Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By George S. Rigakos, Professor of the Political Economy of Policing, Carleton University

Baseball in Canada is thriving, from the grassroots to the professional level.

Recent Toronto Blue Jays viewership numbers have been extraordinary, youth participation continues to climb, elite player showcasing and recruiting is expanding — and a new 19U national championship has just been announced by Baseball Canada.

When I’m not researching or writing about policing and security — an area requiring reflection about the interplay of structures, power and bureaucracy — I devote my energies to doing my small part to help the state of baseball in Canada, both as general manager of the Carleton Ravens baseball team and as a researcher.

I helped found the Ottawa chapter of the Society for American Baseball Research, co-authored a peer-reviewed article for the Baseball Research Journal and have reflected on the state Canadian university baseball for the Canadian Baseball Network.

My research and experience points to an an unavoidable conclusion: university baseball in Canada is shaped less by a lack of interest than by a series of persistent organizational barriers.

Formal recognition lacking

To start, outside Ontario, no major university sport body formally recognizes baseball.

University teams in Atlantic and Western Canada operate only because coaches and students organize their own schedules, pay their own way and operate outside the formal sport-administration structure that supports varsity teams. The notable exception is the UBC Thunderbirds, who play in the U.S.-based National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics.

The bodies overseeing university sport in Western Canada, the Maritimes and Québec don’t sanction or host university baseball in any capacity.

A three-game season

While Ontario University Athletics (OUA) formally recognizes university baseball, the organization’s official university baseball schedule is woeful, consisting of three, maybe four games. Under the OUA structure, the only sanctioned competition is a single regional weekend in October, followed by an underwhelming two-game provincial championship for the four teams that win their regions. This represents the entire formal university baseball calendar in Ontario.

A team that doesn’t move past the regional stage, therefore, completes its entire OUA “season” in one weekend.

This would be extraordinary for any major sport, but it is especially remarkable in baseball: a game built around long schedules, repeat matchups and consequential sample sizes. The 20 or more games that teams actually do play in September and early October are not acknowledged by the OUA in any formal way.

There are no official standings, statistics, athlete profiles or an official league website. For most of the fall, university baseball effectively takes place outside the provincial athletic system.

Held together by volunteers

Because the OUA acknowledges only a small fraction of the schedule, coaches organize every game, secure fields, arrange umpires, co-ordinate travel and compile statistics that are published by yet another savvy volunteer.

Some programs receive modest institutional support; most rely on player fees. Some Ontario universities treat baseball as varsity sport while most classify it as a “club” or “varsity club.”

By contrast, for student athletes participating in the three other major Canadian sports — hockey, football and basketball — established provincial and national structures provide visibility, scheduling and predictable competitive pathways.

Baseball’s exclusion from the varsity system in Ontario and its complete absence from university athletics bodies in the remainder of the country simply does not square with fan interest and participation.

Despite its tremendous popularity, baseball has been treated as the odd man out.

Baseball athlete exodus

This structural absence contributes to the large number of athletes who leave the country to pursue collegiate competition. According to data compiled by the Canadian Baseball Network for 2025, 1,187 Canadian baseball players are currently competing at U.S. colleges across NCAA, NAIA and junior college levels.

To put this into some perspective, Canadian collegiate baseball rosters typically carry about 25 to 30 athletes. The Canadians now playing south of the border therefore represent approximately 45 fully rostered university and college baseball teams.

Even if only a small fraction of these players remained in Canada, it would dramatically expand the competitive landscape and provide enough depth for a robust college and university system. As I wrote this article, there were only 26 recognized university programs competing in Canada.

The cost of this exodus is not merely athletic. Canadian colleges and universities are currently facing a serious financial crisis.

Assuming an average annual undergraduate tuition of $7,573 per year, the Canadian student-athletes now playing baseball at U.S. colleges represent up to $36 million dollars in foregone four-year domestic tuition revenue alone.

This is not simply a story of elite prospects seeking professional opportunities. Many players leave because there is no structured, visible or reliable university baseball pathway at home.

A dead zone

Even so, the experience of university baseball is meaningful to those who play.

Coaches, managers and other volunteers record results, manage schedules and transform the fall season into consequential competition, counting the results toward qualification for a grassroots championship involving teams from Ontario, Québec and the Maritimes.

The broader problem is institutional. Public interest is high, youth development is strong and the talent exists in abundance. University baseball in Canada is active, committed and culturally meaningful — but left outside the structures that ordinarily support and sustain collective achievement, it struggles to thrive.

In sociological terms, it operates in a state once described by the late, great social anthropologist David Graeber: a “dead zone.”

For Graeber, a “dead zone” is fostered when a system creates obstacles that frustrate and silence people, effectively making them unseen. Often these zones operate outside formal rules, and are dependent on unpaid labour. As a consequence, they’re prone to crises and collapse.

How could this change?

Despite the apparent fragility of the current system, change would be neither complicated nor costly. Indeed, as we have noted, a “rogue” national championship already exists.

In late October, coaches from Ontario, Québec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia organize their own Canadian “national” tournament, selecting teams, setting the schedule and administering the entire event.

Teams from Alberta and B.C. compete in the Canadian College Baseball Conference with a different calendar. A fuller national tournament — a “Canadian University World Series” — could incorporate these teams, even by using final placement from the previous year as a qualifier if necessary.

In a 2019 research paper, statistics student Mitchell Thompson and I explored the utility of a simple mathematical model used in NCAA baseball to determine “at-large” qualifiers and seeding for their College World Series.

We examined how useful the NCAA’s Ratings Percentage Index (RPI) would be for a potential Canadian University World Series, which would see teams across Canada compete for a national championship.

Nothing, of course, beats head-to-head qualifiers but most programs currently lack the resources for athletes and staff to travel on short notice. Any viable system will therefore have to respect limits of time, distance and funding.

But what’s missing is not data, talent or competitive interest. It’s a willingness by provincial sport organizations, Baseball Canada and, most importantly, universities to build and resource a structure that addresses their shared constraints.

At this point, even modest institutional co-ordination would move university baseball out of its current dead zone and into a system where student-athletes could be seen, recognized and supported.

George S. Rigakos is affiliated with the Carleton University Ravens baseball team but writes here as an independent researcher. His views are his own and do not represent Carleton University or Carleton University Athletics.

– ref. Baseball in Canada is thriving — but not on campus – https://theconversation.com/baseball-in-canada-is-thriving-but-not-on-campus-269785

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Simon Blanchette, Lecturer, Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University

Artificial intelligence is fascinating, transformative and increasingly woven into how we learn, work and make decisions.

