MIL-OSI – Page 786 – MIL Submissions Engine

December 10, 2025

Novel ‘body-swap’ robot provides insights into how the brain keeps us upright

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jean-Sébastien Blouin, Professor, School of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia

Imagine driving a car with a steering that doesn’t respond instantly and a GPS that always reflects where you were a second ago. To stay on course, you must constantly infer how to steer the wheel from outdated information.

Our brains do exactly that every time we move: sensory signals reach the brain tens of milliseconds after an event and motor commands take similar time to travel to the muscles, which then need extra time to generate force. In other words, the brain is always working with “old news” and must predict the future outcome of every action.

This predictive ability is most impressive when we stand upright because it requires keeping a tall, top‑heavy body balanced on two small feet.

Balance challenges

Scientists have long known that neural delays make balance hard to control. Even in healthy young adults, it takes about one-sixth of a second for information from the feet, muscles and inner ears to reach the brain and for a corrective signal to return to the muscles. Simple physics models treat the body as a mass balanced around the ankles and predict that if the delay is too long, standing becomes impossible.

The physical properties of our bodies similarly shape how we move. Just as a large van steers more sluggishly than a compact car, a large person standing upright resists motion and feels sudden pushes or bumps less sharply.

To test whether the brain treats delayed signals similar to changes in body mechanics, a team at the University of British Columbia and the Erasmus University Medical Centre in the Netherlands built a life‑size “body‑swap” robot.

A man stands in a large piece of machinery. — A participant stands in the ‘body-swap’ robot at the University of British Columbia.
(Sensorimotor Physiology Lab/UBC), CC BY-NC-SA

Participants stand on two force‑sensing footplates and are secured to a padded frame. Motors move the frame in response to the forces they generate, making the whole system behave like their real body swaying under gravity.

Crucially, the robot can alter the simulated body mechanics on the fly: it can make you feel lighter or heavier, add or remove energy from your motion, or insert a delay between your forces and the motion you feel — mimicking the brain’s own sensory‑motor lag.

Three experiments

With this tool, researchers asked whether the brain treats time (delay) and space (body dynamics) independently, under three experiments:

1. Changing body dynamics and delays alter balance similarly: Participants stood while the robot inserted a 0.2‑second lag between their commands and resulting motion. That pause — a blink of an eye — caused larger sway and pushed many participants to a virtual “fall” boundary. Similarly, sway increased when the robot made the body feel lighter or added energy to the motion, much like a gust of wind pushes you forward.

2. Delays feel like altered body mechanics: With the delay turned off, participants adjusted their bodies’ mechanical properties until their sensation matched the delayed condition they had just experienced. They chose a lighter body or a setting that added energy. When they were asked to make the delayed condition feel “natural,” participants selected a heavier body or a setting that dissipated energy from the motion. Hence, tweaking the body’s mechanical properties can recreate or cancel the feeling of delayed information.

3. Improving balance under delay: Volunteers who never experienced the robot stood on it with the 0.2‑second delay present, combined with a heavier body or one that dissipated energy from the motion. Their balance improved instantly: sway dropped by up to 80 per cent and most participants no longer reached the virtual fall boundary.

Blending time and space

Taken together, the three experiments support one conclusion: the brain does not store separate solutions for “late information” and an “unstable body.”
Instead, it maintains a unified internal model that blends time and space into one representation of movement.

When sensory feedback is outdated and the body feels unstable, adding heaviness and dissipating energy from the motion restores balance. Conversely, making the body lighter or adding energy reproduces the instability caused by delays. In either case, a unified representation of balance is used to keep you upright.

These findings are more than a laboratory curiosity. As we age or when diseases damage long nerves, signals travel slower and are more disrupted, leading to balance deficits and a higher risk of falls. According to the World Health Organization, about one in three older adults falls each year, and falls are the leading cause of injury‑related hospital stays, costing health systems billions of dollars.

The body‑swap robot offers a new perspective to this problem: assistive devices and wearable exoskeletons that supply just enough “helpful resistance” the moment a person begins to sway can counteract the destabilizing effects of neural delays.

They also raise a broader question: have the body sizes of animals and the mechanics that compensate for neural delays evolved to enhance their survival?

The next time you lean over a sink or chat in a doorway, remember that your brain is quietly juggling time‑and‑body representations in the background. The fact that you never notice this balancing act may be the most astonishing finding of all.

Jean-Sébastien Blouin receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Patrick A. Forbes receives funding from the Dutch Research Council (NWO).

– ref. Novel ‘body-swap’ robot provides insights into how the brain keeps us upright – https://theconversation.com/novel-body-swap-robot-provides-insights-into-how-the-brain-keeps-us-upright-270846

December 10, 2025

The race to mine the Moon is on – and it urgently needs some clear international rules

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Urwick, Junior analyst, RAND Europe, RAND Europe

The vision of mining space for resources is no longer science fiction. The Moon’s proximity to Earth and the presence of precious resources make it an increasingly attractive prospect for exploitation.

Resources thought to be present on the Moon include uranium, potassium,
phosphorus, water ice, platinum group metals and helium-3. The last of these is a rare isotope that could help power relatively clean fusion energy in future.

There are billions of dollars in it for companies able to kickstart mining operations, even if such returns are still years away. Technological breakthroughs in launch and exploration capabilities are occurring at breakneck pace. In the US, Seattle-based startup Interlune, working with Iowa industrial manufacturer Vermeer, is developing an electric lunar excavator designed to extract helium-3.

Their prototype can process up to 100 metric tons of lunar soil per hour. Interlune plans a 2027 mission to confirm helium-3 concentrations before deploying a pilot plant in 2029.

The Pittsburgh-based space company Astrobotic is developing the Griffin-1 lander to transport a rover designed by the California-based company Astrolab for surface analysis. A different lander called Nova-C,, built by Intuitive Machines in Houston, is being designed to conduct analysis of lunar soil and rock under Nasa’s Prism programme. Prism is a science and technology initiative designed to support various aspects of lunar exploration.

Meanwhile, Nasa’s Polar Resources Ice Mining Experiment 1 (Prime-1), which was carried to the Moon this year by an Intuitive Machines lander, demonstrated Honeybee Robotics’ Trident drill on the lunar surface. Trident both drills and extracts samples of lunar soil.

SpaceX’s giant Starship rocket, which has a large payload capacity and reusable design, could send multiple large experiments to the Moon, and cut launch costs by as much as US$250–US$600 (£188-£451) per kg. Assuming it overcomes its teething problems, Starship could be the game changer that makes large-scale lunar infrastructure and resource missions economically viable.

While US-led initiatives have been commonplace in lunar exploration, new political and corporate players are emerging globally. China aims to achieve human lunar landings by 2030, with plans for the robotic construction of lunar bases in partnership with Russia and other nations. This would establish an international Lunar Research Station by 2035.

Intuitive Machines’ Nova-C lander is being used to test capabilities relevant to mining.
Intuitive Machines

Australia’s 2026 rover will put its mining expertise to work extracting oxygen and collecting soil on the Moon, while Japan’s Slim mission focuses on precision landings that can target resource-rich areas. At the same time ispace, a Japanese company, is developing a mini rover to explore lunar resources.

In the EU, the Argonaut programme is developing the Esa (European Space Agency)‘s first lunar lander, with the involvement of a growing body of industrial enterprises across Europe. These missions are critical for gathering data and capabilities needed to understand what’s actually available on the Moon and how we might one day mine it.

