Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael Slipenkyj, Postdoctoral Fellow, Math Lab, Department of Cognitive Science, Carleton University

Ontario’s 2024-25 Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) standardized test results were recently released, and almost half (49 per cent) of Grade 6 students in English-language schools didn’t meet the provincial standard in mathematics.

These unsatisfactory results should not come as a surprise, and they cannot be attributed to lost time during COVID-19.

Ontario students have been struggling in math for many years. For instance, in 2018-19 and 2015-16, respectively, 52 per cent and 50 per cent of Grade 6 students failed to meet the provincial standard. What can be done to change this situation?

Setting stronger foundations in early math

We know from research in mathematical cognition that children’s early number knowledge (for example, at four-and-a-half years old) predicts their mathematical achievement later in school.

---

Read more:
New research shows quality early childhood education reduces need for later special ed

---

Because later learned skills build on earlier ones, kids who fall behind early may never catch up. Just as children need to get comfortable putting their face in the water before they can learn the front crawl, they need to become proficient with counting before they can learn addition and subtraction.

The best ways to support math learning are to:

1. Provide lessons with clear skill progressions;

2. Conduct regular assessments so teachers know what their students are learning; and

3. Ensure that students get plenty of targeted practice on skills they have not yet mastered.

We should equip our students with solid foundational numeracy skills in the early years and check that they are on track before the first EQAO tests in Grade 3.

Roots of the problem, solutions

Clearly, policy initiatives like the $60 million “renewed math strategy”, making new teachers pass a math test and the “back to the basics” math curriculum, have done little to improve low math achievement.

After the 2024-25 results were announced, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario released a statement calling for EQAO funding to be redirected to classrooms, saying “EQAO assessments shift accountability from the government’s chronic underfunding of public education to educators.”

The province agrees that math scores are too low. In the aftermath of the results release, Ontario Education Minister Paul Calandra held a news conference to say the results weren’t “good enough.” He announced the formation of a two-person advisory committee to review the situation and provide “practical recommendations that we can put into action.”

Early universal numeracy screening

As researchers studying mathematical cognition and learning, we have an evidence-based recommendation to help improve children’s math scores: schools should use universal screening to identify and track students’ numeracy learning much earlier than Grade 3 (when the first EQAO tests are given).

Screeners that assess foundational numeracy skills and other forms of assessment are critical for evaluating gaps in students’ numerical knowledge and providing them with targeted supports before they start to fall behind.

Instead of waiting for provincial results at the end of Grade 3 to identify struggling learners, we need to equip students with necessary skills and knowledge earlier.

Measuring foundational skills is critical for mathematics because more advanced skills like geometry, algebra, calculus require students to have fluent access to foundational knowledge. For example, fluent division skills support converting fractions to decimals (for instance, one quarter equals 0.25).

Extensive store of knowledge needed

Children who lack foundational skills will continue to struggle across grades as the expectations become more advanced. Research has found that kindergarteners with lower counting skills are more likely to under-perform in math in Grade 7. These basic skills have also been linked to other metrics of academic success.

For example, children with strong foundational numerical skills are more likely to take advanced math classes in high school or pursue post-secondary education. Importantly, students who acquire foundational skills also develop more confidence in their mathematics abilities and are less likely to develop math anxiety.

By Grade 6, students need to have acquired a rich and extensive store of knowledge for learning the more complex math required in later grades.

The right to calculate

Human rights commissions have called for changes in education to ensure the “right to read” is protected for all students, including those with reading disabilities. We believe all students also have a right to high-quality math instruction — the right to calculate.

In efforts to connect math researchers and educators, we established the Assessment and Instruction for Mathematics (AIM) Collective. The AIM Collective is a community of researchers and educators, from universities and school districts across the country, committed to improving early math education in Canada.

Universal screening is one of the topics that AIM members have discussed in depth, because teachers often have mixed reactions to policies on screening.

However, educators we’ve partnered with have found that early math screening is a helpful teaching tool that helps educators target instruction to support children’s math learning.

Reaching full potential in math

Alberta now mandates universal numeracy screening. The Math Lab at Carleton University, where we are engaged in research, was involved in constructing grade-specific numeracy screeners for students in kindergarten to Grade 3 now in use in Alberta as well as other provinces.

Universal literacy screening is already mandated for students in Ontario from senior kindergarten to Grade 2. Initiating early universal numeracy screening is one step towards ensuring Ontario students reach their full potential in math.

Critically, screening must be accompanied by targeted support. Helping students reach their full math potential will contribute to a thriving Ontario.

As such, we call on the government to invest more in numeracy screening and earlier educational supports for struggling students.

Michael Slipenkyj is partly supported by a Mitacs internship with Vretta Inc., a Canadian educational technology company.

Heather P. Douglas has developed an early numeracy screener that is being used in four provinces in Canada. She collaborates with Vretta Inc., an educational technology company on a project to develop a digital version of the early numeracy screener. The project is funded by a Micas Accelerate grant.

Jo-Anne LeFevre has developed an early numeracy screener that is being used in four provinces in Canada. She collaborates with Vretta Inc., an educational technology company on a project to develop a digital version of the early numeracy screener, funded a Mitacs Accelerate grant.

Rebecca Merkley collaborates with Vretta Inc., a Canadian educational technology company. The project is funded by a Mitacs Accelerate grant titled: “A Research-Driven Approach to Assessment in Early Math Education”.

– ref. Increasing math scores: Why Ontario needs early numeracy screening – https://theconversation.com/increasing-math-scores-why-ontario-needs-early-numeracy-screening-273339

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Eugene Lang, Interim Director, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University, Ontario

“We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan, or this or that. And they did — they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” So said United States President Donald Trump recently, referring to America’s NATO allies, including Canada.

