

U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, publicly stated that he secured an agreement with the White House to move $9.4 million in Interior Department funding to two dozen Native American stations. But there is no provision related to this promise within the legislation.

The Conversation

Allison Perlman is the co-chair of the Scholars Advisory Committee of the American Archive of Public Broadcasting.

Josh Shepperd and Allison Perlman are under contract to co-author an update of the history of public broadcasting for Current, public media’s trade journal, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Josh and Allison are not paid employees or vendors of either institution.

ref. Clawback of $1.1B for PBS and NPR puts rural stations at risk – and threatens a vital source of journalism – https://theconversation.com/clawback-of-1-1b-for-pbs-and-npr-puts-rural-stations-at-risk-and-threatens-a-vital-source-of-journalism-255826

In Reframing Blackness, Alayo Akinkugbe challenges museums to see blackness first

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Wanja Kimani, Associate Curator, The Fitzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge

In Reframing Blackness, writer and curator Alayo Akinkugbe explores the way that art history is taught, and the impact this has had on what we see in national museums in western cities. This teaching has often led to the exclusion of blackness from mainstream art spaces. Akinkugbe challenges this by shifting our gaze – to see blackness first.

Her book interrogates the place of blackness in relation to art history in several ways. First, she observes that the lack of black curators within national museums in western cities means that blackness is subject to “reactive responses”.

For example, when there was a global outcry after the murder of George Floyd in 2020, institutions reacted by foregrounding their efforts to support black artists and pledging commitments for future initiatives.

But many of these initiatives remain on the surface level and temporary, rather than permanently embedded into the institutional fabric. In my experience, long-term change is unlikely to occur when progress is measured by individual projects, while the decision-making remains in the same hands.

Next, the book draws on Akinkugbe’s experience as a history of art student at the University of Cambridge, during which time there was a call to “decolonise” the curriculum.

She then explores the intersection of race, gender and class, highlighting the double-bind of racial and gender bias that black women may encounter. She suggests ways to shift the gaze by focusing on people of colour depicted in historic artworks, including Portrait d’une Femme Noire (Portrait of a Black Woman) (1800) by Marie-Guillemine Benoist.

Along the way, we are acquainted with figures that have always been present on museum and gallery walls – albeit often ignored or faded into obscurity. Akinkugbe speculates about who some of these unnamed figures were, and what worlds they inhabited.

In Jacques Amans’ painting, Bélizaire and the Frey Children (1837), for example, Bélizaire, a black enslaved child, was over time painted over and faded into the background.


Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.


Akinkugbe provides an overview of exhibitions held between 2022 and 2024 at the Royal Academy in London and the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge. And she has conversations with curators at other museums, whose work contributes to the understanding of the complexity of black life experiences reflected in contemporary art.

These include Antwaun Sargent (curator of The New Black Vanguard: Photography Between Art and Fashion) and Ekow Eshun (curator, In the Black Fantastic and The Time is Always Now: Artists Reframe the Black Figure). Akinkugbe also discusses the late Koyo Kouoh’s When We See Us: A Century of Black Figuration exhibition. Kouoh, who died in May, was the first African woman to curate the Venice Biennale.

By engaging in dialogue with the curators of these pivotal exhibitions, Akinkugbe demonstrates a shared commitment to uncovering what has been overlooked – and a commitment to deepening the discourse around blackness.

Cautious optimism

Reframing Blackness draws attention to important considerations for museums, curators and higher education institutions. There’s also food for thought for students who are keen to understand some of the factors that have contributed to the historic exclusion of blackness within museum walls and art education.

The book raises key questions that black cultural producers have grappled with in the UK since the 1960s, at the height of the Caribbean artists movement, and during the British black arts movement of the early 1980s. These movements created vital opportunities for discussion around issues of racial justice, visibility and representation.

Following the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement in mainstream media in 2020, institutions reacted with pledges for self-reflective work that would lead to more black artists’ work being exhibited and collected. Numerous large exhibitions across national museums followed – some of which are discussed in the book, as are the departmental overhauls of art curricula within higher education.

Portrait of a black woman wrapped in white cloth
Portrait d’une Femme Noire by Marie-Guillemine Benoist (1880).
Louvre Museum

I share in some of Akinkugbe’s optimism – but I do so cautiously.

Following the call to decolonise the curriculum, some art departments in UK higher education have expanded their geographic focus beyond the west. Others have stated their intention to address the legacies of enslavement and colonialism through a commitment to diversity and equality in their job advertisements. Some have done both.

But there are a few hurdles that may limit these efforts. First, newer courses that may not attract sufficient interest are often the first to be cut when budgets are constrained.

Second, if courses offer additional modules that attempt to cover vast areas in the global south, there is a risk of overgeneralising entire continents, marginalising them further. Such symbolic gestures fall short in an attempt to challenge art historical frameworks.