Frozen treaties

Yet despite evolving technical capabilities, the international legal framework governing exploitation of the Moon is both very limited and frozen in the Cold War era. The 1967 outer space treaty established that space cannot be subject to national appropriation, but debate remains as to whether this prohibition extends to private entities extracting resources.

The treaty’s article I declares exploration shall benefit “all mankind”, yet provides no mandatory mechanism for sharing benefits, leaving it entirely to nations that have conducted activities to decide how, or whether, to share benefits at all.

The 1979 Moon agreement attempted to designate lunar resources as the “common heritage of mankind” and establish an international regime for exploitation. This agreement received only 15 ratifications, and none from spacefaring powers. The “common heritage” concept met fierce opposition from industrialised countries, who viewed it as restricting their technological advantage.

National legislation, as well as other types of agreement, has filled the vacuum. The US Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 granted American citizens rights to extract space resources. Luxembourg, UAE and Japan followed with similar laws. The Artemis accords of 2020, which are non-binding arrangements between the US and other countries, have provided for voluntary coordination among like-minded states. They have established principles for lunar activity including transparency and safety zones.

However, they function more as a coalition agreement than a universal law. Clear
international property-rights frameworks would determine which nations capture value. The current state of ambiguity primarily benefits those with clearer frameworks and first-mover advantages, and indicates a missed opportunity for equitable benefit-sharing from space resources.

The pursuit of profit raises paramount scientific and environmental concerns.
Astronomers caution that large-scale mining activities could disrupt ongoing research and preservation of the lunar environment, leading to calls for development of comprehensive lunar laws and regulations to manage these activities responsibly.

Esa’s push for a zero debris charter, which it hopes will gain global recognition by 2030, reflects a growing awareness that mining and resource use in space must go hand in hand with responsible behaviour.

As lunar mining and exploration accelerate, the security dimension also becomes
increasingly complex and fraught, with the potential for conflict between nations. Valuable lunar resources such as water ice and rare metals are concentrated in limited, highly contested regions.

In the absence of internationally binding governance agreements, the risk of overlapping claims, operational interference and even direct confrontation is real. Exclusion zones and safety zones around mining sites could serve as flashpoints for disputes over access, resource rights and commercial interests.

The possibility of competing governance frameworks, such as the Artemis Accords and the Outer Space Treaty, to manage claims could further exacerbate the risk of conflict. The urgent need for international cooperation and transparent, equitable frameworks is clear.

The international community stands at a crossroads. The technology enabling lunar
resource extraction is arriving faster than most anticipated. Policymakers and legislators have a waning opportunity to design and implement governance that keeps pace with innovation and growing appetites for lunar resources.

Binding international agreements – particularly between the great space powers – which emphasise principles of stewardship, clarify access rights and support common benefits from lunar development would ensure the Moon becomes a proving ground for the equitable and sustainable development of space.

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. The race to mine the Moon is on – and it urgently needs some clear international rules – https://theconversation.com/the-race-to-mine-the-moon-is-on-and-it-urgently-needs-some-clear-international-rules-270943

December 10, 2025

Driverless taxis are heading to the UK, but it’s still not clear who to blame when something goes wrong

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paurav Shukla, Professor of Marketing, University of Southampton

Driverless in San Francisco. Tada Images/Shutterstock

Driverless taxis are a bit like buses. You wait ages for one, and then a fleet arrives all at once. The US firms Waymo and Uber have both said their vehicles will be on the streets of London in 2026.

But as this transport technology speeds towards the UK, it seems to be outpacing any widespread agreement over a basic social contract. Robots are due to arrive on British roads without a clear sense of who is responsible when things go wrong.

Imagine you are in the backseat of a driverless taxi, responding to messages on your phone, when suddenly your AI chauffeur crashes into something – or someone. In the silent moments that follow, there is no driver to turn to.

Is the car maker to blame or the programmer who wrote the software? Perhaps it’s the app company that organised the ride. Is it the city authority that permitted the journey, or even you, the passenger, for failing to intervene?

For now, the answer isn’t clear to the public.

Most people don’t know who pays out, or who apologises, when a driverless taxi makes a mistake. And this isn’t just a legal technicality – it is the fault line under a trillion-dollar industry, which could be stopped in its tracks by uncertainty.

Our research reveals that “liability communication” – how companies and authorities explain who is legally in charge and under what conditions – for autonomous vehicles (AVs) is a mess. It is fragmented, riddled with legal jargon and unclear.

This is partly down to the caution with which many western economies – including the US – are approaching AV adoption. In the UK, the government’s pilot scheme is moving ahead slowly.

Others are racing ahead. China, for example, with its high tolerance for experimentation, has created a booming AV ecosystem, with over 32,000km of roads available for AV testing, and 16,000 test licences issued. AV trials have been normalised while legal frameworks are still being drawn up.

But while the UK’s approach may seem sensible, caution without clear communication risks feeding scepticism rather than confidence in the future of driverless cars.

Safety feature

Making the case for safety also needs to be localised. Although enthusiasts highlight millions of safe rides in the US, there’s no point referencing the safety record of AVs in a city built around a grid system that is completely different to the narrow and winding old streets of the UK.

If safety is uncertain, uptake will probably stall, especially in messy streetscapes. And they don’t get much messier than London’s irregular roads.

Uncertainty also brings tension. Some politicians and companies appear fairly bullish, promising a safety revolution and tens of thousands of new jobs. Meanwhile, London’s own taxi trade warns of chaos, citing stalled vehicles, accessibility worries and glaring safety gaps.

London taxi with IHouses of Parliament in background. — Who’s in the driving seat?
Sergii Figurnyi/Shutterstock

Our review shows that this tension is partly to do with poor communication, including gaps in messaging over things like safety and risk, or compensation and complaints. The language apparently aimed at consumers is often ambiguous or overly technical instead of being accessible.

There are other simple steps that UK authorities could take to make things less confusing. One is that every driverless taxi ride should begin with a short, plain-English briefing about who is legally responsible for the journey.

The wording should be composed with consumer groups and accessibility experts, not just lawyers and engineers. And before you even book, the app should explicitly state who insures the vehicle, the software and the ride itself.

A country that gets the communication about AVs wrong will fight every hiccup on social media, at town halls and in the courts. A country that gets it right will turn each minor incident into proof that the system, and the people behind it, are accountable.

To achieve this, liability communication needs to be treated as a safety feature, not a legal footnote. Only then will people be able to truly benefit from the AV promise of cleaner, safer, accessible urban mobility. But the wording needs to be designed for general consumers, not lawyers. Without this, AV adoption risks becoming a slow-motion pile-up.

Paurav Shukla received funding from Trustworthy Autonomous Systems Programme, funded by the UKRI Strategic Priorities Fund.

Tugra Akarsu 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. Driverless taxis are heading to the UK, but it’s still not clear who to blame when something goes wrong – https://theconversation.com/driverless-taxis-are-heading-to-the-uk-but-its-still-not-clear-who-to-blame-when-something-goes-wrong-269233

December 10, 2025

From head to mistletoe: the curious biology of elves

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle Spear, Professor of Anatomy, University of Bristol

As Christmas Eve draws near, we’re reminded of the tireless elves behind the scenes, toiling in workshops to bring festive magic to life.

Imagine Santa’s elves not as fantasy figures but as highly adapted beings designed for the unique demands of their world. From enhanced resilience to happy hormones and efficient energy production, each adapted anatomical feature serves a purpose, allowing them to work joyfully, and without pause, in a cold climate that would challenge the rest of us.