But for every example of innovation and efficiency — such as the custom AI assistant recently developed by an accounting professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal — there’s another that underscores the need for oversight, literacy and regulation that can keep pace with the technology and protect the public.

A recent case in Montréal illustrates this tension. A Québec man was fined $5,000 after submitting “cited expert quotes and jurisprudence that don’t exist” to defend himself in court. It was the first ruling of its kind in the province, though similar cases have occurred in other countries.

AI can democratize access to learning, knowledge and even justice. Yet without ethical guardrails, proper training, expertise and basic literacy, the very tools designed to empower people can just as easily undermine trust and backfire.

Why guardrails matter

Guardrails are the systems, norms and checks that ensure artificial intelligence is used safely, fairly and transparently. They allow innovation to flourish while preventing chaos and harm.

The European Union became the first major jurisdiction to adopt a comprehensive framework for regulating AI with the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, which came into force in August 2024. The law divides AI systems into risk-based categories and rolls out rules in phases to give organizations time to prepare for compliance.

The act makes some uses of AI unacceptable. These include social scoring and real-time facial recognition in public spaces, which were banned in February.

High-risk AI used in critical areas like education, hiring, health care or policing will be subject to strict requirements. Starting in August 2026, these systems must meet standards for data quality, transparency and human oversight.

General-purpose AI models became subject to regulatory requirements in August 2025. Limited-risk systems, such as chatbots, must disclose that users are interacting with an algorithm.

The key principle is the higher the potential impact on rights or safety, the stronger the obligations. The goal is not to slow innovation, but to make it accountable.

Critically, the act also requires each EU member state to establish at least one operational regulatory sandbox. These are controlled frameworks where companies can develop, train and test AI systems under supervision before full deployment.

For small and medium-sized enterprises that lack resources for extensive compliance infrastructure, sandboxes provide a pathway to innovate while building capacity.

Canada is still catching up on AI

Canada has yet to establish a comprehensive legal framework for AI. The Artificial Intelligence and Data Act was introduced in 2022 as part of Bill C-27, a package known as the Digital Charter Implementation Act. It was meant to create a legal framework for responsible AI development, but the bill was never passed.

Canada now needs to act quickly to rectify this. This includes strengthening AI governance, investing in public and professional education and ensuring a diverse range of voices — educators, ethicists, labour experts and civil society — are involved in shaping AI legislation.

A phased approach similar to the EU’s framework could provide certainty while supporting innovation. The highest-risk applications would be banned immediately, while others face progressively stricter requirements, giving businesses time to adapt.

Regulatory sandboxes could help small and medium-sized enterprises innovate responsibly while building much needed capacity in the face of ongoing labour shortages.

The federal government recently launched the AI Strategy Task Force to help accelerate the country’s adoption of the technology. It is expected to deliver recommendations on competitiveness, productivity, education, labour and ethics in a matter of months.

But as several experts have pointed out, the task force is heavily weighted toward industry voices, risking a narrow view on AI’s societal impacts.

Guardrails alone aren’t enough

Regulations can set boundaries and protect people from harm, but guardrails alone aren’t enough. The other vital foundation of an ethical and inclusive AI society is literacy and skills development.

AI literacy underpins our ability to question AI tools and content, and it is fast becoming a basic requirement in most jobs.

Yet, nearly half of employees using AI tools at work received no training, and over one-third had only minimal guidance from their employers. Fewer than one in 10 small or medium-sized enterprises offer formal AI training programs.

As a result, adoption is happening informally and often without oversight, leaving workers and organizations exposed.

AI literacy operates on three levels. At its base, it means understanding what AI is, how it works and when to question its outputs, including awareness of bias, privacy and data sources. Mid-level literacy involves using generative tools such as ChatGPT or Copilot. At the top are advanced skills, where people design algorithms with fairness, transparency and accountability in mind.

Catching up on AI literacy means investing in upskilling and reskilling that combines critical thinking with hands-on AI use.

As a university lecturer, I often see AI framed mainly as a cheating risk, rather than as a tool students must learn to use responsibly. While it can certainly be misused, educators must protect academic integrity while preparing students to work alongside these systems.

Balancing innovation with responsibility

We cannot ban or ignore AI, but neither can we let the race for efficiency outpace our ability to manage its consequences or address questions of fairness, accountability and trust.

Skills development and guardrails must advance together. Canada needs diverse voices at the table, real investment to match its ambitions and strong accountability built into any AI laws, standards and protections.

More AI tools will be designed to support learning and work, and more costly mistakes will emerge from blind trust in systems we don’t fully understand. The question is not whether AI will proliferate, but whether we’ll build the guardrails and literacy necessary to accommodate it.

AI can become a complement to expertise, but it cannot be a replacement for it. As the technology evolves, so too must our capacity to understand it, question it and guide it toward public good.

We need to pair innovation with ethics, speed with reflection and excitement with education. Guardrails and skills development, including basic AI literacy, are not opposing forces; they are the two hands that will support progress.

Simon Blanchette 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. We can’t ban AI, but we can build the guardrails to prevent it from going off the tracks – https://theconversation.com/we-cant-ban-ai-but-we-can-build-the-guardrails-to-prevent-it-from-going-off-the-tracks-268172

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Juliano Palacios Abrantes, Postdoctoral researcher, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia

This year’s COP30 comes after the international Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) finally acquired the required number of ratification votes by United Nations member states.

The treaty, effective from January 2026, is the first global agreement for marine areas beyond national jurisdictions, with a direct reference to climate change risks in its legal text. Its ratification comes at a crucial time for marine environments.

The momentum of COP30 and the BBNJ treaty creates a unique opportunity to further integrate the ocean, particularly the deep sea, into the climate agenda. By connecting the BBNJ under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 2015 Paris Agreement, UN member states now have the tools to better conserve the deep sea’s biodiversity and its role in the global carbon cycle.

The deeps sea’s role in our climate

The deep sea (areas deeper than 200 metres) covers more than half our planet’s surface and accounts for over 90 per cent of the ocean’s volume. It is Earth’s largest long-term carbon sink.

Since the Industrial Revolution, the deep sea has absorbed roughly 30 per cent of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions and about 90 per cent of excess heat, significantly slowing warming and buffering the planet against even more catastrophic impacts.

The deep sea stores 50 times more carbon than the atmosphere and 20 times more than all terrestrial plants and soils combined. It helps regulate the Earth’s climate and its importance in fighting climate change is immense, stretching from pole to pole.