The comments have provoked outrage. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called them “frankly appalling,” especially the insinuation that soldiers from other NATO states avoided the front lines in Afghanistan, leaving the most dangerous heavy lifting to American forces.

Anyone moderately familiar with NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan knows Trump’s insult is rubbish — especially when it comes to Canada.

The Canadian Armed Forces were deployed in some of the most dangerous regions and complex situations in Afghanistan for more than a decade, paying a heavy price in casualties — the heaviest since the Korean War in the early 1950s, when Canada also supported the American-led war effort and more than 500 Canadians died doing so.

What is less commented upon is Trump’s claim: “We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them.” This, too, is rubbish as far as Canada is concerned.

A front-row seat to Rumsfeld’s request

Twenty-three years ago, in fact, the U.S. asked Canada for something substantive and specific in Afghanistan. And Canada delivered substantively.

The ask came from U.S. President George W. Bush’s secretary of defense, the late Donald Rumsfeld, in January 2003. Famous for being sharp and precise with language, Rumsfeld invited Canada’s defence minister at the time, the late John McCallum, to the Pentagon to make a request.

I was in the room that day, and I heard the ask from Rumsfeld’s own lips (I later wrote about this historic meeting in The Unexpected War: Canada in Kandahar in 2007 and again in 2025 in Chretien and the World: Canadian Foreign Policy from 1993-2003.

Rumsfeld asked Canada to lead the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), a multi-national stabilization mission then confined to Kabul, the war-torn capital city of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld’s request was an extremely significant one for Canada to digest. It meant providing the largest contingent of troops — about 2,200 — as well as a brigade headquarters and command of the operation.

Rumsfeld emphasized how critical the leadership of that mission was from his perspective, and how in his view Canada was better suited to take on the role than any other American ally. Gen. Richard Meyers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, was also present at the meeting and reinforced Rumsfeld’s point that ISAF was key to the Kabul region and Canada was the preferred nation to lead it.

American forces, the defense secretary argued, needed Canada to stabilize Kabul, which was awash in war lords and militia and had no real functioning government at that point.

American forces, meantime, would be otherwise engaged in the invasion of Iraq (which began a few weeks later) and holding the line in southern Afghanistan, where U.S. troops were concentrated.

The Canadian military was needed to hold Kabul together and pave the way for scheduled Afghan elections in 2004, Rumsfeld said. Kabul was an extremely important and vulnerable flank in the American war effort, and Rumsfeld needed Canada to cover that flank.

Canada answered the call

The U.S. needed Canada. The American military needed the Canadian Armed Forces. So Rumsfeld asked Canada for help. Following that meeting, McCallum returned to Ottawa and dutifully presented Rumsfeld’s ask to then Foreign Minister Bill Graham, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Canada’s military leadership and ultimately the federal cabinet.

It was not an easy ask for Canada to fulfil in terms of military capability, capacity and risk. Canada had never done anything like this before. It was, therefore, not an easy decision to make for the government of Canada and for the Canadian military to deliver.

But Canada answered the call from its closest ally, giving the U.S. exactly what it asked for and what it needed from Canada. And for the next couple of years, more than 2,000 Canadian Armed Forces soldiers were deployed into the dangers and instability of Kabul in what was known as Operation Athena Phase 1 Kabul, where they acquitted themselves exceptionally well — as Rumsfeld predicted they would. Three Canadian soldiers gave their lives during this phase from 2003 to 2005.

Trump needs to be briefed on Canada’s military heroism before he opens his mouth again on this file. And Americans should understand that in the case of Afghanistan, they needed Canada’s help, their government asked Canada for help — and Canada delivered.

Eugene Lang is affiliated with Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

– ref. Hey Trump: Here’s how Canada punched above its military weight in Afghanistan — from someone with a front-row seat – https://theconversation.com/hey-trump-heres-how-canada-punched-above-its-military-weight-in-afghanistan-from-someone-with-a-front-row-seat-274901

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Eugene Lang, Interim Director, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University, Ontario

“We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan, or this or that. And they did — they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” So said United States President Donald Trump recently, referring to America’s NATO allies, including Canada.

The comments have provoked outrage. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called them “frankly appalling,” especially the insinuation that soldiers from other NATO states avoided the front lines in Afghanistan, leaving the most dangerous heavy lifting to American forces.

Anyone moderately familiar with NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan knows Trump’s insult is rubbish — especially when it comes to Canada.

The Canadian Armed Forces were deployed in some of the most dangerous regions and complex situations in Afghanistan for more than a decade, paying a heavy price in casualties — the heaviest since the Korean War in the early 1950s, when Canada also supported the American-led war effort and more than 500 Canadians died doing so.

What is less commented upon is Trump’s claim: “We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them.” This, too, is rubbish as far as Canada is concerned.

A front-row seat to Rumsfeld’s request

Twenty-three years ago, in fact, the U.S. asked Canada for something substantive and specific in Afghanistan. And Canada delivered substantively.

The ask came from U.S. President George W. Bush’s secretary of defense, the late Donald Rumsfeld, in January 2003. Famous for being sharp and precise with language, Rumsfeld invited Canada’s defence minister at the time, the late John McCallum, to the Pentagon to make a request.

I was in the room that day, and I heard the ask from Rumsfeld’s own lips (I later wrote about this historic meeting in The Unexpected War: Canada in Kandahar in 2007 and again in 2025 in Chretien and the World: Canadian Foreign Policy from 1993-2003.

Rumsfeld asked Canada to lead the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), a multi-national stabilization mission then confined to Kabul, the war-torn capital city of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld’s request was an extremely significant one for Canada to digest. It meant providing the largest contingent of troops — about 2,200 — as well as a brigade headquarters and command of the operation.

Rumsfeld emphasized how critical the leadership of that mission was from his perspective, and how in his view Canada was better suited to take on the role than any other American ally. Gen. Richard Meyers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, was also present at the meeting and reinforced Rumsfeld’s point that ISAF was key to the Kabul region and Canada was the preferred nation to lead it.