Through the lens of this imagined elf, we take a look at general anatomy, using scientific principles and a nod to the Will Ferrell movie Elf to fill in some of the festive details.

Ho-ho-hormones

The remarkable cheer and endurance of an elf can be attributed to a finely tuned endocrine system that supports both their emotional resilience and energy needs.

Their pituitary glands probably produce high baseline levels of serotonin and endorphins – often called “feel-good hormones” – helping them maintain a naturally cheerful disposition even under the pressures of Christmas deadlines.

Beyond individual happiness, elves surely must thrive on teamwork in the workshop. An elevated capacity to release oxytocin, the “bonding hormone”, helps foster strong social connections, promoting a collaborative and harmonious working environment.

With extra oxytocin receptors in the brain, elves would quickly form bonds with each other, boosting morale and creating a positive atmosphere that is crucial for high-stress, close-quarters work. Also essential for good elf and safety.

Presumably, elves would require adaptable sleep patterns to handle the long hours leading up to Christmas. Their pineal glands could produce a specialised form of melatonin, allowing them to reset their internal clocks on demand.

This adaptation would support both sustained alertness during extended shifts and quick recovery naps, keeping them fresh and focused throughout the season.

Good skin and elf care

In the north pole’s long winters, elves may rely on their skin’s heightened ability to synthesise vitamin D even in low-light conditions. This helps regulate mood and energy by supporting serotonin production, which promotes emotional stability, and enhancing mitochondrial function for efficient energy production.

Their skin might also be rich in melanin that adapts to seasonal light changes, maximising their sunlight absorption without risk of seasonal-affective disorder.

A dark polar night tableau. — Elves’ skin is perfectly adapted to dark polar nights.
Esa Ylisuvanto/Shutterstock.com

Sugar and spice

The elf digestive system is probably optimised for processing high-carbohydrate, high-sugar diets without succumbing to the energy crashes humans might experience.

To thrive on a diet rich in sweets, elves would rely on high levels of sucrase, maltase and amylase — enzymes that break down sugars and starches quickly. This enzymatic boost allows for rapid glucose release, sustaining their energy without the usual sugar crash, and keeping them fuelled for long hours in the workshop.

Elves’ livers could also play a crucial role, storing vast reserves of glycogen for quick energy release when needed, especially during the busiest days of the festive season. Their small intestines might boast enhanced villi – tiny, finger-like projections that line the gut – increasing the surface area for nutrient absorption and ensuring every candy cane is put to good use.

Elves might have highly efficient mitochondria – the tiny powerhouses inside cells that convert food into energy – allowing them to produce energy from nutrients more effectively. This could keep their energy levels steady without sharp crashes, helping them remain upbeat and active throughout their lengthy work shifts.

Cold comfort

Thriving in the subzero temperatures of the north pole requires more than a good set of thermals. Elves’ circulatory systems probably feature counter-current heat exchange mechanisms – where warm blood flowing out heats up cold blood coming back in – similar to those found in penguins’ feet and human testicles, to minimise heat loss in extremities. Blood vessels in their hands and feet would work in tandem to recycle warmth.

Elf respiratory systems are equally impressive, designed to maximise oxygen intake in cold, thin air. With larger-than-average nasal cavities lined with specialised mucous membranes, elves can warm and humidify incoming air, protecting their lungs from the frigid environment.

Hear comes Santa Claus

Acute hearing would be essential for quality control and ensuring every toy meets Santa’s exacting standards.

In a bustling workshop, elves need heightened sensory abilities to stay on task. Their ears, already iconic, might also feature internal adaptations – enhanced auditory canals for picking up subtle sounds.

Elf eyes, adapted for the low-light conditions of the winter months, would probably boast a high density of rod cells – the light-sensitive cells in the retina that help us see in darkness – allowing them to see clearly even during the longest polar nights. Perhaps they’ve also evolved a reflective layer behind the retina, similar to a cat’s tapetum lucidum, giving them a distinctive twinkle and ensuring no detail escapes their gaze.

Sleighing it

An elf’s musculoskeletal system would need to be both robust and specialised for the physical demands of their job. Working long hours crafting toys requires dexterous hands supported by flexible yet strong finger joints, enhanced by tendons and ligaments adapted to repetitive tasks. To avoid the perils of repetitive strain injuries, elves might have increased collagen production, keeping their joints supple and resilient.

With an optimised ratio of fast-twitch muscle fibres (for quick movements) and slow-twitch fibres (for endurance), elves would be perfectly suited for bursts of energy and sustained activity alike, ensuring they can switch seamlessly between nimble toy-making and the occasional snowball fight.

So this Christmas, as you admire the handiwork of Santa’s helpers, spare a thought for the ingenious anatomical adaptations that make the merry work of elves possible.

Michelle Spear 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. From head to mistletoe: the curious biology of elves – https://theconversation.com/from-head-to-mistletoe-the-curious-biology-of-elves-269155

December 10, 2025

Europe must reject Trump’s nonsense accusations of ‘civilizational erasure’ – but it urgently needs a strategy of its own

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Francesco Grillo, Academic Fellow, Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University

European leaders must agree on how to respond to the accusation that their continent faces “civilizational erasure”. These were the strongest words used in the most strongly-worded national security strategy ever released by a US government, making it clear that allyship is no longer a given.

And yet, what exactly does “civilizational erasure” mean? The term seems to come straight out of science fiction and deserves qualification. What kind of civilisation is being erased?

The document released by the US government explicitly specifies that this is not about economic decline so much as the “values” that make European nations “reliable allies” to the US.

The implication is that the current administration is worried that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are no longer foundational to Europe as they were to America. In addition, it seems that Trump is worried that migration is the cause of this problem.

This is curious. As far as “freedom of speech” and “political liberty” go, even the ranking published annually by the hyper libertarian Washington-based Cato Institute acknowledges that six of the top ten most free countries of the world are from the EU. In contrast, the US is tied with the UK at number 17.

The evidence on being “happy” is even worse for Americans (they are ranked 24th by Gallup) and even better for Europeans (four of the top five happiest nations in the world seem to be in the EU, and the fifth is Iceland).

Perhaps the most dangerous symptom of civilizational decline is apparent when we consider the parameter of the ability to pursue “life”. According to the OECD, in 2024, the US spent more on health than any other country per person at over U$12,000 (£9,000) per year (Switzerland, in a distant second place, at US$8,000). Yet Americans’ life expectancy is six years less on average than Europeans’.

Last but not least, migration. The US government seems concerned that too many immigrants will make Europe unrecognisable, but it is the United States that hosts the largest number of first or second-generation immigrants (including Donald Trump, whose mother and four grandparents were all born in Europe). The security strategy’s diagnosis seems oddly oblivious to the role migrants played in building American success.

How should Europe respond?

It is, thus, difficult to see how Europe is being erased. It is nevertheless true that Europe has a problem. Whereas the US has a strategy, Europeans are very far from even agreeing on what their own interests are.

As wrong as the US may be to attempt to establish a strategy on Europe’s behalf, this lack of vision makes it increasingly unsustainable for Europe to remain one of the best places to be born or to live.

Three messages stand out clearly from the strategy. First, the US does not want to be the world’s sheriff and is not going to pay to stabilise the world. There is even the implication here that the US is happy for the world to be divided into cold war-style “areas of influence”.