Finally, by adding works by black scholars to reading lists as supplementary instead of core reading, their contributions are treated as being on the margins rather than key producers of knowledge.

Museums have a responsibility to reflect the communities they serve, in a way that respects the individual and collective autonomy of that community. This may be counterintuitive to the museum’s original purpose, which may have been to serve the upper class, showcasing its founders’ interests.

Museums are better equipped to engage communities as partners in shaping their future when permanent staff reflect the diversity of these communities across the intersections of race, gender, class, sexuality and disability. Museum directors have a duty to serve these communities with a long-term commitment to care and accountability.

This book asks us to see blackness first. Akinkugbe guides us closer to a vision that does not require black people to reinsert ourselves, but insists on our resolute presence – both then and now.


This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org, The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

The Conversation

Wanja Kimani 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 Reframing Blackness, Alayo Akinkugbe challenges museums to see blackness first – https://theconversation.com/in-reframing-blackness-alayo-akinkugbe-challenges-museums-to-see-blackness-first-260734

Why some ‘biodegradable’ wet wipes can be terrible for the environment

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel James Jolly, PhD candidate, University of East Anglia

Daniel James Jolly, CC BY-NC-ND

Have you felt disgust when taking a walk along the riverside or plunging into the sea to escape the summer heat, only to spy a used wet wipe floating along the surface? Or shock at finding out that animals have died choking on plastic products or that the seafood we eat may be contaminated with microfibres?

These pollutants are common in our waterways because of the mismanagement of sewage and inappropriate disposal that flush hygiene products and microfibres into rivers and oceans. In the UK alone, more than 11 billion wet wipes are thrown away annually. Wet wipe litter was found on 72% of UK beaches in 2023.

They persist because they’re made of plastic, a durable material that won’t easily degrade. Plastic can last for decades to hundreds of years. Therefore, governments and manufacturers are eagerly encouraging the use of non-plastics as more “sustainable” alternatives, with the UK banning plastic in wet wipes in 2024.

These textiles can be made from plant or animal fibres such as cotton and wool, or they may be chemically and physically modified, such as rayon or viscose. They are often labelled “biodegradable” on product packaging, suggesting they are environmentally friendly, break down quickly, and are a safe alternative to plastics. But is this really the case?


Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


My research focuses on investigating the environmental impact of these non-plastic textiles and their persistence in waterways. My colleagues and I have found that some non-plastic microfibres can be just as problematic or even more harmful than plastic.

While non-plastic textiles are not as long-lived as plastics, with many composting within weeks to months, they can last long enough to accumulate and cause damage to plants, animals and humans. Studies by scientists at the University of Stirling show that biodegradable wet wipes can last up to 15 weeks on beaches, where they can act as a reservoir for faecal bacteria and E.coli. Other studies have highlighted non-plastic textiles lasting for two months or more in rivers and oceans, where they break up into hundreds of thousands of microfibres.

woman in white top golds wet wipes
Non-plastic wet wipes can cause as much an environmental hazard as plastic ones.
Adam Radosavljevic/Shutterstock

These microfibres are so prevalent in waterways that they have contaminated animals across the food chain, from filter-feeding mussels and oysters to top predators such as sharks and the seafood we eat.

They are also found in remote locations as far away as the Arctic seafloor and deep sea, thousands of miles from civilisation. These discoveries highlight that non-plastics last longer than we think.

The dangers of non-plastics

Once exposed to aquatic life, non-plastic microfibres can be easily ingested or inhaled, where they can become trapped in the body and cause damage. During their manufacture, textile fibres can be modified with various chemical additives to improve their function, such as flame retardants, antibacterials, softeners, UV protection and dyes.

It is known that several toxic synthetic chemicals, including the plastic additive bisphenol A (BPA), are used for this purpose. These additives can be carcinogenic, cause neurotoxic effects or damage hormonal and reproductive health.

Researchers like me, have only just begun to explore the dangers of non-plastics. Some have shown that non-plastic microfibres and their additives can damage the digestive system, cause stress, hinder development and alter immune responses in animals such as shrimp, mussels, and oysters. However, other studies have shown little to no effect of non-plastic microfibres on animals exposed to them.

We do not yet know how much of a threat these materials are to the environment. Only the manufacturers know exactly what’s in the textiles we use. This makes it hard to understand what threats we are really facing. Nevertheless, assumptions that non-plastics are environmentally friendly and an easy alternative to plastic materials must be challenged and reconsidered.

To do this, we need to push for greater transparency in the contents of our everyday items and test them to make sure that they are truly sustainable and won’t harm the world around us. So next time you are browsing the supermarket aisles and come across a pack of “biodegradable” or “environmentally friendly” wet wipes, just question, are they really?


Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


The Conversation

Daniel James Jolly receives funding from the University of East Anglia, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, and the NERC ARIES doctoral training pathway as part of his PhD studentship.
He is a student member of the UK Green Party.

ref. Why some ‘biodegradable’ wet wipes can be terrible for the environment – https://theconversation.com/why-some-biodegradable-wet-wipes-can-be-terrible-for-the-environment-258836

Will Donald Trump get Vladimir Putin (before Maga gets Trump)?

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

This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.


You know when the Kremlin is worried about something – it starts talking about nuclear weapons. And so it was, just two days after Donald Trump revealed he had decided to lift his administration’s pause on the supply of US-made weapons to Ukraine, that Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, raised Russia’s nuclear doctrine. In response to a handy question from a friendly reporter as to whether Russia’s nuclear doctrine was still active, Peskov said: “Russia’s nuclear doctrine remains in effect, and thus, all its provisions continue to apply.”

By saying “all its provisions”, he was emphasising the changes made in December last year which significantly lowered the bar for Russia to use its nuclear deterrent. It states that Russia “reserves the right to employ nuclear weapons” in response to nuclear weapons or “other types of weapons of mass destruction” against itself or its allies.

Whether Putin and his team consider the sorts of weapons the US is prepared to allow Ukraine to use against Russia as weapons of mass destruction is not clear as yet. The US president specifically said that a fresh supply of Patriot systems was already en route to Ukraine from Germany. But he also hinted that other more offensive weapons could also be in the mix. And in a July 4 phone call he is reported to have asked the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, whether he could hit Moscow or St Petersburg, to which Zelensky replied: “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.”

Trump is reported to have gone on to say that it was important to “make [Russians] feel the pain”.

At the beginning of the week, the US president was also keen for Russia to feel the economic pain of indirect sanctions, with 100% tariffs promised against any country buying Russia’s oil. Could this be a turning point?


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.


Interesting question, says David Dunn. Dunn, professor of international relations at the University of Birmingham, says Trump’s decision – if he follows through with it – pretty much brings the US back in line with its policy under the Biden administration. Particularly now that Trump appears to have ruled out, for the time being, allowing Ukraine to use long-range offensive missiles against targets in Moscow.

As Dunn points out, there’s no sense that Trump has changed his overall tack on what he is looking for from Putin: a ceasefire, rather than, as Biden repeatedly insisted, a settlement that respects Ukrainian sovereignty and restores the land occupied illegally by Russian troops.

Meanwhile the economic pain he promised to inflict on Russia has been scheduled to begin in 50 days. This – as many commentators have been quick to point out – has irresistible echoes of his off-again, on-again tariff regime. So will these sanctions actually happen?




Read more:
What Trump’s decision to send more weapons to Ukraine will mean for the war


The Russian stock market certainly wasn’t that worried. Shortly after trump made his announcement, the Moscow stock exchange increased by 2.7% and the rouble strengthened. Oil markets also appear to have relaxed, suggesting traders see no imminent risks. Maybe this is another case of “Taco” (Trump always chickens out)?

Patrick O’Shea, an international relations and global governance specialist at the University of Glasgow, believes that the markets’ reaction is more than just indifference to what Trump was threatening. It was relief.

“Trump’s threat isn’t just non-credible, the positive market reaction in Russia suggests it is a gift for Moscow,” O’Shea writes. “The 50-day ultimatum is seen not as a deadline but as a reprieve, meaning nearly two months of guaranteed inaction from the US.”

What has not been widely reported in the UK is that a bipartisan bill making its way through the US congress would have been far more punitive that anything Trump is threatening. Now this has been paused pending Trump’s initiative in 50 days’ time.




Read more:
Why Russia is not taking Trump’s threats seriously


Back in Europe, meanwhile, Ukraine’s allies got together in Rome last weekend to discuss what will be needed to rebuild the war-torn country and how to raise the necessary funds. Stefan Wolff was watching proceedings and believes that while countries in the “coalition of the willing” are ready to open their coffers to help Ukraine get back on its feet, the funds so far pledged will not touch the sides.

Ukraine’s allies at the conference have pledged more than €10 billion (£8.7 billion). But, Wolff – an expert in international relations at the University of Birmingham who has contributed regular analysis of the war in Ukraine – points out that this sum looks minuscule alongside the World Bank’s latest assessment that Ukraine will need at least US$524 billion (£388 billion) over the next decade to fund its recovery.

There have been some fairly upbeat forecasts about Ukraine’s potential for growth. The IMF forecasts growth for Ukraine of between 2% and 3% for 2025, which is likely to grow to over 4% in 2026 and 2027. But it cautions that this will not happen without considerable overseas support. And an end to the war. Neither is certain anytime soon.