American forces, the defense secretary argued, needed Canada to stabilize Kabul, which was awash in war lords and militia and had no real functioning government at that point.

American forces, meantime, would be otherwise engaged in the invasion of Iraq (which began a few weeks later) and holding the line in southern Afghanistan, where U.S. troops were concentrated.

The Canadian military was needed to hold Kabul together and pave the way for scheduled Afghan elections in 2004, Rumsfeld said. Kabul was an extremely important and vulnerable flank in the American war effort, and Rumsfeld needed Canada to cover that flank.

Canada answered the call

The U.S. needed Canada. The American military needed the Canadian Armed Forces. So Rumsfeld asked Canada for help. Following that meeting, McCallum returned to Ottawa and dutifully presented Rumsfeld’s ask to then Foreign Minister Bill Graham, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Canada’s military leadership and ultimately the federal cabinet.

It was not an easy ask for Canada to fulfil in terms of military capability, capacity and risk. Canada had never done anything like this before. It was, therefore, not an easy decision to make for the government of Canada and for the Canadian military to deliver.

But Canada answered the call from its closest ally, giving the U.S. exactly what it asked for and what it needed from Canada. And for the next couple of years, more than 2,000 Canadian Armed Forces soldiers were deployed into the dangers and instability of Kabul in what was known as Operation Athena Phase 1 Kabul, where they acquitted themselves exceptionally well — as Rumsfeld predicted they would. Three Canadian soldiers gave their lives during this phase from 2003 to 2005.

Trump needs to be briefed on Canada’s military heroism before he opens his mouth again on this file. And Americans should understand that in the case of Afghanistan, they needed Canada’s help, their government asked Canada for help — and Canada delivered.

Eugene Lang is affiliated with Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

– ref. Hey Trump: Here’s how Canada has long punched above its military weight — from someone with a front-row seat – https://theconversation.com/hey-trump-heres-how-canada-has-long-punched-above-its-military-weight-from-someone-with-a-front-row-seat-274901

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Mallory Terry, Postdoctoral Fellow, Faculty of Science, McMaster University

Elite sport often looks like a test of speed, strength and technical skill. Yet some of the most decisive moments in high-level competition unfold too quickly to be explained by physical ability alone.

Consider Canadian hockey superstar Connor McDavid’s overtime goal at the 4 Nations Face-Off against the United States last February. The puck was on his stick for only a fraction of a second, the other team’s defenders were closing in and he still somehow found the one opening no one else saw.

As professional hockey players return to the ice at the Milan-Cortina Olympics, Canadians can expect more moments like this. Increasingly, research suggests these moments are better understood not as just physical feats, but also as cognitive ones.

A growing body of research suggests a group of abilities known as perceptual-cognitive skills are key differentiators. This is the mental capacity to turn a blur of sights, sounds and movements into split-second decisions.

These skills allow elite athletes to scan a chaotic scene, pick out the right cues and act before anyone else sees the opportunity. In short, they don’t just move faster, but they also see smarter.

How athletes manage visual chaos

One way researchers study these abilities is through a task known as multiple-object tracking, which involves keeping tabs on a handful of moving dots on a screen while ignoring the rest. Multiple-object tracking is a core method I use in my own research on visual attention and visual-motor co-ordination.

Multiple-object tracking taxes attention, working memory and the ability to suppress distractions. These are the same cognitive processes athletes rely on to read plays and anticipate movement in real time.

Unsurprisingly, elite athletes reliably outperform non-athletes on this task. After all, reading plays, tracking players and anticipating movement all depend on managing visual chaos.

There is, however, an important caveat. Excelling at multiple-object tracking will not suddenly enable someone to anticipate a play like McDavid or burst past a defender like Marie-Philip Poulin, captain of the Canadian women’s hockey team. Mastering one narrow skill doesn’t always transfer to real-world performance. Researchers often describe this limitation as the “curse of specificity.”

This limitation raises a deeper question about where athletes’ mental edge actually comes from. Are people with exceptional perceptual-cognitive abilities drawn to fast-paced sports, or do years of experience sharpen it over time?

Evidence suggests the answer is likely both.

Born with it or trained over time?

Elite athletes, radar operators and even action video game players — all groups that routinely track dynamic, rapidly changing scenes — consistently outperform novices on perceptual-cognitive tasks.

At the same time, they also tend to learn these tasks faster, pointing to the potential role of experience in refining these abilities.

What seems to distinguish elite performers is not necessarily that they take in more information, but that they extract the most relevant information faster. This efficiency may ease their mental load, allowing them to make smarter, faster decisions under pressure.

My research at McMaster University seeks to solve this puzzle by understanding the perceptual-cognitive skills that are key differentiators in sport, and how to best enhance them.

This uncertainty around how to best improve perceptual-cognitive skills is also why we should be cautious about so-called “brain training” programs that promise to boost focus, awareness or reaction time.

The marketing is often compelling, but the evidence for broad, real-world benefits is far less clear. The value of perceptual-cognitive training hasn’t been disproven, but it hasn’t been tested rigorously enough in real athletic settings to provide compelling evidence. To date, though, tasks that include a perceptual element such as multiple-object tracking show the most promise.

Training perceptual-cognitive skills

Researchers and practitioners still lack clear answers about the best ways to train perceptual-cognitive skills, or how to ensure that gains in one context carry over to another. This doesn’t mean cognitive training is futile, but it does mean we need to be precise and evidence-driven about how we approach it.

Research does, however, point to several factors that increase the likelihood of real-world transfer.

Training is more effective when it combines high cognitive and motor demands, requiring rapid decisions under physical pressure, rather than isolated mental drills. Exposure to diverse stimuli matters as well, as it results in a brain that can adapt, not just repeat. Finally, training environments that closely resemble the game itself are more likely to produce skills that persist beyond the training session.