Second, the US now believes it is a mistake to think exporting democracy or liberalism maximises the chance of world peace and will no longer pursue this agenda. Third, the US believes that nation states are the cornerstone of any possible world order and that multilateralism (a notion encompassing a diverse range of institutions from the UN to the EU) is undermining that.

While Europe does not need to agree on these assertions, it can use each of the three US points to come up with a response.

Friedrich Merz, Keir Starmer, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Emmanuel Macron sitting in front of their national flags. — European leaders gathered in London to discuss the path ahead after the US published its security strategy.
Flickr/Number 10, CC BY-NC-ND

It should, for example, be relatively happy to fill the gap left by US retreat. This would see Europe equipping itself to contribute to stability in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. Europe should probably also acknowledge that the Americans have a point when they say that “exporting democracy” does not necessarily buy peace.

Second, Europe can even agree with the US that “exporting” institutions and market regulations is complicated and not effective. We must simply focus on protecting human rights as much as possible, without asking other countries to imitate our model.

Third, and most important, it is true that international organisations are not working. But Europeans should answer US rhetoric not by going back to small nation states (as the security strategy suggests) but by assuming the leadership of a radical reform of multilateralism.

The international organisations that Trump has criticised, must rapidly become more capable of delivering solutions efficiently. This must include the EU because it’s obvious that any kind of strategy cannot be led by 27 individual nations working separately.

European civilization is not imploding. It is, however, true that such a civilization requires financial, political and defence resources. These were once bought cheaply from allies who no longer wish to subsidise Europe’s way of life.

It is time for a European security strategy. And one whose message, in a nutshell, is that Europeans are ready to lead and thrive in the changed geopolitcal climate of the 21st century.

Francesco Grillo is affiliated with Vision, the think tank,

– ref. Europe must reject Trump’s nonsense accusations of ‘civilizational erasure’ – but it urgently needs a strategy of its own – https://theconversation.com/europe-must-reject-trumps-nonsense-accusations-of-civilizational-erasure-but-it-urgently-needs-a-strategy-of-its-own-271763

December 10, 2025

New cancer therapy brings remission for patients with deadly T-cell leukaemia

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Justin Stebbing, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University

A small group of patients with an otherwise incurable form of T‑cell leukaemia have seen their cancer driven into remission by an innovative form of immune therapy.

The treatment uses T-cells – a type of white blood cell – from a healthy donor, re-engineered in the lab to recognise and attack leukaemia cells. Unlike personalised cancer therapies made from each patient’s own cells, these can be prepared in advance as an “off-the-shelf” product and given quickly to people in urgent need.

For families facing a disease that has returned after every standard treatment, a ready-made therapy that can clear leukaemia to undetectable levels is a major step forward. The latest results of the first 11 patients, treated at Great Ormond Street and King’s College Hospital, have just been published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The scientific trick here is particularly clever. In T‑cell leukaemia, the cancer itself is made of T-cells, so simply adding more T-cells from outside would normally cause friendly fire: the therapeutic cells would attack each other as well as the cancer or be rejected by the patient’s immune system. By using gene‑editing tools, researchers have switched off or altered key molecules on the donor T-cells so that they can slip past the patient’s immune defences and focus their attack on the leukaemia cells.

In early studies, some patients with no remaining treatment options achieved deep remissions, where even sensitive tests could no longer detect leukaemia. This then opened the door to a stem cell or bone marrow transplant from a donor, which remains the only realistic route to a long‑term cure for these patients.

T-cells explained.

Nuance lost in the media coverage

For the non-expert, it is tempting to see headlines about “reversing incurable cancer” and assume this is a magic bullet that will soon replace chemotherapy or radiotherapy. The truth is both more modest and, in some ways, more impressive.

This treatment is not designed to be the first thing given to every person with leukaemia. It is a specialist option for the few whose cancer has resisted or returned after standard treatments. In that setting, where the alternative may be palliative care alone, having an extra step on the ladder – one more line of defence – can be life changing, even if it is not perfect.

Another point often lost in media coverage is that this therapy is a bridge, not a destination. In the reported cases, the goal was to reduce the cancer burden enough to make a stem cell transplant feasible.

The engineered T-cells are not expected to provide lifelong control by themselves. Instead, they act as a very powerful but temporary strike against the leukaemia, buying time for the patient to receive a transplant, which can then rebuild a healthy immune and blood‑forming system.

That combined strategy – intensive but time‑limited immune therapy, followed by transplant – is what offers a realistic chance of long‑term survival for some of these patients.

Here, life after such treatment is rarely straightforward. A stem cell or bone marrow transplant can save a life, but it is also one of the most demanding procedures in modern medicine. In the months afterwards, patients are at high risk of serious infections, because their new immune system is still immature and may also be suppressed by drugs used to prevent rejection.

Many people experience profound fatigue, weight loss and emotional distress. A significant number spend repeated spells in hospital coping with complications such as graft‑versus‑host disease, where the donor immune cells attack the patient’s own tissues.

Even years later, survivors may live with chronic skin, gut or liver problems, hormonal changes, fertility issues, or the psychological impact of prolonged illness and uncertainty.

From that perspective, it is important not to present this new T‑cell treatment as a simple one‑time cure, after which life instantly returns to normal. For some patients in the New England Journal of Medicine “case series” (a report on a small set of patients), the therapy was part of a long, difficult journey that had already included multiple rounds of chemotherapy and hospital admissions.

Adding an experimental immune therapy and then a transplant increases both the chances of survival and the complexity of aftercare. After treatment, care isn’t just about checking whether the leukaemia has returned. Patients often need lifelong monitoring for late effects, vaccinations to retrain their new immune systems, and support with returning to work, study and family life.

A transformation hard to overstate

At the same time, for those people and their families, the gains are immense. To walk out of hospital after being told that nothing more could be done, and then later hear the words “no evidence of leukaemia”, is a transformation that is hard to overstate.

Parents describe seeing their children go back to school or play sport. Adults talk about being able to plan a holiday or think about the future again. These very human milestones embody the promise of the science far more clearly than any technical description of gene editing or immune receptors. Yet they rest on decades of painstaking lab work, safety testing and thoughtful choices by doctors, and on patients and families willing to take part in experimental treatments when the outcome is uncertain.

There is also a wider significance beyond this particular leukaemia. If donor‑derived, gene‑edited T-cells can be made safe and effective for one rare and aggressive cancer, the same concept might be adapted for other blood cancers or even some solid tumours.

An off‑the‑shelf cell therapy that can be stored, shipped and given in many hospitals could be far more accessible than bespoke therapies that rely on each patient’s own cells, which are complex and slow to manufacture. That said, scaling up production, ensuring the cells are available equitably, and managing the costs will be major challenges for health systems.

So, where does that leave the public trying to interpret dramatic headlines? It helps to hold two ideas in mind at once. First, this is an extraordinary scientific and clinical achievement for a group of patients who had very few options left, offering real hope where previously there was almost none. Second, it is not a universal cure, and it comes at the price of intense treatment and long‑term follow‑up.

The most honest way to describe it is as an extra lifeline for some people in very specific circumstances – a powerful new tool added to an existing toolbox, not the end of cancer as we know it. That may sound less dramatic than “reversing the incurable”, but for the families involved, it can mean everything.

Justin Stebbing 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. New cancer therapy brings remission for patients with deadly T-cell leukaemia – https://theconversation.com/new-cancer-therapy-brings-remission-for-patients-with-deadly-t-cell-leukaemia-271643

December 10, 2025

What Labour’s migration reforms mean for LGBTQ+ asylum seekers

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Diego Garcia Rodriguez, Leverhulme Research Fellow, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Nottingham

The UK government’s recently-announced plan to overhaul the asylum system rests on the idea that protection for refugees should be temporary and subject to regular review.