Read more:
Over €10 billion has now been pledged for Ukraine’s recovery. It’s nowhere near enough


Maga moves – but will Trump take responsiblity?

To Washington, where the US president is having what would probably count as the worst week of his second administration so far. Large sections of his faithful Maga base are in almost open revolt at his seeming reluctance to release what have become known as the “Epstein files”. You may remember he littered his election campaign last year with dark hints about the revelations the files must surely contain about the possible involvement of the rich and powerful in child-sex exploitation. But this week he essentially said it was old news, which was “pretty boring”, adding that “I think, really, only pretty bad people, including fake news, want to keep something like that going.”

This is not only at odds with what he spent much of 2024 saying. It also flies in the face of what his own attorney general, Pam Bondi, said in February when she said Epstein’s client list was “sitting on [her] desk right now to review”. Now of course, the justice department says there is no list. This is not what much of his base wants to hear.

Rob Dover, an intelligence specialist at the University of Hull who has researched conspiracy theories and the people who obsess about them, says this is a dangerous moment for the Trump presidency. He points to Maga unrest over Trump’s decision to bomb Iran and to resume military aid to Ukraine, both of which appear to contradict his pledge to keep the US out of foreign conflicts. Trump’s “big beautiful bill”, which has cut medicaid and other benefits to the poorest people in the US, will also inflict hurt on many is his base. Even his recent musing that he agrees with his health secretary’s questionable assertion that Coca-Cola should be made with sugar cane not corn syrup to “make America healthy again” is sure to anger corn farmers in the Midwest, another core Trump constituency.

“Maga is not a uniform group in belief or action. But if Trump loses either the loyalty of some or they refuse to flex their beliefs as they have done before, it will be politically dangerous for him,” Dover concludes.




Read more:
Trump’s changing stance on Epstein files is testing the loyalty of his Maga base


Trouble brewing in Bosnia

I had the great good fortune to visit Sarajevo in December last year where I spent a few days exploring, taking a walking tour of the old town and a wider tour of the whole city which took us across the notional border with the Republika Srpska, one of the two main constituent parts of the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Panoramic view of Sarajevo, inclujding the old city.
Sarajevo: a beautiful but troubled city.
Julian Nyča via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-NC-SA

The country was created by the Dayton accord, bringing an end to the ethnic conflict in the mid-1990s that saw whole populations displaced as ethnic Serbs and Croats sought to create new pure mini-states by expelling mainly Muslim Bosniaks.

When visiting, I felt a pervading sense that the two parts of the new country sit uncomfortably next to each other – and in recent months the friction has intensified considerably. Birte Julia Gippert of the University of Liverpool, who has researched extensively the conflict in the Balkans and the attempts to bring peace to the region, explains how the situation has become so tense.




Read more:
Bosnia and Herzegovina in crisis as Bosnian-Serb president rallies for secession


Why is Israel bombing Syria?

Conflict in Syria escalated again this week, with Israeli warplanes launching airstrikes against government buildings in Damascus this week. A Netanyahu government minister, Amichai Chikli, referred to Syria’s leader, Ahmed al-Shara, as “a terrorist, a barbaric murderer who should be eliminated without delay”.

Mixed up in all this is sectarian fighting in southern Syria was has been going on sporadically since al-Shara took power at the end of last year. But, as Ali Mamouri of Deakin University explains, Israel wants to see the emergence of a federal Syria, which the new regime has ruled out. It also want to retain influence in the region and secure its northern border with Syria.

While a ceasefire is in place for now, Mamouri sees the situation as extremely fragile with further clashes “not only possible but highly probable”.

World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.


The Conversation

ref. Will Donald Trump get Vladimir Putin (before Maga gets Trump)? – https://theconversation.com/will-donald-trump-get-vladimir-putin-before-maga-gets-trump-261416

UK to lower voting age to 16 – a once-in-a-generation opportunity to secure the future health of British democracy

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andrew Mycock, Chief Policy Fellow, University of Leeds

The UK government has announced that the voting age will be lowered to 16 at the next election as part of a wider effort to restore trust in and “future-proof” democracy.

Votes at 16 has grown from a niche concern to become a salient – if contentious – issue supported by most UK political parties and electoral reform groups. The Conservative party remains a holdout – but has never acknowledged the contradiction of its continued opposition to the universal lowering of the voting age while empowering the Scottish and Welsh parliaments to enact the measure during its time in government.

This is a policy response to concerns about declining youth democratic engagement since the late 1990s. Since 1997, the UK general election turnout rate for those aged 65 years and over has consistently been at least 20 percentage points higher than for those aged 18-24.


Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.


Some opponents argue that the Labour government is lowering the voting age to 16 for its own electoral interest, but we should remember this was a clearly stated election manifesto commitment. Votes at 16 was part of the package that delivered Labour to government in 2024 on a huge majority.