The polar regions support essential climate functions. The Southern Ocean around Antarctica absorbs approximately 40 per cent of the global oceanic uptake of human-generated carbon. The opposite pole, the Arctic Ocean, is facing some of the most immediate threats from climate change.

---

Read more:
A walk across Alaska’s Arctic sea ice brings to life the losses that appear in climate data

---

Against this backdrop, COP30 is hosting an unprecedented number of Indigenous people, with around 3,000 participants. Inuit, Sámi, Athabaskan, Aleut, Yupiit and other Arctic and global Indigenous leaders are voicing the need for climate policy to reflect local knowledge, rights and values in line with claims by Arctic states to sovereignty and stewardship.

However, discontent exists given the lack of representation of Indigenous people in COP30 negotiations. More than 70,000 people participated in the parallel People’s Summit which produced the Declaration of the Peoples’ Summit towards COP30. The declaration calls for more equitable solutions to climate change that include Indigenous and other communities.

Indigenous Peoples already co-create scientific management of marine protected areas, such as the Primnoa resedaeformis coral habitats and glass sponge reefs in Nova Scotia. However, more efforts are needed to reach the 30×30 target to designate 30 per cent of the Earth’s land and oceans as protected areas and achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.

Closing the ocean gap

Recent sessions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have focused on co-ordination across major international agreements like the BBNJ. These sessions, along with the latest vulnerability assessments from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and UNFCCC’s Ocean Climate Change Dialogues, have urged parties to align ocean actions with climate commitments and close measurement and reporting gaps.

In the summer of 2024, Brazil and France started the Blue NDC Challenge, encouraging countries to include ocean-based climate solutions in their National Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans.

The UNFCCC requires NDCs to increase carbon uptake rather than historical storage to mitigate. Carbon uptake is the process, activity or mechanism by which natural sinks remove CO2 from the atmosphere. On the other hand, National Adaption Plans may protect deep-sea ecosystems and their biological pump roles.

While recent syntheses show that about 75 per cent (97 out of 130 coastal states that have submitted their NDCs) of UN member states now reference marine and coastal actions in their NDCs, the formal mechanisms for implementing adaptation efforts that include the ocean are lagging behind.

Of the roughly 100 climate indicators being considered at COP30 to monitor the progress of the Paris Agreement’s global goal on adaptation, only 14 include marine or ocean dimensions, with the majority focusing on coasts or shallow waters.

Although those with marine dimensions could be extended to include the deep sea, a persistent omission of deep-sea ecosystems risks undermining both mitigation and adaptation goals. While the final indicators are yet to be determined, it’s critical to ensure that deep-sea ecosystems are explicitly incorporated.

The global stocktake — the Paris Agreement’s process to evaluate the world’s climate action progress — determines if countries are meeting goals and identifies gaps. The stocktake must also identify the deep ocean and deep-sea life specifically, and elaborate on appropriate ocean-based climate actions, comparable to elaborations on the need to halt and reverse deforestation and forest degradation.

Supporting the Paris Agreement

Emerging activities, misguidingly branded as helping the energy transition — like deep-sea mining — further threaten oceans by causing irreparable damage to the sea floor and in the water column.

Geoengineering technologies to remove excess CO₂ from the atmosphere are so far costly and ineffective, but may be necessary to meet the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 C target. However, marine-based technologies may disrupt seafloor habitats, alter ocean chemistry and disrupt the natural carbon cycle in unpredictable ways.

The largest uncertainties in future climate projections stem from potential changes in ocean circulation and biological activity that could reduce the ocean sink efficiency. Even if emissions are stopped, a substantial fraction (20 to 40 per cent in some models) of emitted CO₂ will remain in the atmosphere for a millennium or longer, persisting until slow geological processes complete the sequestration.

If deep-sea carbon sinks were to weaken due to these climate-induced changes, CO₂ would accumulate faster in the atmosphere, making the 1.5 target significantly more difficult to achieve. Therefore, the deep ocean’s capacity determines the long-term fate of CO₂ and the ultimate success of the Paris Agreement’s targets.

Acting without a precautionary approach and failing to incorporate Indigenous values could further damage marine ecosystems and increase inequalities. In addition, failing to establish appropriate protocols for research ethics, project implementation and scientific assessments could result in negative outcomes in terms of CO₂ sequestration.

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 deep sea and the Arctic must be included in efforts to tackle climate change – https://theconversation.com/the-deep-sea-and-the-arctic-must-be-included-in-efforts-to-tackle-climate-change-269581

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Regan Lipes, Assistant Professor of Comparative Literature and English, MacEwan University

As an assistant professor of comparative literature, when I ask undergraduate students how they define “Canadian literature,” I get half-hearted answers about it encompassing anything inherently Canadian. They don’t, however, specify which language, if any, they believe Canadian literature must be written in.

I specifically ask this question because — although I teach in an anglophone environment — just as Canadian identities are multilingual, so too is the literature that tells Canada’s stories.

Defining a national literary canon can be complex. But literature written in any language can be Canadian when the experiences it describes are grounded in the realities of life in Canada.

Yiddish literature, though often overlooked, is an example that offers essential Canadian stories that broaden the national canon.

Reflecting multilayered identities

In my literary trends and traditions class, I teach the short story collection Natasha And Other Stories by Canadian author David Bezmozgis. Bezmozgis’s six English-language stories about a young Soviet-born, Russian-speaking, Latvian-Jewish immigrant to Toronto chronicle the gradual cultivation of a Canadian identity.

Students have a much easier time seeing the work of Bezmozgis as Canadian literature, despite the diversity of multilayered cultural influences, because it was written in English. To them, it’s more accessible.

I follow my first question with another: can Canadian literature be written in Yiddish?

This is usually answered with noncommittal shrugs. Some students are unsure whether Yiddish is still a functioning language and are surprised to learn it is the mother tongue of daily life in many communities globally, with 41,000 speakers residing in Canada.

Yiddish, traditionally spoken by Eastern and Central European Jews before the Second World War, has also experienced a renaissance because of growing appreciation for its evocative flair among contemporary culture connoisseurs.

My students were skeptical when I tell them we are going to read Canadian literature that had been translated from Yiddish. I introduce them to Jewish-Canadian writer Chava Rosenfarb, who was recognized by the University of Lethbridge with an honorary doctorate in 2006 for her literary achievements.