Currently, refugees are usually granted five years’ permission to stay, after which they can apply for settlement (indefinite leave to remain). Under the new proposals, recognised refugees would first receive “core protection” – 30 months’ leave, renewable after review. The government is also proposing a system that would make some people wait 20 years for settlement.

Like in Norway and Denmark, the UK is proposing allowing refugee status to be revoked and people deported if their country of origin is deemed to have become “safe”. In 2021, Denmark judged parts of Syria safe to return to and revoked or refused renewals for hundreds of Syrians, even as charities warned that returnees still faced serious risk.

For LGBTQ+ people, these plans present particular risks that could undermine their safety and ability to live openly.

Home Office data shows that, in 2023, 1,377 asylum claims (2% of the total) included sexual orientation as part of the basis for asylum. Equivalent gender identity statistics are not available.

For these asylum seekers, “safety” does not switch on when their countries’ laws change or a conflict stops. States can look stable on paper while people remain unsafe in their family homes, neighbourhoods, workplaces and at police stations.

The Home Office uses its official guidance about countries to evaluate whether it would be “safe” to return someone. It also might refer to relevant case law from the Upper Tribunal, a UK court that deals with immigration and asylum cases.

Some nationalities are treated as coming from “designated” safe states under British law, which can affect how asylum claims are processed. LGBTQ+ asylum charities have argued that countries are sometimes deemed safe even when they are dangerous for LGBTQ+ people.

Asylum seekers waving out of the window of a hotel in London. — The UK wants to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers.
BalochLenses/Shutterstock

In my research, I have encountered such examples. For example, I have met LGBTQ+ Namibians whose asylum claims were rejected after Namibia’s supreme court recognised foreign same-sex marriages (though same-sex marriage is still not legal in the country), despite evidence of well-founded fear of persecution and a lack of state protection.

My research interlocutors from countries labelled “safe” emphasised the differences between official “safety” and everyday threats. An Indian lesbian woman explained: “Being who I am in India, I wouldn’t be safe there, that’s why I left after my family started to threaten me.”

A lesbian woman speaking from Brazil, where she was deported from the UK after initially fleeing due to violent threats, said: “People think Brazil is safe, but it’s not, and you’re lucky to be alive if you’re LGBT here … It’s not about it being legal or illegal, you need to look at real life, what’s going on with people around you, churches, your boss.”

Both global and local non-profit organisations that support LGBTQ+ people have recorded high levels of violent deaths of LGBTQ+ people in Brazil, including the most killings of trans people in any country for 18 consecutive years.

The UN refugee agency has warned that misusing “safe country” concepts risks breaching the principle of non-refoulement: the duty not to return someone to persecution.

Under the UK’s asylum proposals, once a country is declared safe, refugees seeking to remain in the UK would have to prove that it would be dangerous for them to return.

If the possibility of being deported remains for 20 years, many will plan for life back under secrecy and return to the “closet” to stay safe. This may complicate their asylum applications, as the Home Office expects that claimants live “openly” as LGBTQ+ when assessing their applications.

Increased precarity

LGBTQ+ claimants tend to have thin safety nets. Family support is often absent because relatives are part of their persecution. While other claimants lean on organisations linked to their ethnic communities, I have found in my work that many LGBTQ+ people avoid them due to fear of stigma or violence.

A lesbian Nigerian woman told me that staff at a community organisation described same-sex relationships as something to “cast out”. Another said: “Not all people are going to accept you as you are”. This does not mean the UK is not welcoming or safe. Many asylum seekers have found support in LGBTQ+ organisations, inclusive churches and wider community spaces.

Additionally, the government’s plans to remove its obligation to provide accommodation and support for asylum seekers could make their situations more precarious – leading to homelessness, exploitative “sofa surfing” and risky survival strategies.

A fair asylum system should not declare whether a country is “safe” but, instead, assess whether an asylum seeker would be safe if returned there. That is the basic logic of refugee protection under the refugee convention, which says that states must not “expel … a refugee” to a place “where his life or freedom would be threatened”. In the UK, “safe country” lists are a modern policy tool introduced in the late 20th century as part of domestic law.

If Labour’s reforms turn refugee protection into a renewable status, the predictable result is more wrongful returns. This risks establishing a misleading picture of “real” refugees as only those fleeing wars, dismissing queer claimants facing targeted persecution.

Diego Garcia Rodriguez receives funding from the Leverhulme Trust. He is a Research Fellow at the University of Nottingham and a trustee at the LGBTIQ+ asylum charity Time To Be Out.

– ref. What Labour’s migration reforms mean for LGBTQ+ asylum seekers – https://theconversation.com/what-labours-migration-reforms-mean-for-lgbtq-asylum-seekers-271239

December 10, 2025

Farmers and supermarkets worry that extreme weather will stop food getting to consumers – here’s what needs to change

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mohammed F. Alzuhair, Doctor of Business Administration Candidate and Researcher, Durham University

Storm Amy with its gusts of nearly 100mph brought heavy rain, fallen trees, and transport disruption across parts of the UK in October. Shortly after, a cold spell brought frost risks in several areas. The shift from flooding to frost showed how quickly farmers’ access to fields, harvesting and transport can be disrupted.

It also revealed how heavily the food chain depends on clear, connected information when conditions change suddenly. Without improvements, in this type of extreme weather, supermarkets risk running short of food.

Extreme weather, like the floods and high winds of Storm Bram on December 9, is reshaping UK farming. A recent survey found that 87% of farmers have seen lower productivity because of droughts, floods or heatwaves, and major retailers now link higher food prices to weather-related harvest losses.

A recent UK assessment of resilience in the systems delivering food from farms to shops also identifies how much pressure severe weather places on production and transport.

Storm Amy exposed that clearly. It left fields too muddy for machinery and blocked rural access roads in several areas. Harvesting was paused and collections rescheduled because vehicles could not operate safely or reach farms by normal routes.

When many farms face the same conditions at once, produce reaches distribution centres later and waste risks rise. The storm illustrated how quickly weather can unsettle the flow of food, and how much depends on clear, connected information when conditions shift suddenly.

How information moves through the system is important. Farmers may know frost is coming, but not whether access roads are open nearby, whether rivers are rising in their region, or whether retailers are shifting collection times. Each part of the chain acts on its own information, so decisions are made later than they need to be.

A shared early-warning system could change that by giving farmers, retailers and public agencies (such as local authorities) the same practical signals at the same time. Information about soil conditions, water availability, severe-weather alerts and access, could help the food system can adjust earlier and avoid possible food shortages.

Food is already classified as part of the UK’s critical national infrastructure, meaning disruptions can affect essential services. Projections from the Met Office, the UK’s weather and climate science agency, suggest Britain will face hotter, drier summers and warmer, wetter winters.

They also warn of more frequent extreme events. Even as intense rain falls in some areas, reservoirs in parts of south-east England are entering winter below typical levels, showing how uneven rainfall can leave soils saturated while water storage remains tight.

The rapid shift from heavy rain to colder conditions illustrates what the Met Office describes as compound events – hazards arriving close together that can cause greater disruption than either would on their own. For farmers, this can mean managing soaked ground one day and protecting crops from frost the next, all while keeping collections and deliveries on track.

How Storm Amy affected one farmer.