The challenge now is translating these insights from the laboratory into practical training environments. Before investing heavily in new perceptual-cognitive training tools, coaches and athletes need to understand what’s genuinely effective and what’s just a high-tech placebo.

For now, this means treating perceptual-cognitive training as a complement to sport-specific training, not as a substitute. Insights will also come from closer collaborations between researchers, athletes and coaches.

There is however, support for incorporating perceptual-cognitive tasks as an assessment of “game sense” to inform scouting decisions.

The real secret to seeing the game differently, then, is not just bigger muscles or faster reflexes. It’s a sharper mind, and understanding how it works could change how we think about performance, both on and off the ice.

Mallory Terry 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. The mental edge that separates elite athletes from the rest – https://theconversation.com/the-mental-edge-that-separates-elite-athletes-from-the-rest-273758

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Catherine Baillie Abidi, Associate Professor, Child & Youth Study, Mount Saint Vincent University

Over half a billion children are now living in conflict zones, according to a 2025 Save the Children report, and the world is turning its back on them.

At a time of unprecedented global insecurity, funding and resources to care for, protect and engage with children affected by armed violence continue to decline.

The Donald Trump administration’s recent announcement of unprecedented American cuts to funding for international organizations — including reductions to the United Nations Offices of the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General for Children in Armed Conflict and on Violence Against Children — further undermines an already fragile system.

Cuts like these can have a devastating effect on some of the world’s most vulnerable populations, undermining important work to identify and prevent violations against children, and to assist children in rebuilding their lives in the aftermath of violence. Canada cannot sit on the sidelines.

Preventing violence against children

Violence against children is a global crisis. Without a seismic shift in how states take action to prevent such violence, the costs will continue to impact people around the world.

As a global community, we have a collective responsibility to build communities where children are not only safe and thriving, but where their capacity and agency as future peace-builders, leaders and decision-makers in their families, schools and communities are built upon and nurtured in wartime and post-conflict societies. These are core responsibilities that the global community is failing at miserably.

As many as 520 million war-affected children deserve better.

Canada has a long history of serving as a champion of children’s rights in armed conflict. Canadians have led global initiatives, including leading the first International Conference on War-affected Children, championing the Ottawa Treaty to ban landmines and developing the Vancouver Principles on Peacekeeping and Preventing the Recruitment and Use of Child Soldiers .

Canada is also the founder and chair of the Group of Friends of Children and Armed Conflict, an informal but vital UN network focused on child protection.

Now more than ever — amid American economic and political disengagement from core child protection priorities — there is both an opportunity and an imperative for Canada to demonstrate active leadership in the promotion of children’s rights and enhanced safety for children impacted by the devastation of armed conflict.

Complacency threatens to perpetuate generational impacts of violence.

Global leadership required

The Canadian government must once again stand up and provide global leadership on children and armed conflict by bolstering strategic alliances and funding efforts to protect and engage children impacted by armed conflict.

As a community of Canadian scholars dedicated to studying children, organized violence and armed conflict, we are deeply concerned about the growing vulnerability of children worldwide.

We see an opportunity for Canada to reclaim its role as a global leader in advancing and protecting children’s rights, especially in a time of political upheaval and heightened global insecurity. Canada can reassert itself and live up to its global reputation as a force for good in the world. It can stand on the global stage and draw attention to a crisis with generational impacts.

Children need protection from the effects of war, but they also need to be seen as active agents of peace who understand their needs and can help secure better futures.

Investments of attention and funding today can make significant differences in the emotional and social development of children who are navigating post-conflict life.

---

Read more:
The lasting scars of war: How conflict shapes children’s lives long after the fighting ends

---

Canada must take the lead

These investments are critical to the social structures of peaceful communities. Canadian leadership is well-positioned to take on this role, not only because of the country’s history and reputation, but because Canadian scholars are at the forefront, are organized around this issue and can be leveraged for maximum impact.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent celebrated speech at the World Economic Forum’s annual conference at Davos signalled a possible and important shift in alliances, priorities and global moral leadership for Canada.

Canadian foreign policy can build upon this. Making the vulnerability of children affected by armed conflict and the capacity of children to be agents of peace a key foreign policy issue would positively affect the lives of millions of children globally. It would also signal to the world that Canada is ready to take on the significant global human rights challenges it once did.

---

The following scholars, members of The Canadian Community of Practice on Children and Organized Violence & Armed Conflict, contributed to this article: Maham Afzaal, PhD Student, Queens University; Dr. Marshall Beier, McMaster University; Sophie Greco, PhD Candidate, Wilfrid Laurier University; Ethan Kelloway, Honours Student, Mount Saint Vincent University; Dr. Marion Laurence, Dalhousie University; Dr. Kate Swanson, Dalhousie University; Orinari Wokoma, MA student, Mount Saint Vincent University.

Catherine Baillie Abidi receives funding from Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Izabela Steflja receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Kirsten J. Fisher receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Myriam Denov receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the Canada Research Chair Program.

– ref. Why Canada must step up to protect children in a period of global turmoil – https://theconversation.com/why-canada-must-step-up-to-protect-children-in-a-period-of-global-turmoil-274398

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alicia M. Battaglia, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto

As the world races to electrify everything from cars to cities, the demand for high-performance, long-lasting batteries is soaring. But the uncomfortable truth is this: many of the batteries powering our “green” technologies aren’t as green as we might think.

Most commercial batteries rely on fluorinated polymer binders to hold them together, such as polyvinylidene fluoride. These materials perform well — they’re chemically stable, resistant to heat and very durable. But they come with a hidden environmental price.

Fluorinated polymers are derived from fluorine-containing chemicals that don’t easily degrade, releasing persistent pollutants called PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) during their production and disposal. Once they enter the environment, PFAS can remain in water, soil and even human tissue for hundreds of years, earning them the nickname “forever chemicals.”