That said, public opinion remains steadfastly opposed. The government will need to handle this tension carefully, ensuring that 16- and 17-years-olds are not treated as second-class members of the electorate as this debate pushes forward.

For and against

As when the voting age was universally lowered to 18 in 1969, the case for change has pivoted on perceptions of maturity and markers of adulthood. There was considerable political and public consensus in the 1960s that 18 was the appropriate age of majority and enfranchisement. This link has endured, and many people continue to think under 18s are too socially and politically immature to vote responsibly or regularly.

Supporters of reform emphasise the need to align enfranchisement with other rights realised before or at age 16 – such as paying tax, medical consent, working, autonomy to make decisions about future education and work lives, and undertaking military (if not frontline) service.

Opponents respond by noting the age of majority remains 18, and that the minimum age for many protective and social rights, such as marriage and leaving full-time education, has been pushed upwards to 18 in the past decade or so.

But while 18 remains the legal marker of adulthood, transitions from youthhood to adulthood have become extended and complex. There is no single age point at which young people realise all the social and economic rights and responsibilities associated with adulthood.

Biological maturation extends from late-stage childhood until early adulthood (mid-20s). Traditional markers of adulthood such as financial independence, owning a property, or getting married and having children are occurring later in life than in previous generations.

It is more than 50 years since parliament last reflected and reviewed how society understands, and frames, issues of adulthood and citizenship linked to the ages of majority and enfranchisement. Lowering the voting age to 16 offers a timely opportunity to do so again.

Extensive parliamentary debate lies ahead as this bill makes its way through to becoming law. MPs should take that time to discuss and build consensus around what British democracy should offer young people, and how enfranchisement should be conceptualised for future generations.

Lowering the age is just the start

Now that 16- and 17-year-olds are part of the electorate, we can hope that political parties will improve their responsiveness to the interests of young people.

Unfortunately, where the voting age has already been lowered, we’ve not yet seen parties address their skewed decision-making, representation or electoral behaviour, which continues to favour older voters. The average age of elected representatives has remained around 50 years of age in all UK national and devolved parliaments, and higher in local government. Few young people join political parties or are active in their campaigning.

There is also significant evidence that, regardless of whether the voting age has been lowered or not, young people are not appropriately supported to be politically and media literate to understand how and when to vote, and to make informed and independent voter choices.

So, lowering the voting age should only be the first step in a more concerted effort to improve political literacy and democratic engagement as young people grow up. This should begin in primary, not secondary, school and continue through further and higher education.

Elected representatives should hold regular school surgeries where they meet children and young people, and listen and respond to their issues and concerns. Young people need to learn to discuss political issues in school settings, and political parties should host election hustings in schools and colleges. Young people should also be involved in decision-making in their schools and communities.

Lowering the voting age offers an opportunity to reinvigorate how we host elections to ensure young people enjoy voting for the first time – and encourage their future participation.

Making electoral registration automatic, as the government has promised, will help. But joining the electoral roll is a significant civic moment in young people’s lives. Schools should host electoral registration ceremonies where pupils are welcomed into the electorate by local elected representatives, and automatically given a voter authority certificate so they have an appropriate piece of voter ID.

Political parties need to embrace this once-in-a-generation opportunity that voting age reform presents to secure the future health of British democracy.

The Conversation

Andrew Mycock 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. UK to lower voting age to 16 – a once-in-a-generation opportunity to secure the future health of British democracy – https://theconversation.com/uk-to-lower-voting-age-to-16-a-once-in-a-generation-opportunity-to-secure-the-future-health-of-british-democracy-261411

We detected deep pulses beneath Africa – what we learned could help us understand volcanic activity

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Emma Watts, Postdoctoral Researcher in Geography, Swansea University

Earth’s continents may look fixed on a globe, but they’ve been drifting, splitting and reforming over billions of years – and they still are. Our new study reveals fresh evidence of rhythmic pulses of molten rock rising beneath east Africa, reshaping our understanding of how continents break apart.

Our findings could help scientists understand more about volcanic activity and earthquakes.

There are around 1,300 active volcanoes on the Earth’s surface. Active volcanoes are those thought to have had an eruption over the last 12,000 years or so. Of these volcanoes, over 90 lie on the East African Rift Valley – the seam along which Africa is splitting apart. This weak seam of crust may even allow a new ocean to form over the next few million years.

Although ocean formation is happening around the world, and has been for several billion years, there are few places on Earth where you can study different stages of continental breakup at the same time. This is because they normally become submerged under water as the Earth’s crust thins, and seawater eventually inundates the rift valley.


Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


The Rift Valley is different. There is, at its northern end (in Ethiopia) a place called Afar, which sits at the meeting point of three rifts. These are called the Red Sea Rift, the Gulf of Aden Rift, and the Main Ethiopian Rift (see the map below).