Born in Łódź, Poland, in 1923, Rosenfarb has become a core literary figure for the city because of her three-volume novel Tree of Life chronicling the conditions of perpetual struggle in the Łódź Ghetto. In 2023, a street in Łódź, was named after Rosenfarb, underscoring her importance in the Polish literary sphere.

But outside of Yiddish circles in Canada, her poetry and prose were not widely associated with the country’s literary canon for a long time.

Yiddish literature is Canadian

Though Rosenfarb spent most of her adult life in Canada, raising a family in Montréal, it is only in recent years that she is being appreciated for her significant contribution to Canadian literature. Even though it may have limited her audience, she predominantly published her work in Yiddish because it remained the language in which she felt most artistically at home.

Although Rosenfarb’s individual stories have been previously published in Yiddish literary magazines and in separate translations, it was not until In the Land of The Postscript: The Complete Short Stories of Chava Rosenfarb came out in 2023 that we had the author’s short fiction in a single volume for the first time.

Chava Rosenfarb’s daughter, Dr. Goldie Morgentaler — professor emerita at the University of Lethbridge who was honoured with a Canadian Jewish Literary Award for her translation work from Yiddish to English — translated the collection unifying the text with an insightful and synthesizing forward. She finally brought her mother’s short fiction, about the lives of Holocaust survivors rebuilding lives in Montréal, to anglophone audiences.

Rosenfarb’s stories in the collection tackle the philosophical and existential quandaries of the universal human experience, but with a recognizably Canadian backdrop. Her characters grapple with the obstacles of immigration and ongoing displacement while simultaneously navigating the legacy of their Holocaust trauma. The resettlement of survivors contributed significantly to Canadian Jewish culture, and the impact is still present today.

As Morgentaler notes, it is the ever-visible silhouette of Mount Royal in Montréal that reminds Edgia, the title character of “Edgia’s Revenge,” that as a Jew, she is always under the watchful gaze of the dominant Christian power structure. When Lolek, Edgia’s husband, later dies, it is a set of spiral wooden stairs characteristic of Montréal architecture that are to blame for his fall.

These are distinctly local, Montréal-rooted elements of Rosenfarb’s storytelling, and are immediately familiar to readers. Despite being written in Yiddish, these are Canadian stories that depict the lived experiences of a generation of traumatized newcomers.

Translation supports Canadian narratives

A nation’s literature used to be tied to language, but this can no longer be the narrow criterion for defining a canon. Migration, both voluntary and resulting from forcible displacement, has diversified and enriched the chorus of voices that narrate the stories of Canada. And translation makes it possible to appreciate Canadian literature in its diversity of voices.

Despite having written her short fiction in Yiddish, Rosenfarb’s work tells Canadian stories that provide a valuable glimpse into a chapter of the national narrative seldom explored.

After exposing my students to Rosenfarb’s short fiction, I ask them again whether they consider literature written in languages other than those officially recognized by the Canadian government as belonging to the genre of Canadian literature. And without exception, they agree their perspective has changed.

This marks a point in literary studies where scholars are moving past the traditional paradigm of examining national literature through the lens of national languages.

And the growing literary canon is not only stronger for it, it better reflects the country’s cultural reality.

Regan Lipes 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. What Yiddish literature reveals about Canada’s diverse canon and multilingual identity – https://theconversation.com/what-yiddish-literature-reveals-about-canadas-diverse-canon-and-multilingual-identity-267190

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Laszlo Sarkany, Assistant Professor, Political Science, Western University

Canada has yet to officially throw its support behind the International Criminal Court (ICC), an institution it helped create, against targeted sanctions imposed on several prosecutors and judges by the United States earlier this year.

---

Read more:
Why is Canada quiet on the International Criminal Court while recognizing Palestine?

---

Four key staff of the court — including Canadian judge Kimberly Prost — have been sanctioned by President Donald Trump’s administration because of their involvement in investigations related to alleged war crimes committed by American and Israeli officials.

Other allies, including France, Belgium and the European Union have publicly opposed the sanctions, issuing statements in support of the ICC.

Other states have also spoken out out against the sanctions, including Denmark, Finland, Estonia, the Netherlands, Norway, Senegal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

Canada has publicly backed Prost, and has recently joined a number of states at the United Nations in supporting the overall work of the court. But Canadian officials have been silent about the American sanctions.

Sanctions fallout

The current wave of sanctions has forced the court to take extraordinary measures, such as paying staff ahead of time and changing email software to openDesk which was developed by the Germany-based Centre for Digital Sovereignty.

Despite these safety measures, the court may not be safe from further punishment. The Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC has speculated the U.S. government may impose further sanctions against the entire organization.

This would mean that any American company — including financial institutions — or even Canadian companies with subsidiaries in the U.S. that deal with the court may be subject to penalties and legal action.

Shielding businesses

Not all is lost, however. There are two legal remedies that could be be used to shield the ICC. Canada and the EU could amend key laws designed to protect companies from such actions, which could significantly aid in the operation of the court.

These include the 1985 Foreign Extra-Territorial Measures Act (FEMA) and its subsequent amendments in Canada, and in the EU, legislation known as the Extraterritorial Blocking Statute (EBS).

A FEMA amendment was passed in 1996 in response to the Helms-Burton Act in the U.S. that prohibited companies from trading or conducting business in Cuba.

FEMA shields Canadian businesses affected by the Helms-Burton Act and contains specific provisions to protect companies from retaliatory action by the U.S. Similarly, the EBS was passed in the European Parliament to shield European companies from American sanctions.

It was introduced initially as a result of the Helms-Burton Act, and then later revised when the U.S. withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018.

Canada and the EU could amend both FEMA and the EBS to ensure that Canadian and European companies are shielded from the effects of American sanctions and can continue to provide key services to the court.

In the case of the EU, most of the ICC’s contractual arrangements with entities like banks, insurers, service providers, technology providers and landlords are with European firms because the court is located in Europe — in The Hague, Netherlands.

Amending the EBS, therefore, would protect these companies from further American sanctions and would ensure they can still provide services to the ICC.

These legal remedies are a proportional response to the U.S. sanctions. They would allow all parties — the U.S. and the ICC’s supporters — to continue to negotiate instead of bringing international criminal justice to a grinding halt.

Ensuring the survival of the ICC

It’s important to note that including the need to shield businesses from U.S. sanctions in any amended legislation in both Canada and the EU legislation isn’t aimed at helping governments in either Cuba or Iran.