We’ve justified their use because they increase the lifespan and performance of batteries. But if the clean energy transition relies on materials that pollute, degrade ecosystems and persist in the environment for years, is it really sustainable?

As a graduate student, I spent years thinking about how to make batteries cleaner — not just in how they operate, but in how they’re made. That search led me somewhere unexpected: the ocean.

---

Read more:
Living with PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ can be distressing. Not knowing if they’re making you sick is just the start

---

Why binders are important

Every rechargeable battery has three essential components: two electrodes separated by a liquid electrolyte that allows charged atoms (ions) to flow between them. When you charge a battery, the ions move from one electrode to the other, storing energy.

When you use the battery, the charged atoms flow back to their original side, releasing that stored energy to power your phone, car or the grid.

Each electrode is a mixture of three parts: an active material that stores and releases energy, a conductive additive that helps electrons move and a binder that holds everything together.

The binder acts like glue, keeping particles in place and preventing them from dissolving during use. Without it, a battery would be unable to hold a charge after only a few uses.

Lessons from the sea

Many marine organisms have evolved in remarkable ways to attach themselves to wet, slippery surfaces. Mussels, barnacles, sandcastle worms and octopuses produce natural adhesives to stick to rocks, ship hulls and coral in turbulent water — conditions that would defeat most synthetic glues.

For mussels, the secret lies in molecules called catechols. These molecules contain a unique amino acid in their sticky proteins that helps them form strong bonds with surfaces and hardens almost instantly when exposed to oxygen. This chemistry has already inspired synthetic adhesives used to seal wounds, repair tendons and create coatings that stick to metal or glass underwater.

Building on this idea, I began exploring a related molecule called gallol. Like catechol in mussels, gallol is used by marine plants and algae to cling to wet surfaces. Its chemical structure is very similar to catechol, but it contains an extra functional group that makes it even more adhesive and versatile. It can form multiple types of strong, durable and reversible bonds — properties that make it an excellent battery binder.

A greener solution

Working with Prof. Dwight S. Seferos at the University of Toronto, we developed a polymer binder based on gallol chemistry and paired it with zinc, a safer and more abundant metal than lithium. Unlike lithium, zinc is non-flammable and easier to source sustainably, making it ideal for large-scale applications.

The results were remarkable. Our gallol-based zinc batteries maintained 52 per cent higher energy efficiency after 8,000 charge-discharge cycles compared to conventional batteries that use fluorinated binders. In practical terms, that means longer-lasting devices, fewer replacements and a smaller environmental footprint.

Our findings are proof that performance and sustainability can go hand-in-hand. Many in industry might still view “green” and “effective” as competing priorities, with sustainability an afterthought. That logic is backwards.

We can’t build a truly clean energy future using polluting materials. For too long, the battery industry has focused on performance at any cost, even if that cost includes toxic waste, hard-to-recycle materials and unsustainable and unethical mining practices. The next generation of technologies must be sustainable by design, built from sources are renewable, biodegradable and circular.

Nature has been running efficient, self-renewing systems for billions of years. Mussels, shellfish and seaweeds build materials that are strong, flexible and biodegradable. No waste and no forever chemicals. It’s time we started paying attention.

The ocean holds more than beauty and biodiversity; it may also hold the blueprint for the future of energy storage. But realizing that future requires a cultural shift in science, one that rewards innovation that heals, not just innovation that performs.

We don’t need to sacrifice progress to protect the planet. We just need to design with the planet in mind.

This research was supported by the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, and the Ontario Research Fund. Alicia M. Battaglia received funding from the Ontario Graduate Scholarship Program.

– ref. Lessons from the sea: Nature shows us how to get ‘forever chemicals’ out of batteries – https://theconversation.com/lessons-from-the-sea-nature-shows-us-how-to-get-forever-chemicals-out-of-batteries-273098

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Taylor McKee, Assistant Professor, Sport Management, Brock University

Game Plan. Best Ever ‘88. Own the Podium. The messaging from the Canadian government’s Olympic high-performance sport initiatives over the past 50 years makes the stakes clear: winning is important.

Gone are the days of Canadian athletes being satisfied with simply making it to the Olympics. An expectation of excellence now pervades the Olympic program. Athletes are considered ambassadors of their countries and symbols of national pride.

This year in Italy, that expectation will be front and centre amid recent geopolitical tensions. It’s no wonder the new slogan is one that evokes unity and patriotism: “We Are All Team Canada.”

While there is little doubt that all Olympic athletes are expected to play and perform under pressure, Canada’s historical successes at the Winter Games have created heightened expectations. The country set a record for the most gold medals won by a host nation at a single Winter Olympics with 14 in Vancouver in 2010.

When I ask my undergraduate students which Canadian athletes they believe feel the most pressure to win gold at the Olympics, most say hockey, though that may be too simple an answer.

Curling hopefuls

It is certainly true that Canadians expect strong results from men’s and women’s hockey teams, and for good reason. Canada is the most successful ice hockey nation in Olympic history, with 23 medal wins.

Yet many Canadian hockey fans recognize the strength of other hockey nations. Canadians both love and loathe the Swedes, Finns, Slovaks, Czechs and Americans that play for their National Hockey League teams. A loss to those players and those teams is devastating, but explicable.

Curling presents a different story. Here, expectations are clear: gold medals. Casual Olympic viewers may not realize that Scots and Swiss make up the top-three men’s curling rinks in the world, and the Swiss women have won two of the last four World Championships.

That said, Canada’s teams are formidable. The men’s rink, led by Brad Jacobs, won gold in 2014 in Sochi, and the women’s rink, led by Rachel Homan, is currently ranked No. 1 in the world. Far from a golden fait accompli, Canada’s curlers are among the most heavily scrutinized athletes heading to Milan Cortina.