The Red Sea Rift has been spreading for the last 23 million years, and the Main Ethiopian Rift for the last 11 million years. There are active volcanoes across all three of these rifts. In Afar, all three rifts are at least partly exposed, with the Red Sea Rift and Main Ethiopian Rift having the most exposure.

Volcanic rocks that erupt when Earth’s tectonic plates spread apart provide a window into the inner Earth that wouldn’t otherwise be accessible. Each lava flow and volcano has its own story that is recorded in the rock and we can learn about that through geochemistry – the concentrations of the elements that make up the rock – and mineralogy – the minerals within the rock.

Analysing these things can tell us about the depth at which the melting rock formed and roughly where in the Earth’s mantle it formed. In our new study, we analysed over 130 new lava samples, obtained from the Afar rock repository at the University of Pisa and our own fieldwork.

We used these samples to investigate the characteristics of the mantle beneath this rifting, when tectonic plates are moving apart from each other. These samples are from Holocene eruptions (rocks younger than 11.7 thousand years old) from across Afar and the East African Rift.

Geodynamic model, showing what happens in the mantle (brown) as the plates (green) rift apart. At approximately five seconds (equivalent to 35 million years) into the video the seafloor ridge has formed.

Since the 1970s, scientists have believed that there is a mantle plume beneath the Afar region. Mantle plumes are a portion of abnormally hot mantle (around 1,450°C) or unusual composition of the mantle (or both) below the Earth’s surface. Scientists think it pushed some of the mantle to the Earth’s surface. Our study not only confirms the presence of a mantle plume in this region, but also gives scientists details about its characteristics.

We discovered that the mantle plume beneath the region rises beneath the tectonic plates in pulses, and the pulses have slightly different chemical compositions.

There are mantle plumes around the world. They can be identified in the geological record as far back as several billion years. Each of the plumes has different characteristics – with their own unique chemical composition and shape.

One mantle plume still active today is the one lying below the Hawaiian islands. These islands are part of the Hawaiian Emperor chain, formed over the last 80 million years or so, and are still forming today. The islands originate from the Pacific tectonic plate slowly moving across the top of a mantle plume, making lava bubble up, erupt and eventually solidify as rock.

This plume melts the Earth’s mantle and forms magma, which over long periods results in the formation of an island chain or breaks up continents. It can also form volcanoes along a rift in the Earth’s crust, as we see in east Africa. The Hawaiian plume signature comes from two chemical compositions rising up through the mantle together like two vertical strands.

While scientists have long thought there probably is a plume underneath Afar, what it looks like is debated.

In our study, we created several scenarios of what the plume looks like and then used mathematical modelling to see which plume scenario best fit the sample data. Using this data-driven approach, we show that the most likely scenario is a singular plume that pulses with different chemical compositions.

The three rifts in Afar are spreading at different rates. The Red Sea Rift and Gulf of Aden Rift are moving faster at about 15mm per year (that’s half the rate your fingernails grow at) compared to the Main Ethiopian Rift moving at about 5mm per year. We deduced that the pulses are flowing at different speeds along the stretched and thinner undersides of the tectonic plates.

All this shows us that the motion of tectonic plates can help focus volcanic activity to where the plate is thinner.

This finding has important implications for how we interpret volcanic and earthquake activity. It may indicate that volcanism could be more likely to occur in the faster spreading and thinner portions of the rift, as the flow beneath replenishes the magma more frequently.

However, the eruptions here may be less explosive than the slower spreading rifts. This fits observations that explosive eruptions occur more frequently in the Main Ethiopian Rift (which sits on a thicker part of the plate and where the volcanoes are more mature), compared to the Red Sea Rift.

Our understanding of the link between continental rifting and mantle plumes is still in its infancy but research is already providing insights into how tectonic plates affect mantle plumes and how this might be recorded in the future seafloors of Earth.

The Conversation

Emma Watts works for Swansea University. She receives funding from Natural Environment Research Council and the UK Research Council.

Derek Keir works for the University of Southampton. He receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council.

Thomas Gernon works for the University of Southampton. He receives funding from the WoodNext Foundation, a donor-advised fund program, and from the Natural Environment Research Council.

ref. We detected deep pulses beneath Africa – what we learned could help us understand volcanic activity – https://theconversation.com/we-detected-deep-pulses-beneath-africa-what-we-learned-could-help-us-understand-volcanic-activity-260129

Why the UK’s butterflies are booming in 2025

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Willow Neal, Postgraduate Researcher in Conservation Ecology, The Open University

Biodiversity is in rapid decline, across the UK and globally. Butterflies are excellent for helping us understand these changes. Where butterfly communities are rich and diverse, so too is the ecosystem. But the opposite is also true: if butterfly numbers are low and there are few species, it is a bad sign for the overall variety and abundance of life in the area.