Data that doesn’t connect

Farmers already monitor soil moisture, field conditions and crop status. Public agencies track rainfall, river levels and flood alerts. Retailers have complicated systems that include transport networks and assessing expected demand. But these numbers sit in different systems, often using different formats, making them difficult to bring together quickly.

At its core, this is a problem of systems not being able to talk to each other when it matters. Work on the food data transparency partnership (which brings together views from government departments and industry) highlights the need for common standards.

Technical groups make the same point – that inconsistent formats and definitions prevent organisations from forming a clear shared view of what is happening on the ground.

Each set of data helps in isolation; the difficulty is that they are not easily viewed together.

Supermarkets want change too

In November, Tesco’s UK chief executive, Ashwin Prasad, called for a national framework for farm data, noting that 96% of farmers say inconsistent standards make planning harder. When both the UK’s largest retailer and its suppliers highlight the same barrier, it suggests a deeper, system-wide issue rather than an isolated concern.

Government plans for revising its agricultural policy is starting to acknowledge these issues. There are pilot schemes testing the use of shared environmental data on farms. And the food data transparency partnership is working on more consistent data rules. These efforts are important foundations, but recent events show that more practical, real-time coordination is still needed, especially in emergencies.

Public agencies hold information that no other part of the system can access: regional transport pressures, infrastructure constraints and emergency responsibilities. They are also required to assess climate-related risks under government reporting standards which will start to be introduced in 2026. These assessments depend on accurate, timely data, something that becomes far harder to provide when information is fragmented.

With clearer and more connected information, government bodies could identify which rural roads matter most for moving perishable goods, direct targeted support to farmers when severe weather threatens crops, spot pressure points when multiple regions face disruption, and plan long-term investments in flood management, soil health and water resources.

Why early-warning systems are needed

The UK already has many of the components needed for a modern, connected food-information system, detailed monitoring on farms themselves, national forecasting and sophisticated retail logistics. The priority now is to bring these parts together.

A shared early-warning layer could make a difference. It would not replace existing tools or farmers’ experience, but provide a small set of common signals, soil conditions, water availability, severe-weather alerts and key access-route issues, available to everyone at the same time. To work in practice, it must also ensure that farmers retain clear control over how their data is used so that trust and coordination develop together.

A recent survey found that more than 80% of UK farmers are worried that climate change is “harming their livelihoods”. That sense of pressure underlines the need for systems that help farmers prepare earlier and respond more confidently when conditions change.

Better, more connected data is one of the simplest ways to offer that support, and to help keep food moving smoothly as British weather becomes increasingly unpredictable.

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 47,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Mohammed F. Alzuhair 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. Farmers and supermarkets worry that extreme weather will stop food getting to consumers – here’s what needs to change – https://theconversation.com/farmers-and-supermarkets-worry-that-extreme-weather-will-stop-food-getting-to-consumers-heres-what-needs-to-change-270924

December 10, 2025

L’Australie interdit les réseaux sociaux aux moins de 16 ans : un modèle bientôt suivi par d’autres pays ?

Source: The Conversation – France in French (3) – By Lisa M. Given, Professor of Information Sciences & Director, Social Change Enabling Impact Platform, RMIT University

L’accès aux réseaux sociaux doit-il être restreint jusqu’à un âge donné, et si oui, jusqu’à quel âge, et comment exactement ?
Sanket Mishra/Unsplash

C’est le résultat de plusieurs années de campagne du gouvernement australien et de parents d’enfants victimes de harcèlement en ligne : l’entrée en vigueur d’une loi interdisant les réseaux sociaux aux moins de 16 ans. Des applications telles qu’Instagram, Snapchat, X, Facebook ou encore Reddit sont désormais soumises à l’obligation de bannir tous les utilisateurs de moins de 16 ans sous peine d’amendes. Si cette loi soulève de nombreuses questions sur son efficacité réelle et ses modalités de mise en œuvre, et si d’autres pays privilégient des mesures moins contraignantes, le texte n’en constitue pas moins une première mondiale et suscite un intérêt à l’international. Affaire à suivre…

Après des mois d’attente et de débats, la loi sur les réseaux sociaux en Australie est désormais en vigueur. Les Australiens de moins de 16 ans doivent désormais composer avec cette nouvelle réalité qui leur interdit d’avoir un compte sur certaines plates-formes de réseaux sociaux, notamment Instagram, TikTok et Facebook.

Seul le temps dira si cette expérience audacieuse, une première mondiale, sera couronnée de succès. En attendant, de nombreux pays envisagent déjà de suivre l’exemple de l’Australie, tandis que d’autres adoptent une approche différente pour tenter d’assurer la sécurité des jeunes en ligne.

Un mouvement global

En novembre, le Parlement européen a appelé à l’adoption d’une interdiction similaire des réseaux sociaux pour les moins de 16 ans.

La présidente de la Commission européenne, Ursula von der Leyen, a déclaré qu’elle avait étudié les restrictions australiennes et la manière dont elles traitent ce qu’elle a qualifié d’« algorithmes qui exploitent la vulnérabilité des enfants », laissant les parents impuissants face au « tsunami des big tech qui envahit leurs foyers ».

En octobre, la Nouvelle-Zélande a annoncé qu’elle allait introduire une législation similaire à celle de l’Australie, à la suite des travaux d’une commission parlementaire chargée d’examiner la meilleure façon de lutter contre les dommages causés par les réseaux sociaux. Le rapport de la commission sera publié début 2026.

Le Pakistan et l’Inde visent à réduire l’exposition des enfants à des contenus susceptibles de leur porter préjudice, en introduisant des règles exigeant l’accord parental et la vérification de l’âge pour accéder aux réseaux sociaux, ainsi que des exigences en matière de modération adressées aux plates-formes.

La Malaisie a annoncé qu’elle interdirait l’accès aux réseaux sociaux aux enfants de moins de 16 ans à partir de 2026. Cette mesure s’inscrit dans la continuité de l’obligation imposée à partir de janvier 2025 aux réseaux sociaux et aux plates-formes de messagerie comptant au moins huit millions d’utilisateurs d’obtenir une licence d’exploitation et de mettre en place des mesures de vérification de l’âge et de sécurité des contenus.

De son côté, la France envisage d’interdire les réseaux sociaux aux moins de 15 ans et d’imposer un couvre-feu de 22 h à 8 h pour l’utilisation des plates-formes aux 15-18 ans. Ces mesures font partie des recommandations formulées par une commission d’enquête française en septembre 2025, qui a également prescrit d’interdire les smartphones à l’école et d’instaurer un délit de « négligence numérique pour les parents qui ne protègent pas leurs enfants ».

En 2023, la France a promulgué une loi contraignant les plates-formes à obtenir l’accord des parents des enfants de moins de 15 ans pour que ces derniers puissent créer un compte sur les réseaux sociaux. Pour autant, cette mesure n’a pas encore été mise en application. C’est également le cas en Allemagne : dans ce pays, les enfants âgés de 13 à 16 ans ne peuvent accéder aux plates-formes qu’avec l’accord de leurs parents, mais dans les faits, aucun contrôle réel n’est exercé.

En Espagne, l’âge minimum pour créer un compte sur les réseaux sociaux passera de 14 ans actuellement à 16 ans. Les moins de 16 ans pourront tout de même créer un compte à la condition expresse d’avoir l’accord de leurs parents.

La Norvège a annoncé en juillet son intention de restreindre l’accès aux réseaux sociaux pour les moins de 15 ans. Le gouvernement a expliqué que la loi serait « conçue dans le respect des droits fondamentaux des enfants, notamment la liberté d’expression, l’accès à l’information et le droit d’association ».