Speed skating hopefuls

Canada has realistic medal potential in both short-track and long-track speed skating. Laurent Dubreuil is a defending silver medallist in the 1000m and finished fourth in the 500m in Beijing 2022.

Ivanie Blondin and Isabelle Weidemann are members of the defending gold medallist Team Pursuit team and silver medallists in other distances. The Team Pursuit event is among the most exciting long-track events at the Olympics and certainly worth circling on the viewing calendar.

On short track, the location of some of the highest drama and most intense finishes at every Olympics, Canada has some serious medal potential with a full complement of 10 skaters headed to Milan.

The women’s team features four-time Olympic medallist Kim Boutin, who will compete at her third consecutive Olympic Winter Games. Boutin received medals in all three women’s individual events at PyeongChang 2018 and later added bronze in the 500m at Beijing 2022. Over the past decade, she has earned 17 medals at the ISU World Short Track Championships and two more world titles at the 2025 Championships, winning gold in the women’s 3000m relay and the mixed relay.

Freestyle skiing hopefuls

Many Canadians might assume speed skating has produced the most medals for Canada over the years. Speed skating accounts for 23 total events between short and long-track at this year’s Olympics, and Canada won their first speed skating medal in 1932.

However, despite it only being added as a full medal sport in 1992, Canada has won 30 total medals in a different sport, including the distinction of Canada’s first home gold medal won by Alexandre Bilodeau in 2010: freestyle skiing.

Equal parts agility and artistry, freestyle skiing is definitely one of Games’ most beguiling and exhilarating watches.

Comprised of eight separate disciplines, Canada has numerous medal threats, headlined by “greatest mogul skiier of all time” Mikaël Kingsbury, fresh off of a Jan. 10 victory in men’s moguls at Val St. Côme, marking a staggering 100 career World Cup victories for the skier.

And then, there’s hockey.

Ice hockey hopefuls

The centre of the women’s hockey is a binary system: two stars bound together, their combined gravity ordering the remaining planets, paling in size and importance to their suns.

This year marks a new era, as professional women’s players will compete for the first time at the Olympics, following the establishment of the Professional Women’s Hockey League.

Since 1990, only one team other than Canada and the U.S. — Finland in 2019 — has reached the Ice Hockey World Championships gold medal game. Canada won bronze that year.

Gold medallists in five of seven previous Olympics, the Canadian women’s team enters as a slight underdog this year, with Team USA defending their World Champion title.

Given the storied history of these two teams and the heightened tension currently between the two nations, their matchup will assuredly be among the most exciting 60 minutes played this year.

On the men’s side, a long, protracted wait is over: NHL players return to the Olympics. Canadian captain Sidney Crosby will be aiming for his third Olympic gold.

Alongside the return of pro talent comes a familiar source of tension for Canadian hockey fans: consternation around goaltending.

Canada remains one of the tournament’s favourites, shimmering with a galaxy of superstars on forward and defence, yet persistent concerns over net-minding continue to fuel doubt among some fans.

No shortage of Olympic hopefuls

There are many more medal hopefuls for Team Canada heading into Milan Cortina, from alpine skiiers and ski cross athletes to snowboarding, figure skating and freestyle skiing.

But simply taking in the Games when possible can be a rewarding experience in and of itself.

While cynicism and skepticism towards the International Olympic Committee and Olympic movement are certainly warranted, the Winter Olympics will provide the opportunity for Canadian athletes to achieve global sporting excellence.

While we know that pressure creates diamonds, these athletes may soon prove that it can produce gold, too.

Taylor McKee receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

– ref. Here are Canada’s 2026 Winter Olympic medal hopefuls, from hockey to freestyle skiing – https://theconversation.com/here-are-canadas-2026-winter-olympic-medal-hopefuls-from-hockey-to-freestyle-skiing-274407

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Marshia Akbar, Research Lead on Labour Migration at the CERC Migration and Integration Program, TMU, Toronto Metropolitan University

American tariffs have reshaped Canada’s manufacturing sector, but labour-market impacts have not been evenly shared across workers.

The United States imposed tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum, automobiles and auto parts as part of a broader protectionist push under Donald Trump’s administration. Canada’s government responded with its own counter-tariffs and trade measures, but disruptions to the industry were already underway by that point.

Manufacturing is a major source of employment for both immigrant and Canadian-born workers. It includes everything from automotive and aerospace parts to food processing and steel products, and it contributes roughly 10 per cent of Canada’s GDP.

Manufacturing is particularly vulnerable to U.S. tariffs because of its deep integration with cross-border supply chains. More than 60 per cent of Canada’s manufacturing sector has substantial trade exposure to the U.S., making it the primary channel through which tariffs affect the Canadian economy.

As firms adjusted to rising costs and trade uncertainty, immigrant and Canadian-born workers experienced different forms of employment risk at different points in 2025.

A sector under strain

A recent report shows that between January and September 2025, Canada’s manufacturing sector experienced lower production, fewer jobs and higher prices.

After momentum earlier in the year, manufacturing jobs fell sharply in the spring, with the largest consecutive job losses occurring in April, when 30,600 jobs were lost, and May, when a further 12,200 jobs disappeared. Overall, employment fell by nearly 43,000 workers between March and May.

This was followed by persistent instability rather than sustained recovery later in the year. Employment rebounded in September, with 27,800 jobs gained, and rose again in October, but these gains were partially reversed in November, when 9,300 jobs were lost.

Firms responded to the tariff shocks through delayed and incremental employment cuts, but these sector-wide adjustments were experienced differently by immigrant and Canadian-born workers.

Immigrant workers are more vulnerable

Not all workers felt the shocks from the labour market equally. Immigrant workers were disproportionately affected by tariff-related employment adjustments and are particularly vulnerable when manufacturing employment becomes unstable.