Butterfly sightings were among the lowest on record in the UK in 2024 – a low point in a downward trend that has been documented in North America and elsewhere.

The UK’s low numbers last year were probably due to the weather – in particular the notably cloudy and wet summer. These are not ideal conditions for butterflies, which use the Sun’s warmth to regulate their temperature and (mostly) do not fly in the rain.


Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


While weather patterns vary, climate change is making unpredictable weather more common. Wildlife is under the immense combined pressure of habitat loss and climate change, and it is driving many species to extinction. Consecutive summers with poor weather can push butterflies, and other species, over the edge.

Luckily for butterflies, 2025 has been a stark contrast – so far. After the driest spring since 1893 and multiple early summer heatwaves in the UK, butterflies are really bouncing back under lots of sunshine, which keeps them active.

Legendary lepidopterist Chris van Swaay of Butterfly Conservation Europe posts results of Dutch butterfly counts from early spring to late autumn. Many of these “transect surveys”, which involve recording butterflies while following a straight line through a habitat, have been repeated in the same locations over several decades. As such, they give reliable trends of butterfly diversity and abundance.

Van Swaay notes that many common species are having an excellent year. Many of the white species, including the large white, small white and green-veined white, are faring particularly well. Peacock butterflies are also being recorded on these Dutch transects in some of their best numbers for the past 20 years. These trends are likely to be the same in the UK.

On the Knepp estate in West Sussex, a farm that underwent rewilding in 2001, biologists are reporting record numbers of not just butterflies in general, but the elusive and stunning purple emperor (Apatura iris). This species can only survive in old and large woodlands with willow trees that they lay their eggs on. Because they live almost exclusively in the canopy, they are often difficult to see.

It is a treat to see even one purple emperor, and Knepp has been recording their numbers since 2014. The previous record was 66 over the entire summer in 2018 (another hot and sunny one). But 2025’s numbers have smashed that, with a running total of 80 as of July 11.

A butterfly on a leaf with purple, white and black markings.
Knepp ecologists are confident purple emperor numbers are improving nationally.
Stephan Morris/Shutterstock

I have the pleasure of often working in a meadow next to a river, and butterfly numbers are staggering here compared with 2024. Even the buddleia bush outside my office has had at least 30 butterflies at a time, of a wide variety of common species, during the past few weeks – an absolute joy to see.

Hot weather helps butterflies – until it doesn’t

This sounds like good news, right? Butterflies have been saved, and we didn’t have to do anything. I’d be happy even if that put me out of a job, and despite it ignoring the incredible work of charities like Butterfly Conservation. But it is, of course, not the whole story.

Our standard for what constitutes a great year for butterflies has been considerably lowered due to the extent of loss over decades and centuries. The great butterfly summer we are having might be comparable to an awful year 30 years ago. Similarly, this hot and dry weather is good for a while – but if it doesn’t start raining soon, plants are going to wilt.

We saw this during the intense heatwave of summer 2022. Both the plants that butterfly larvae use for food and the nectar sources of adult butterflies were under so much stress from a lack of rainfall that they failed to help adults and caterpillars alike.

The exceptionally warm spring of 2025 led to butterflies emerging from hibernation (referred to as “overwintering” when it concerns insects) unusually early.

Butterflies overwinter as eggs, caterpillars or adults. Their emergence is typically triggered by rising temperatures, and this year’s warmth appears to have accelerated that process: 21 out of 33 butterfly species in Dorset were spotted earlier than usual. The dingy skipper (Erynnis tages), a small, unassuming and increasingly rare species, emerged a whole month earlier than usual.

While early sightings may seem encouraging, they raise concerns. If plants do not also respond to the warmer temperatures by blooming earlier, there may not be enough food to sustain these early butterflies and other pollinating insects. This is a growing concern as the global climate changes.

Overall, there are reasons to be delighted about the summer of 2025. The sunny weather has allowed for a vital boom in butterfly numbers, despite the constant strain that nature is under. It is refreshing to see a bush full of vivid, beautiful insects.

However, the rain is still necessary, and the see-saw between a very wet year in 2024 and the potential for a very dry one in 2025 indicates climate change’s violent disruption of weather patterns which nature has depended on for a long time.

You can support butterfly conservation by mowing your lawn less, planting more native flowers, and joining the UK’s annual Big Butterfly Count – which starts on Friday, July 18 – to report your sightings and help experts like me keep track.


Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


The Conversation

Willow Neal received funding from NERC (National Environmental Research Council).

ref. Why the UK’s butterflies are booming in 2025 – https://theconversation.com/why-the-uks-butterflies-are-booming-in-2025-256039

When public money is tight, how do governments put a price on culture?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Nolan, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Liverpool John Moores University

It’s no secret that public finances are tight in the UK. This spells trouble for many sectors, not least culture. After all, this is an area that often relies on public funding – with many projects facing an uncertain future. But in an era of economic bad news, can it be justifiable to pump money into what some see as “frivolous” projects?