En novembre, le Danemark a annoncé souhaiter « l’interdiction de l’accès aux réseaux sociaux à toute personne âgée de moins de 15 ans ». Cependant, contrairement à la législation australienne, les parents peuvent passer outre ces règles afin de permettre aux enfants âgés de 13 et 14 ans de conserver leur accès à ces plates-formes. Toutefois, aucune date de mise en œuvre n’a été fixée et l’adoption du texte par les législateurs devrait prendre plusieurs mois. On ignore la façon dont l’interdiction danoise sera appliquée. Mais le pays dispose d’un programme national d’identification numérique qui pourrait être utilisé à cette fin.

En juillet, le Danemark a été sélectionné pour participer à un programme pilote (avec la Grèce, la France, l’Espagne et l’Italie) visant à tester une application de vérification de l’âge qui pourrait être lancée dans toute l’Union européenne à l’intention des sites pour adultes et d’autres fournisseurs de services numériques.

Une femme aux cheveux blonds portant un blazer blanc — La présidente de la Commission européenne, Ursula von der Leyen, étudie les restrictions imposées par l’Australie sur les réseaux sociaux. L’Union européenne pourrait suivre l’exemple de l’Australie.
Wikimedia, CC BY

Des résistances

Pour autant, ce type de restrictions n’est pas appliqué partout dans le monde.

Par exemple, la Corée du Sud a décidé de ne pas adopter une interdiction des réseaux sociaux pour les enfants. Mais elle interdira l’utilisation des téléphones portables et autres appareils dans les salles de classe à partir de mars 2026.

Dans la ville de Toyoake (au sud-ouest de Tokyo, au Japon), une solution très différente a été proposée. Le maire de la ville, Masafumi Koki, a publié en octobre une ordonnance limitant l’utilisation des smartphones, tablettes et ordinateurs à deux heures par jour pour les personnes de tous âges.

Koki est informé des restrictions imposées par l’Australie en matière de réseaux sociaux. Mais comme il l’a expliqué :

« Si les adultes ne sont pas tenus de respecter les mêmes normes, les enfants n’accepteront pas les règles. »

Bien que l’ordonnance ait suscité des réactions négatives et ne soit pas pas contraignante, elle a incité 40 % des habitants à réfléchir à leur comportement, et 10 % d’entre eux ont réduit le temps passé sur leur smartphone.

Aux États-Unis, l’opposition aux restrictions imposées par l’Australie sur les réseaux sociaux a été extrêmement virulente et significative.

Les médias et les plateformes états-uniens ont exhorté le président Donald Trump à « réprimander » l’Australie au sujet de sa législation. Ils affirment que les entreprises états-uniennes sont injustement visées et ont déposé des plaintes officielles auprès du Bureau américain du commerce.

Le président Trump a déclaré qu’il s’opposerait à tout pays qui « attaquerait » les plates-formes états-uniennes. Les États-Unis ont récemment convoqué la commissaire australienne à la sécurité électronique Julie Inman-Grant pour témoigner devant le Congrès. Le représentant républicain Jim Jordan a affirmé que l’application de la loi australienne sur la sécurité en ligne « impose des obligations aux entreprises américaines et menace la liberté d’expression des citoyens américains », ce que Mme Inman-Grant a fermement nié.

Maintien de la vigilance mondiale

Alors que la plupart des pays semblent s’accorder sur les préoccupations liées au fonctionnement des algorithmes et aux contenus néfastes auxquels les enfants sont exposés sur les réseaux sociaux, une seule chose est claire : il n’existe pas de solution miracle pour remédier à ces problèmes.

Il n’existe pas de restrictions faisant consensus ni d’âge spécifique à partir duquel les législateurs s’accorderaient à dire que les enfants devraient avoir un accès illimité à ces plates-formes.

De nombreux pays en dehors de l’Australie donnent aux parents la possibilité d’autoriser l’accès à Internet s’ils estiment que cela est dans l’intérêt de leurs enfants. Et de nombreux pays réfléchissent à la meilleure façon d’appliquer les restrictions, s’ils mettent en place des règles similaires.

Alors que les experts soulignent les difficultés techniques liées à l’application des restrictions australiennes, et que les jeunes Australiens envisagent des solutions de contournement pour conserver leurs comptes ou trouver de nouvelles plates-formes à utiliser, d’autres pays continueront à observer et à planifier leurs prochaines actions.

Lisa M. Given a reçu des financements de l’Australian Research Council et de l’eSafety Commission australienne. Elle est membre de l’Académie des sciences sociales d’Australie et de l’Association for Information Science and Technology.

– ref. L’Australie interdit les réseaux sociaux aux moins de 16 ans : un modèle bientôt suivi par d’autres pays ? – https://theconversation.com/laustralie-interdit-les-reseaux-sociaux-aux-moins-de-16-ans-un-modele-bientot-suivi-par-dautres-pays-271774

December 10, 2025

À qui appartiennent les poissons ? L’épineuse question de la répartition des quotas de pêche européens

Source: The Conversation – in French – By Sigrid Lehuta, Chercheure en halieutique, Ifremer

Les poissons de la Manche n’ont pas pu voter au moment du Brexit, ceux de l’Atlantique n’ont pas de visa de l’espace Schengen et pourtant, leur sort a été fixé au sein de l’Union européenne dans les années 1970. Actualiser ces statu quo anciens dans une Europe à 27 où les océans se réchauffent et où bon nombre de poissons tendent à migrer vers le nord à cause de la hausse des températures devient plus que nécessaire. Voici pourquoi.

Les populations marines ne connaissent pas de frontières. Tous les océans et toutes les mers du monde sont connectées, permettant la libre circulation des animaux marins. Les seules limitations sont intrinsèques à chaque espèce, dépendantes de sa capacité de déplacement, de ses besoins et tolérances vis-à-vis des températures, des profondeurs et d’autres facteurs.

Les poissons ne connaissent ainsi pas de barrières linéaires ou immuables, mais les États ont, eux, quadrillé les mers en fonction de leurs zones économiques exclusives (ZEE). Des institutions onusiennes, comme l’Organisation des Nations unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO), la Commission générale des pêches pour la Méditerranée (CGPM) ou le Conseil international de l’exploitation de la mer, définissent des zones d’évaluation des stocks ou de gestion des pêches dans lesquelles sont régulées les captures ou les activités de pêche.

Dans l’UE : une règle peu révisée depuis plus de quarante ans

Mais à qui sont donc les poissons qui franchissent allégrement les limites des ZEE et des zones de gestion de pêche ? Pour répondre à cette question et éviter la surpêche, des mécanismes de gestion commune et de partage des captures ont été mis en place au sein de l’Union européenne (UE) et avec les pays voisins.

Le tonnage de poisson que l’on peut pêcher est d’abord défini pour chaque espèce et chaque zone de gestion (un stock) afin d’éviter la surpêche. Puis ce tonnage est divisé entre pays, comme les tantièmes dans une copropriété ou les parts dans un héritage. C’est cette répartition entre pays, appelée la « clé de répartition », qui est ici discutée.

Pour la plupart des stocks, la clé de répartition est encore définie sur la base des captures réalisées dans les années 1973-1978 par chacun des neuf États alors membres de l’UE. Cette référence historique a mené à la dénomination de « stabilité relative » qui désigne la méthode de partage des captures annuelles admissibles : la clé est stable, mais la quantité obtenue chaque année varie en fonction de l’état du stock.