Manufacturing is a critical source of employment for immigrants, particularly in large metropolitan regions and along industrial corridors.

In March 2025, immigrants accounted for 30 per cent of employment in Canada’s manufacturing sector, compared with 70 per cent of Canadian-born workers. By December 2025, however, the immigrant share had declined to 28 per cent, while the share of Canadian-born workers increased to 72 per cent.

---

Read more:
Canadian immigrants are overqualified and underemployed — reforms must address this

---

This disparity was compounded by a structural educational mismatch. While 80 per cent of workers in the sector don’t have a university degree, immigrant workers were more than twice as likely as Canadian-born workers to be university educated.

Nevertheless, these higher education levels often do not translate into higher-paid roles within manufacturing.

Lower wages amplify employment risk

Wage data shows that many immigrant manufacturing workers are concentrated in lower-paid or more labour-intensive jobs that are particularly vulnerable during an economic downturn.

Throughout 2025, immigrant workers earned roughly $2.50 to $3 less per hour than Canadian-born workers. This gap did not narrow even when wages recovered later in the year.

Average hourly wages for all workers increased from $34.43 in March to $35.29 in December. Yet the wage gap for immigrant workers widened slightly — from $2.52 to $2.56.

Lower pay combined with higher educational attainment points to persistent credential under-utilization, meaning workers possess skills or qualifications that are not fully used or rewarded in their jobs. This under-utilization increases immigrant workers’ exposure to employment instability when trade disruptions occur.

How job loss patterns shifted

Job loss also unfolded differently over time. In the first half of 2025, unemployed former workers who were immigrants were more likely to report layoffs — temporary or permanent — as the cause of their joblessness.

That share remained consistently high — at 66 per cent in June — before gradually declining later in the year. By December, 51 per cent of immigrant former workers reported job loss as the reason for unemployment.

In contrast, job loss became increasingly concentrated among Canadian-born workers in the second half of the year. In March, only 53 per cent reported job loss as the reason for unemployment. This share rose steadily throughout the rest of the year, reaching 71 per cent by December.

These trends indicate that firms initially relied more heavily on reductions in immigrant labour, and later expanded layoffs to include Canadian-born workers as tariff pressures persisted.

Differential adjustment strategies

U.S. tariffs reshaped Canadian manufacturing not through a single employment shock, but through different labour-adjustment strategies over time.

Highly educated immigrant workers, many of whom were concentrated in lower-paid roles, were more exposed to early layoffs, wage penalties and unstable employment. As tariff pressures deepened, job loss became more concentrated among Canadian-born workers as longer-term restructuring took place.

These patterns matter for policy. If manufacturing is to remain a viable pillar of the Canadian economy in an era of trade disruption, policy responses must recognize these unequal adjustment patterns and address the underlying vulnerabilities that leave some workers more exposed than others.

This could include targeted income supports and rapid-response training for displaced workers, and tailored settlement and employment services for immigrant workers who, as a group, are concentrated in lower-wage and more unstable jobs.

In addition, better co-ordination between trade, industrial, and immigration policies could help ensure that adjustment costs are not disproportionately borne by already vulnerable workers.

Marshia Akbar receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Devaanshi Khanzode 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. Tariffs are reshaping Canadian manufacturing, but not all workers are being impacted the same way – https://theconversation.com/tariffs-are-reshaping-canadian-manufacturing-but-not-all-workers-are-being-impacted-the-same-way-274269

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sarah Elaine Eaton, Professor and Research Chair, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is now a reality in higher education, with students and professors integrating chatbots into teaching, learning and assessment. But this isn’t just a technical shift; it’s reshaping how students and educators learn and evaluate knowledge.

Our recent qualitative study with 28 educators across Canadian universities and colleges — from librarians to engineering professors — suggests that we have entered a watershed moment in education.

We must grapple with the question: What exactly should be assessed when human cognition can be augmented or simulated by an algorithm?

Research about AI and academic integrity

In our review of 15 years of research that engages how AI affects cheating in education, we found that AI is a double-edged sword for schools.

On one hand, AI tools like online translators and text generators have become so advanced that they can write just like humans. This makes it difficult for teachers to detect cheating. Additionally, these tools can sometimes present fake news as facts or repeat unfair social biases, such as racism and sexism, found in the data used to train them.

---

Read more:
I used AI chatbots as a source of news for a month, and they were unreliable and erroneous

---

On the other hand, the studies we reviewed showed AI can be a legitimate assistant that can make learning more inclusive. For instance, AI can provide support for students with disabilities or help those who are learning an additional language.

Because it’s nearly impossible to block every AI tool, schools should not just focus on catching cheaters. Instead, schools and post-secondary institutions can update their policies and provide better training for both students and teachers. This helps everyone learn how to use technology responsibly while maintaining a high standard of academic integrity.

Participants in our study positioned themselves not as enforcers, but as stewards of learning with integrity.

Their focus was on distinguishing between assistance that supports learning and assistance that substitutes for it. They identified three skill areas where assessment boundaries currently fall: prompting, critical thinking and writing.

Prompting: A legitimate and assessable skill

Participants widely viewed prompting — the ability to formulate clear and purposeful instructions for a chatbot — as a skill they could assess. Effective prompting requires students to break down tasks, understand concepts and communicate precisely.

Several noted that unclear prompts often produce poor outputs, forcing students to reflect on what they are really asking.

Prompting was considered ethical only when used transparently, drawing on one’s own foundational knowledge. Without these conditions, educators feared prompting may drift into over-reliance or uncritical use of AI.

Critical thinking

Educators saw strong potential for AI to support assessing critical thinking. Because chatbots can generate text that sounds plausible but may contain errors, omissions or fabrications, students must evaluate accuracy, coherence and credibility. Participants reported using AI-generated summaries or arguments as prompts for critique, asking students to identify weaknesses or misleading claims.