The goal is to protect Canadian and European companies from possible legal action or economic fallout if more sanctions are applied. Most importantly, the aim is to ensure that the ICC continues to operate with as little interruption as possible.

Sanctions may have significant effects on businesses, and what’s been identified as Trump’s penchant for “retributive diplomacy” may compel states — and businesses — to think twice before they act.

But FEMA and EBS provide appropriate countermeasures if and when broader U.S. sanctions on the entire ICC are introduced, or if Canadian and European companies unjustifiably suffer due to the imposition of new sanctions.

The ICC is the international organization with the ability to deliver justice and support victims. It’s the “court of last resort” that only gets involved when offending states are unwilling or unable to do so.

National security concerns in the U.S., Canada and the EU stem as much from the committing of mass atrocities as they do from other types of global crimes. That’s why it’s so important for states to support international criminal justice efforts by fulsomely supporting the ICC.

Laszlo Sarkany 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. How Canada and the European Union could ensure the survival of the International Criminal Court – https://theconversation.com/how-canada-and-the-european-union-could-ensure-the-survival-of-the-international-criminal-court-269372

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By David Tindall, Professor of Sociology, University of British Columbia

We live in a time often characterized as a polycrisis. One of those crises is human-caused climate change, an issue currently being discussed by delegates at the COP30 climate talks in Belém, Brazil.

Another is disinformation, much of which has been focused on climate change. A third potential crisis comes from the implications of artificial intelligence for society and the planet.

When it comes to AI and climate change, there are a variety of opinions, from the optimistic to the pessimistic and the skeptical. Given the overarching concerns about environmental harms of AI, it is surprising to some that AI is front and centre at COP30, which I am currently attending.

Both COP30 President André Aranha Corrêa do Lago and Simon Stiell, executive director of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, have noted the importance of AI and other aspects of technology for addressing climate change.

While there has been some consideration of AI in addressing climate change at previous COPs, COP30 is the first conference where AI has been formally integrated as a central theme in the conference agenda.

AI at COP30

On the first day of COP30, “science, technology and artificial intelligence” was explicitly listed as one of the key themes. Initiatives included the Green Digital Action Hub, a global platform to drive a greener, more inclusive digital transformation.

Additionally, there was a session introducing the AI Climate Institute. A key goal of the AI Climate Institute is to enable Global South countries to design, adapt and implement their own AI-based climate solutions.

In these and other forums, there were discussions about digital decarbonization technologies and advances in data transparency for emissions. Proponents argued these initiatives were designed to help countries harness technology to meet their climate goals.

When it comes to AI and climate change, there is a tendency for people to think about the increased environmental and climate change harms that AI will bring. In this regard, there has been a lot of recent media coverage on the potential of increased carbon emissions, water use and environmental damage as a result of mining for critical minerals.

A key issue is the emissions produced by data centres. As many commentators have said — including Stiell — data centres need to have electrical power sources if AI is to be aligned with climate action.

How is AI relevant to addressing climate change?

AI is already being applied in climate change mitigation. At COP30, former United States vice president Al Gore gave a presentation about the role of Climate TRACE in addressing climate change. Climate TRACE is a non-profit coalition of organizations that have been developing an inventory of exactly where greenhouse gas emissions are coming from to help governments, organizations and companies to reduce or eliminate these emissions.

Climate TRACE uses satellite imagery, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning to estimate emissions. In his presentation, Gore demonstrated visual examples in a slide show.

AI can play a role in reducing emissions in a number of ways. One, as noted above, is by tracking emissions. Another is by making energy systems more efficient and thus reducing emissions through energy savings.

Reducing energy use and emissions were not the only type of efficiencies discussed at COP30. Conservation of water use and increased efficiencies in agricultural production were also highlighted. An example is the AI for Climate Action Award that was given to a team from Laos this year for a project using AI for farming and irrigation.

Climate adaptation

AI has the potential to make a big impact in the area of climate adaptation. Key issues were discussed at COP30 at a session called Smarter than the Storm: The Future of AI in Forecasting and Proactive Responses to Build More Resilient Communities.

Scientific research has demonstrated that machine learning can assist local governments in their decisions about options for climate adaptation. AI can be an integral part of an early warning system.

It can be used to predict floods using sensor data, predict wildfires using satellite and weather data, monitor social media for disaster response and identify areas at risk of landslides.

AI tools involved in these various processes include machine learning, deep learning, natural-language processing and computer vision. Consistent with overarching concerns at COP30 about the importance of social and climate justice, proponents of community AI applications emphasized the need for transparency, affordability of data and AI systems and the sovereignty of community data.

Dangers of disinformation

Climate disinformation is a key type of disinformation in contemporary society. AI can either be a source or a counter to climate disinformation.

At COP30, disinformation and climate denial was mentioned in a number of contexts, including by Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. One key event on this topic was the announcement of a Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change, which a number of countries endorsed.

AI can be considered a triple-edged sword. Unregulated expansion of AI has the potential to do enormous environmental harm and magnify misinformation and disinformation.

However, principled development of AI, powered by clean energy sources, also has the potential to significantly reduce carbon emissions, provide early warning to communities of climate threats, reduce the costs of adapting to a changing climate and enhance our understanding of climate change.

David Tindall receives funding from from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, a body that funds academic research. He has an affiliation with Cllimate Reality Canada. In this voluntary role he occassionally gives unpaid talks on climate change.

– ref. Artificial intelligence is front and centre at COP30 – https://theconversation.com/artificial-intelligence-is-front-and-centre-at-cop30-269872

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jillian Sunderland, PhD Student , University of Toronto

Across TikTok and university campuses, young men are rewriting what masculinity looks like today, sometimes with matcha lattes, Labubus, film cameras and thrifted tote bags.

At Toronto Metropolitan University, a “performative male” contest recently drew a sizeable crowd by poking fun at this new TikTok archetype of masculinity. “Performative man” is a new Gen Z term describing young men who deliberately craft a soft, sensitive, emotionally aware aesthetic, signalling the rejection of “toxic masculinity.”

At “performative male” contests, participants compete for laughs and for women’s attention by reciting poetry, showing off thrifted fashion or handing out feminine hygiene products to show they’re one of the “good” guys.

Similar events have been held from San Francisco to London, capturing a wider shift in how Gen Z navigates gender. Research shows that young men are experimenting with gender online, but audiences often respond with humour or skepticism.

This raises an important question: in a moment when “toxic masculinity” is being called out, why do public responses to softer versions of masculinity shift between curiosity, irony and judgment?