Chaque État membre est ensuite libre de distribuer son quota à ses pêcheurs selon des modalités qu’il choisit. En France, chaque navire possède des antériorités de captures propres mais qui ne lui donnent pas automatiquement accès au quota correspondant. Elles déterminent en revanche les sous-quotas attribués à l’organisation de producteurs (OP) à laquelle le navire choisit d’adhérer. L’OP définit en interne les modalités de répartition de ses sous-quotas entre ses adhérents, qui sont différentes entre OP, stocks, flottilles, années…

Échange de quotas pour le merlan bleu entre pays membres de l’UE en 2024.
Fourni par l’auteur

Un partage satisfaisant pour la France mais qui atteint ses limites

La France fait partie des gagnants de ce partage ancien. Le cadre juridique bien établi et la prévisibilité du système facilitent la programmation et évitent d’interminables négociations. Un système assez fluide, avec des échanges parfois systématiques entre États ou entre OP, permet d’éviter d’atteindre les quotas trop tôt dans l’année. Les OP jouent un rôle essentiel pour optimiser l’utilisation et la valorisation des quotas sur l’année, limiter la concurrence entre pêcheurs, ou éviter des crises économiques.

Mais à l’heure du changement climatique, et dans une Europe post-Brexit, ce modèle ancien se frotte à des questionnements nouveaux, qu’ils soient sociétaux ou environnementaux.

Le cas du maquereau est emblématique de cela. Depuis 2010, ce poisson migre de plus en plus vers le nord et atteint les eaux de l’Islande, pays qui n’avait pratiquement pas de quotas pour cette espèce. Faute d’accord avec les pays voisins, la capture annuelle du maquereau dépasse la recommandation scientifique depuis de nombreuses années, menant à la surpêche.

Le Brexit a, quant à lui, provoqué une réduction de la part de l’UE pour les stocks partagés avec le Royaume-Uni, car pêchées dans leur ZEE, avec de lourdes conséquences économiques et sociales : mise à la casse de 90 bateaux français et baisse d’approvisionnement et donc d’activité dans les criées et pour toute la chaîne de transport et de transformation du poisson.

Autre question épineuse : que faire pour les espèces qui sont capturées simultanément par l’engin de pêche alors que leurs niveaux de quota sont très différents ?

C’est le cas par exemple du cabillaud en mer Celtique. Cette espèce est généralement capturée en même temps que le merlu et la baudroie, mais elle fait l’objet d’un quota très faible en raison de l’effondrement du stock. Les pêcheurs qui disposent de quotas pour le merlu ou la baudroie sont donc contraints de cesser leur activité pour éviter de capturer sans le vouloir du cabillaud.

Chaque année, de difficiles négociations sont nécessaires entre l’UE et des pays non membres avec qui des stocks sont partagés, comme la Norvège et le Royaume-Uni, soit des pays qui échappent aux objectifs et critères de répartition définis par la politique commune des pêches.

En France, ce statu quo freine aussi l’installation des jeunes et la transition vers des méthodes de pêche plus vertueuses. En effet, pour s’installer, il ne s’agit pas simplement de pouvoir payer un navire. Le prix de vente d’un navire d’occasion tient en réalité compte des antériorités de pêche qui y restent attachées, ce qui augmente la facture.

Et si l’on veut transitionner vers d’autres techniques ou zones de pêche à des fins de préservation de la biodiversité, d’amélioration du confort ou de la sécurité en mer, ou encore de conciliation des usages avec, par exemple, l’éolien en mer, ce sera nécessairement conditionné à la redistribution des quotas correspondants aux nouvelles espèces pêchées et forcément au détriment d’autres navires qui les exploitent historiquement.

Quelles alternatives au système en place ?

Les atouts et limites du système en place sont bien connus des acteurs de la pêche, mais la réouverture des négociations autour d’une autre clé de répartition promet des débats difficiles entre l’UE et les pays voisins.

L’UE, depuis 2022, incite les États à élargir les critères de répartition du quota national à des considérations environnementales, sociales et économiques. En France, cela s’est traduit en 2024 par de nouveaux critères d’allocation de la réserve nationale de quota. La réserve nationale correspond à une part de quota qui est reprise par l’État à chaque vente et sortie de flotte des navires. Sa répartition favorise désormais les jeunes et la décarbonation des navires.

Cette avancée, même timide, prouve que le choix et l’application de nouveaux critères sont possibles, mais elle reste difficile dans un contexte de faible rentabilité des flottes et de demandes en investissements conséquents pour l’adaptation des bateaux aux transitions écologiques et énergétiques.

En juin 2024, avec un groupe d’une trentaine de scientifiques des pêches, réunis sous l’égide de l’Association française d’halieutique, nous avons mené une réflexion sur les alternatives possibles à la clé actuelle. Parmi les propositions, quatre points ont été saillants pour une pêche durable, équitable et rentable :

la nécessaire prise en compte d’une multitude de critères écologiques et halieutiques pour l’attribution de part de quota. Par exemple, l’utilisation d’engins sélectifs, et moins impactants pour la biodiversité ou la proximité des zones de pêche, traduisant un souci de limitation d’empreinte carbone, et d’adaptabilité aux changements de distribution ;
la nécessaire prise en compte de critères socio-économiques, comme l’équité entre navires, entre générations, entre sexes… ;
la création de récompenses en quota pour la participation à la collecte de données nécessaires pour informer une gestion écosystémique et permettre la mise en place d’un système de répartition fondé sur des critères biologiques (mise en place de caméras à bord, campagnes exploratoires, auto-échantillonnage) ;
la nécessaire transparence concernant la répartition nationale et ses critères.

Conscients de la charge réglementaire qui pèse sur les patrons pêcheurs et des difficultés financières, parfois insurmontables, associées aux adaptations (changement d’engins, de pratiques…), certaines propositions reposent davantage sur des incitations que sur des obligations, c’est-à-dire des quotas supplémentaires venant récompenser des adaptations volontaires.

Pour permettre une transition douce vers les nouvelles règles, nous conseillons le maintien temporaire ou partiel des antériorités afin de donner le temps et la visibilité nécessaires aux pêcheurs pour effectuer les adaptations adéquates.

Nous nous accordons sur une mise à jour à intervalle régulier de la clé de répartition entre pays et navires selon un calendrier prédéfini et en application des critères retenus pour améliorer l’adaptabilité des pêcheries aux changements. Les critères pourraient être aussi révisés, tout en évitant une réouverture des négociations trop régulièrement. Nous insistons sur le nécessaire maintien de la flexibilité indispensable aux adaptations dans un contexte environnemental très fluctuant lié au changement global.

Cet article a été écrit sur la base d’un travail collaboratif mené par Arthur Le Bigot, encadré par les autrices (Ifremer), pour lequel une trentaine de scientifiques a été consultée au cours d’un atelier organisé par l’Association française d’halieutique et des acteurs du système pêche interviewés. Le contenu de cet article reflète l’interprétation des autrices sur la base de leurs connaissances et des propos recueillis au cours des entretiens et de l’atelier. Il n’engage pas les participants à l’atelier, les personnes interviewées ni les membres de l’AFH.

Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.

– ref. À qui appartiennent les poissons ? L’épineuse question de la répartition des quotas de pêche européens – https://theconversation.com/a-qui-appartiennent-les-poissons-lepineuse-question-de-la-repartition-des-quotas-de-peche-europeens-270814