For some politicians, investment in cultural infrastructure is an investment in place and in people. This is the hope behind a £270 million fund that aims to boost the resilience of cultural institutions following an era of restricted public spending. There are limitations, and the culture-led approach – as with regeneration projects in general – remains only partially successful and deeply uneven.

From the role of large-scale cultural events like the European Capital of Culture to the so-called “Bilbao effect” (where a new cultural site is thought to spark revitalisation and economic growth), the same questions arise. Who is it for? What type of value is created – and is it shared in equitably?

But the question is also about how we might better understand and measure the value of a cultural site, collection or (re)development.


Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


Pinning down the meaning of “value” is a tricky philosophical question – one that has long plagued economists. The standard evaluation tool of cost-benefit analysis tries to collapse these debates into a number. That is, a price that can measure the multi-faceted benefits a project can provide.

But in the cultural sphere, value often comes without a price tag. Access to many of our museums and galleries is free and the values derived from them transcend the monetary.

Even though economists can estimate this non-monetary value (albeit not without criticism), a more wide-ranging benefit of cultural investment is harder to understand. This is the counter-intuitive notion of “non-use value”.

In other words, this is the benefit that flows to an individual from the existence of a cultural good such as a museum. It can be without that person ever setting foot inside the building or engaging with any of the collections.

Consider a current culture-led redevelopment in the UK: the Waterfront Transformation Project in Liverpool. This ambitious scheme takes in the redevelopment of the International Slavery Museum, Maritime Museum and associated outdoor spaces.

Within this collection of cultural goods, “use” could be a visitor stepping inside the museums. They may derive multiple benefits, from the aesthetics of the building, the creativity of the displays and the histories and stories represented in the collection.

pane detailing slave ship history outside liverpool's museum of slavery
If these stones could speak … through their very existence, cultural sites can bring value to people who will never visit them.
NorthSky Films/Shutterstock

But what about a history lover who either lacks the desire or the ability to visit the collection? Or someone whose memories or heritage intertwines with the history? Despite having no direct contact, they might still benefit from the sites’ continuing existence: the fact, for example, that a place exists where other citizens can visit, challenge and debate.

For some, there is value simply in knowing that there are spaces for this kind of engagement. In this way, public use by others can generate indirect benefits. These benefits cannot be captured by traditional metrics like footfall. But they constitute value to that individual and, in turn, the communities in which they live.

Assessing value

The inclusion of non-use value within the Treasury’s evaluation recommendations recognises this complex public relationship with cultural goods. Correctly capturing these benefits is crucial. If not, funders may misconstrue a project’s total economic value when they make their decisions. Some that could generate significant public value might be overlooked.

However, non-use value can be slippery both to define and measure. Understanding how engagement with publicly funded cultural goods varies across communities and regions is crucial. This current gap in our knowledge means that non-use value is not always fully considered in the design or evaluation of cultural programmes.

Our ongoing project, undertaken along with post-doctoral research fellow Laura Taggart, attempts to improve this understanding in the context of Liverpool’s Waterfront Development Project.

This process raises vital questions. What are the benefits and potential harms of the site? How do relationships with it change over time and across economic and ethnic groups? And how does the public’s historic relationship with the dockside change the nature of the non-use value generated?

Clearly, the answers to these questions cannot easily be calculated from the results of a cost-benefit analysis. Like most economic tools it is a model – a simplification of reality that aims to help policymakers make informed decisions. By engaging locally and regionally, it is easier to understand what drives non-use value – and capture it in a way that is relevant across other projects.

At heart, our project aims to capture the voices that are often excluded or overlooked in decisions about cultural funding. By developing a better understanding of the range of non-use value from these spaces, we hope to support more rounded approaches to cultural policy.

This means improving evaluation tools and funding frameworks. They must better reflect how people relate to cultural goods and how this differs across communities and regions. This will help in the quest for a richer concept of “value for money” — one that supports political choices that recognise the long-term civic, emotional and historical returns of cultural infrastructure.

Ultimately, in an era of tight budgets this allows for better and more targeted decision-making that recognises the often complex value and benefit flows that culture generates. But there is work to be done to help the public articulate the nature of benefits and costs. These are as vital and complex as the cultural goods that generate them.

The Conversation

This article is part of the wider project – Cultural Heritage, People and Place (CHerPP) : Understanding Value via a regional case study. It is funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and the UK Government’s Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). Grant reference AH/Y000242/1

ref. When public money is tight, how do governments put a price on culture? – https://theconversation.com/when-public-money-is-tight-how-do-governments-put-a-price-on-culture-259483