Why Gen Z calls it “performative”

Gen Z’s suspicions toward these men may be partially due to broader shifts in online culture.

As research on social media shows, younger users value authenticity as a sign of trust. If millennials perfected the “curated self” of filtered selfies and highlight reels, Gen Z has made a virtue of realness and spontaneity.

Studies of TikTok culture find that many users share and consume more emotionally “raw” content that push against the more filtered aesthetics of Instagram.

Against this backdrop, the performative man stands out because he looks like he’s trying too hard to be sincere. The matcha latte, the film camera, the tote bag — these are products, not values. Deep, thoughtful people, the logic goes, shouldn’t have to announce it by carrying around a Moleskine notebook and a copy of The Bell Jar.

But as philosopher Judith Butler explained, all gender is “performative” in that it’s made real through repeated actions. Sociologists Candace West and Don Zimmerman call this “doing gender” — the everyday work we do to communicate we’re “men” or “women.”

This framing helps explain why the “performative man” can appear insincere, not because he’s fake, but because gender is always performed and policed, destined to look awkward before it seems “natural.”

On this end, the mockery of “performative men” acts as a way of keeping men in the “man box” — the narrow confines of acceptable masculinity. Studies show that from school to work, people judge men more harshly than women when they step outside gender norms. In this way, the mockery sends a message to all men that there are limits to how they can express themselves.

When progress still looks like privilege

However, many researchers caution that new masculine styles may still perpetuate male privilege.

In the post-#MeToo era, many men are rethinking what it means to be a man now that toxic masculinity has been critiqued. The calls for more “healthy masculinity” and positive male role models reveal a culture searching for new ways of being a man, yet also uncertain about what that would look like.

In this context, many public commentators argue these men are just rebranding themselves as self-aware, feminist-adjacent and “not like other guys” to seek better dating opportunities.

Sociologists Tristan Bridges and C.J. Pascoe would call this “hybrid masculinity” — a term that describes how privileged men consolidate status by adopting progressive or queer aesthetics to reap rewards and preserve their authority.

A 2022 content analysis of popular TikTok male creators found a similar pattern: many creators blurred gender boundaries through fashion and self-presentation yet reinforced norms of whiteness, muscularity and heterosexual desirability.

This echoes many critiques of performative men: they use the language of feminism and therapy without altering their approach to sharing space, attention or authority.

Can these small experiments matter?

Yet as sociologist Francine Deutsch argues in her theory of “undoing gender,” change often begins with partial, imperfect acts. Studies show that copying and experimenting with gender are key ways people learn new gender roles.

On the surface, there’s nothing inherently harmful about men getting into journaling, vinyl records or latte art.

In fact, youth and anti-radicalization research suggests these could be practical tools in countering online radicalization and isolation, another issue affecting young men.

What would change look like?

The truth is we may not yet have the tools to recognize change, given that much of our world is created to be shared and consumed on social media, and male dominance seems hard to change.

A positive sign is that, rather than being defensive, many male creators are leaning into the joke and using parody as a way to explore what a more sensitive man might look like.

And perhaps the “performative male” trend holds up a mirror to our own contradictions. We demand authenticity but consume performance; we beg men to change but critique them when they try; we ask for vulnerability yet recoil when it looks too forced.

The “performative male” may look ironic, but he’s also experimenting with what it means to be a man today.

Whether that experiment leads to lasting change or just another online trend remains unclear, but it’s a glimpse of how masculinity is being rewritten, latte by latte.

Jillian Sunderland has previously received funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Grant and the Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS) Award.

– ref. The rise of the ‘performative male:’ How young men are experimenting with masculinity online – https://theconversation.com/the-rise-of-the-performative-male-how-young-men-are-experimenting-with-masculinity-online-268742

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Daryl Janzen, Observatory Manager and Instructor, Astronomy, University of Saskatchewan

The nature of time has plagued thinkers for as long as we’ve tried to understand the world we live in. Intuitively, we know what time is, but try to explain it, and we end up tying our minds in knots.

St. Augustine of Hippo, a theologian whose writings influenced western philosophy, captured a paradoxical challenge in trying to articulate time more than 1,600 years ago:

“What then is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I want to explain it to a questioner, I do not know.”

Nearly a thousand years earlier, Heraclitus of Ephesus offered a penetrating insight. According to classical Greek philosopher Plato’s Cratylus:

“Heraclitus is supposed to say that all things are in motion and nothing at rest; he compares them to the stream of a river, and says that you cannot go into the same water twice.”

Superficially, this can sound like another paradox — how can something be the same river and yet not the same? But Heraclitus adds clarity, not confusion: the river — a thing that exists — continuously changes. While it is the same river, different waters flow by moment to moment.

While the river’s continuous flux makes this plain, the same is true of anything that exists — including the person stepping into the river. They remain the same person, but each moment they set foot in the river is distinct.

How can time feel so obvious, so woven into the fabric of our experience, and yet remain the bane of every thinker who has tried to explain it?

An issue of articulation

The key issue isn’t one most physicists would even consider relevant. Nor is it a challenge that philosophers have managed to resolve.

Time itself isn’t difficult to grasp: we all understand it, despite our persistent struggle to describe it. As Augustine sensed, the problem is one of articulation: a failure to precisely draw the right boundaries around the nature of time both conceptually and linguistically.

Specifically, physicists and philosophers tend to conflate what it means for something to exist and what it means for something to happen — treating occurrences as if they exist. Once that distinction is recognized, the fog clears and Augustine’s paradox dissolves.

The source of the issue

In basic logic, there are no true paradoxes, only deductions that rest on subtly mishandled premises.

Not long after Heraclitus tried to clarify time, Parmenides of Elea did the opposite. His deduction begins with a seemingly valid premise — “what is, is; and what is not, is not” — and then quietly smuggles in a crucial assumption. He claims the past is part of reality because it has been experienced, and the future must also belong to reality because we anticipate it.

Therefore, Parmenides concluded, both past and future are part of “what is,” and all of eternity must form a single continuous whole in which time is an illusion.

Parmenides’ pupil, Zeno, devised several paradoxes to support this view. In modern terms, Zeno would argue that if you tried walking from one end of a block to the other, you’d never get there. To walk a block, you must first walk half, then half of what remains, and so on — always halving the remaining distance, never reaching the end.

But of course you can walk all the way to the end of the block and beyond — so Zeno’s deduction is absurd. His fallacy lies in removing time from the picture and considering only successive spatial configurations. His shrinking distances are matched by shrinking time intervals, both becoming small in parallel.

Zeno implicitly fixes the overall time available for the motion — just as he fixes the distance — and the paradox appears only because time was removed. Restore time, and the contradiction disappears.

Parmenides makes a similar mistake when claiming that events in the past and future — things that have happened or that will happen — exist. That assumption is the problem: it is equivalent to the conclusion he wants to reach. His reasoning is circular, ending by restating his assumption — only in a way that sounds different and profound.

Space-time models

An event is something that happens at a precise location and time. In Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity, space-time is a four-dimensional model describing all such occurrences: each point is a particular event, and the continuous sequence of events associated with an object forms its worldline — its path through space and time.

But events don’t exist; they happen. When physicists and philosophers speak of space-time as something that exists, they’re treating events as existent things — the same subtle fallacy at the root of 25 centuries of confusion.

---

Read more:
Space-time doesn’t exist — but it’s a useful concept for understanding our reality

---

Cosmology — the study of the whole universe — offers a clear resolution.

It describes a three-dimensional universe filled with stars, planets and galaxies that exist. And in the course of that existence, the locations of every particle at every instance are individual space-time events. As the universe exists, the events that happen moment by moment trace out worldlines in four-dimensional space-time — a geometric representation of everything that happens during that course of existence; a useful model, though not an existent thing.

The resolution

Resolving Augustine’s paradox — that time is something we innately understand but cannot describe — is simple once the source of confusion is identified.

Events — things that happen or occur — are not things that exist. Each time you step into the river is a unique event. It happens in the course of your existence and the river’s. You and the river exist; the moment you step into it happens.

Philosophers have agonized over time-travel paradoxes for more than a century, yet the basic concept rests on the same subtle error — something science fiction writer H.G. Wells introduced in the opening of The Time Machine.

In presenting his idea, the Time Traveller glides from describing three-dimensional objects, to objects that exist, to moments along a worldline — and finally to treating the worldline as something that exists.

That final step is precisely the moment the map is mistaken for the territory. Once the worldline, or indeed space-time, is imagined to exist, what’s to stop us from imagining that a traveller could move throughout it?

Occurrence and existence are two fundamentally distinct aspects of time: each essential to understanding it fully, but never to be conflated with the other.

Speaking and thinking of occurrences as things that exist has been the root of our confusion about time for millennia. Now consider time in light of this distinction. Think about the existing things around you, the familiar time-travel stories and the physics of space-time itself.

Once you recognize ours as an existing three-dimensional universe, full of existing things, and that events happen each moment in the course of that cosmic existence — mapping to space-time without being reality — everything aligns. Augustine’s paradox dissolves: time is no longer mysterious once occurrence and existence are separated.

Daryl Janzen 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. Physicists and philosophers have long struggled to understand the nature of time: Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/physicists-and-philosophers-have-long-struggled-to-understand-the-nature-of-time-heres-why-269762

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Abbas Yazdinejad, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Artificial Intelligence, University of Toronto

Across Canada, doctors and nurses are quietly using public artificial-intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot and Gemini to write clinical notes, translate discharge summaries or summarize patient data. But even though these services offer speed and convenience, they also pose unseen cyber-risks when sensitive health information is no longer controlled by the hospital.

Emerging evidence suggests this behaviour is becoming more common. A recent ICT & Health Global article cited a BMJ Health & Care Informatics study showing that roughly one in five general practitioners in the United Kingdom reported using generative-AI tools such as ChatGPT to help draft clinical correspondence or notes.

While Canadian-specific data remain limited, anecdotal reports suggest that similar informal uses may be starting to appear in hospitals and clinics across the country.

This phenomenon, known as shadow AI, refers to the use of AI systems without formal institutional approval or oversight. In health-care settings, it refers to well-intentioned clinicians entering patient details into public chatbots that process information on foreign servers. Once that data leaves a secure network, there is no guarantee where it goes, how long it is stored, or whether it may be reused to train commercial models.

A growing blind spot

Shadow AI has quickly become one of the most overlooked threats in digital health. A 2024 IBM Security report found that the global average cost of a data breach has climbed to nearly US$4.9 million, the highest on record. While most attention goes to ransomware or phishing, experts warn that insider and accidental leaks now account for a growing share of total breaches.

In Canada, the Insurance Bureau of Canada and the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security have both highlighted the rise of internal data exposure, where employees unintentionally release protected information. When those employees use unapproved AI systems, the line between human error and system vulnerability blurs.

Are any of these documented cases in health settings? While experts point to internal data exposure as a growing risk in health-care organizations, publicly documented cases where the root cause is shadow AI use remain rare. However, the risks are real.

Unlike malicious attacks, these leaks happen silently, when patient data is simply copy-and-pasted into a generative AI. No alarms sound, no firewalls are tripped, and no one realizes that confidential data has crossed national borders. This is how shadow AI can bypass every safeguard built into an organization’s network.

Why anonymization isn’t enough

Even if names and hospital numbers are removed, health information is rarely truly anonymous. Combining clinical details, timestamps and geographic clues can often allow re-identification. A study in Nature Communications showed that even large “de-identified” datasets can be matched to individuals with surprising accuracy when cross-referenced with other public information.

Public AI models further complicate the issue. Tools such as ChatGPT or Claude process inputs through cloud-based systems that may store or cache data temporarily.

While providers claim to remove sensitive content, each has its own data-retention policy and few disclose where those servers are physically located. For Canadian hospitals subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and provincial privacy laws, this creates a legal grey zone.

Everyday examples hiding in plain sight

Consider a nurse using an online translator powered by generative AI to help a patient who speaks another language. The translation appears instant and accurate — yet the input text, which may include the patient’s diagnosis or test results, is sent to servers outside Canada.

Another example involves physicians using AI tools to draft patient follow-up letters or summarize clinical notes, unknowingly exposing confidential information in the process.

A recent Insurance Business Canada report warned that shadow AI could become “the next major blind spot” for insurers.

Because the practice is internal and voluntary, most organizations have no metrics to measure its scope. Hospitals that do not log AI usage cannot audit what data has left their systems or who sent it.

Bridging the gap between policy and practice

Canada’s health-care privacy framework was designed long before the arrival of generative AI. Laws like the PIPEDA and provincial health-information acts regulate how data is collected and stored but rarely mention machine-learning models or large-scale text generation.

As a result, hospitals are forced to interpret existing rules in a rapidly evolving technological environment. Cybersecurity specialists argue that health organizations need three layers of response:

1- AI-use disclosure in cybersecurity audits: Routine security assessments should include an inventory of all AI tools being used, sanctioned or otherwise. Treat generative-AI usage the same way organizations handle “bring-your-own-device” risks.

2- Certified “safe AI for health” gateways: Hospitals can offer approved, privacy-compliant AI systems that keep all processing within Canadian data centres. Centralizing access allows oversight without discouraging innovation.

3- Data-handling literacy for staff: Training should make clear what happens when data is entered into a public model and how even small fragments can compromise privacy. Awareness remains the strongest line of defence.

These steps won’t eliminate every risk, but they begin to align front-line practice with regulatory intent, protecting both patients and professionals.

The road ahead

The Canadian health-care sector is already under pressure from staffing shortages, cyberattacks and growing digital complexity. Generative AI offers welcome relief by automating documentation and translation, yet its unchecked use could erode public trust in medical data protection.

Policymakers now face a choice: either proactively govern AI use within health institutions or wait for the first major privacy scandal to force reform.

The solution is not to ban these tools but to integrate them safely. Building national standards for “AI-safe” data handling, similar to food-safety or infection-control protocols, would help ensure innovation doesn’t come at the expense of patient confidentiality.

Shadow AI isn’t a futuristic concept; it’s already embedded in daily clinical routines. Addressing it requires a co-ordinated effort across technology, policy and training, before Canada’s health-care system learns the hard way that the most dangerous cyber threats may come from within.

Abbas Yazdinejad is a Postdoctoral Scholar at the Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Modelling Lab (AIMMlab), University of Toronto. He will be joining the Department of Computer Science at the University of Regina as an Assistant Professor in Cybersecurity in January 2026.

Jude Kong receives funding from NSERC, IDRC, and FCDO. He is the Executive Director of the Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Modelling Lab (AIMMLab) at the University of Toronto, as well as AI4PEP, ACADIC, and REASURE2.

– ref. Silent cyber threats: How shadow AI could undermine Canada’s digital health defences – https://theconversation.com/silent-cyber-threats-how-shadow-ai-could-undermine-canadas-digital-health-defences-268478

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Britta Baechler, Adjunct Professor, Department of Physical & Environmental Sciences, University of Toronto

Plastics are everywhere, and the ocean is no exception: 11 million metric tons of plastics enter the ocean every year, where they spread far and wide, making their way to the deepest trenches and remote Arctic islands.

We have long known that marine animals can mistake plastic bags and other plastic pollution for food. To date, every family of marine mammal and seabird, and all seven species of sea turtles, have been documented to ingest plastics — nearly 1,300 species in total.

We also know that eating plastics can prove fatal for wildlife. When swallowed, macroplastics — plastics larger than five millimetres in size in any single direction — can block or puncture an animal’s organs or cause lethal twisting of the digestive tract, also known as torsion.

But understanding the link between ingestion of these large plastics and animal death has long been difficult. In an effort to investigate this connection, our team at the Ocean Conservancy non-profit collaborated with experts at the University of Toronto, the Federal University of Alagoas and the University of Tasmania to answer a deceptively simple question: how much ingested plastic is too much?

This question led us to undertake an ambitious effort to compile more than 10,000 animal autopsies — called necropsies — where both cause of death and data on plastic ingestion were known. These necropsies had been reported in peer-reviewed literature, in stranding network databases (collections of information about marine wildlife that have become stranded) and in two original datasets.

What we found

Our dataset included 31 species of mammals, 57 species of seabirds, and all seven species of sea turtles. We then modelled the relationship between plastics in the gut and likelihood of death for each group, looking both at total pieces of plastics as well as volume of plastics.

Our findings are sobering.

First, we found that plastic consumption was common among all types of animals: nearly half of sea turtles, over one-third of seabirds and one in eight marine mammals had plastic in their guts. For sea turtles who ingested plastic, roughly five per cent died directly as a result — an alarming figure given that five of seven sea turtle species are already endangered.

Second, we found that the lethal dose was much smaller than we had initially guessed, especially for small seabirds.

For example, if an Atlantic puffin consumes plastic around the size of three sugar cubes, it faces a 90 per cent chance of death.

A loggerhead sea turtle that consumes just over two baseballs’ worth of plastic has the same odds. And for a harbour porpoise, consuming a soccer ball’s worth of plastic is fatal 90 per cent of the time.

Third, we found that not all plastics cause equal harm. When modelling lethal ingestion thresholds, we looked at the number of plastic pieces and the volume of plastic, and found that the type of plastic is actually very important, as each impacts the gastrointestinal tract differently.

For seabirds, rubber materials like balloons were the deadliest; consuming just six pea-sized shards could be lethal. For marine mammals, lost fishing gear — also known as ghost gear — posed the greatest risk: as few as 28 tennis ball-sized pieces could kill a sperm whale.

Nearly half of the individual animals in our dataset who had ingested plastics were red-listed as threatened by the International Union for Conservation of Nature — that is, near-threatened, vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered.

Protecting marine life from plastics

The most impactful way to protect ocean wildlife is to reduce how much plastic enters the ocean in the first place. By pinpointing which plastics are deadliest to key marine species, we can help guide targeted actions such as bans on some of the most dangerous items like balloons, fishing line and plastic bags.

Last year, Florida banned the intentional release of balloons with major implications for protecting seabirds and manatees, which also featured heavily in our dataset.

The research also demonstrates the potentially significant impact of removing plastics from shorelines, waterways and the ocean through cleanups and other removal efforts.

By modelling lethal doses, providing our data open-access for anyone to search or us and generating this new framework to help guide risk-assessment efforts, we hope our findings will inform the continued development and implementation of solutions that protect vulnerable ocean species from the dangers of ocean plastics.

Britta Baechler is Director of Ocean Plastics Science and Research at Ocean Conservancy, a U.S.-based nonprofit that spearheaded the study in this article. This study was funded by the Seale Family Foundation, the Wayne Hollomon Price Foundation, and Carla Itzkowich in memory of Moisés Itzkowich.

Erin Murphy is the Manager of Ocean Plastics Science and Research at Ocean Conservancy, a U.S.-based nonprofit that spearheaded the study. This study was funded by the Seale Family Foundation, the Wayne Hollomon Price Foundation, and Carla Itzkowich in memory of Moisés Itzkowich.

– ref. New study finds that ingesting even small amounts of plastic can be fatal for marine animals – https://theconversation.com/new-study-finds-that-ingesting-even-small-amounts-of-plastic-can-be-fatal-for-marine-animals-269882