These activities align with a broader need to prepare students for work in a future where assessing algorithmic information will be a routine task. Several educators argued it would be unethical not to teach students how to interrogate AI-generated content.

Writing: Where boundaries tighten

Writing was the most contested domain. Educators distinguished sharply between brainstorming, editing and composition:

• Brainstorming with AI was acceptable when used as a starting point, as long as students expressed their own ideas and did not substitute AI suggestions for their own thinking.

• Editing with AI (for example, grammar correction) was considered acceptable only after students had produced original text and could evaluate whether AI-generated revisions were appropriate. Although some see AI as a legitimate support for linguistic diversity, as well as helping to level the field for those with disabilities or those who speak English as an additional language, others fear a future of language standardization where the unique, authentic voice of the student is smoothed over by an algorithm.

• Having chatbots draft arguments or prose was implicitly rejected. Participants treated the generative phase of writing as a uniquely human cognitive process that needs to be done by students, not machines.

Educators also cautioned that heavy reliance on AI could tempt students to bypass the “productive struggle” inherent in writing, a struggle that is central to developing original thought.

---

Read more:
What are the key purposes of human writing? How we name AI-generated text confuses things

---

Our research participants recognized that in a hybrid cognitive future, skills related to AI, together with critical thinking are essential skills for students to be ready for the workforce after graduation.

Living in the post-plagiarism era

The idea of co-writing with GenAI brings us into an post-plagiarism era where AI is integrated into into teaching, learning and communication in a way that challenges us to reconsider our assumptions about authorship and originality.

This does not mean that educators no longer care about plagiarism or academic integrity. Honesty will always be important. Rather, in a post-plagiarism context, we consider that humans and AI co-writing and co-creating does not automatically equate to plagiarism.

Today, AI is disrupting education and although we don’t yet have all the answers, it’s certain that AI is here to stay. Teaching students to co-create with AI is part of learning in a post-plagiarism world.

Design for a socially just future

Valid assessment in the age of AI requires clearly delineating which cognitive processes must remain human and which can be legitimately cognitively offloaded. To ensure higher education remains a space for ethical decision-making especially in terms of teaching, learning and assessment, we propose five design principles, based on our research:

1. Explicit expectations: The educator is responsible for making clear if and how GenAI can be used in a particular assignment. Students must know exactly when and how AI is a partner in their work. Ambiguity can lead to unintentional misconduct, as well as a breakdown in the student-educator relationship.

2. Process over product: By evaluating drafts, annotations and reflections, educators can assess the learning process, rather than just the output, or the product.

3. Design assessment tasks that require human judgment: Tasks requiring high-level evaluation, synthesis and critique of localized contexts are areas where human agency is still important.

4. Developing evaluative judgment: Educators must teach students to be critical consumers of GenAI, capable of identifying its limitations and biases.

5. Preserving student voice: Assessments should foreground how students know what they know, rather than what they know.

Preparing students for a hybrid cognitive future

Educators in this study sought ethical, practical ways to integrate GenAI into assessment. They argued that students must understand both the capabilities and the limitations of GenAI, particularly its tendency to generate errors, oversimplifications or misleading summaries.

In this sense, post-plagiarism is not about crisis, but about rethinking what it means to learn and demonstrate knowledge in a world where human cognition routinely interacts with digital systems.

Universities and colleges now face a choice. They can treat AI as a threat to be managed, or they can treat it as a catalyst for strengthening assessment, integrity and learning. The educators in our study favour the latter.

Sarah Elaine Eaton receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of Calgary.

Rahul Kumar has received funding from SSHRC in the past.

Robert Brennan receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Beatriz Antonieta Moya Figueroa 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. ChatGPT is in classrooms. How should educators now assess student learning? – https://theconversation.com/chatgpt-is-in-classrooms-how-should-educators-now-assess-student-learning-270933

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Matthew Hoffmann, Professor of Political Science and Co-Director of Environmental Governance Lab, University of Toronto

At the recent World Economic Forum in Switzerland, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney proclaimed “a rupture” in the global “rules-based order” and a turn to great power rivalry.

While its demise is not certain, even the current disruption to global order, largely due to the Donald Trump administration in the United States, promises profound impacts on the global response to climate change. The world is at risk of losing even the insufficient progress made in the last decade.

But it’s unclear what that effect will be. That uncertainty is both a cause for concern and a source of hope. The climate crisis is not slowing, and humanity must figure out how to navigate the disruption.

---

Read more:
Venezuela attack, Greenland threats and Gaza assault mark the collapse of international legal order

---

Unfortunately, much of what we know about how climate politics works has depended on a relatively stable rules-based order. That order, however problematic, provided institutions like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement.

It also established trade rules for energy technology, co-operative agreements on public and private climate finance, and parameters for how civil society and states interact. It structured the opportunities and obstacles for acting on climate change.

Everyone who cares about climate action must now grapple with how climate politics can function in a new world of uncertainty. It won’t be easy.

But, to inject a slight note of hope, I’m not convinced that meeting the climate challenge is harder now. It’s difficult in a different way. Let’s be clear: the rules-based order was not producing effective global co-operation on climate change.

Limited successes of the rules-based order

The U.S. has consistently been an obstacle to global climate action. As Carney noted, under the the rules-based order “the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient.” Clearly the U.S. decided from very early on that a stable climate was not a public good it was willing to seriously support.

The U.S. failed to see benefits from climate action that outweighed the perception of costs and has consistently been influenced by status quo, fossil-capital economic interests.

That’s not to say there was no progress under the old rules-based system. At least five sources of progress are worth highlighting:

• A coalition of the ambitious, mostly anchored in Europe, consistently pushed for action. This coalition stayed in the Kyoto Protocol and took action domestically, moving forward on emissions reductions and globally significant technological innovation.

• The changing political economy of renewable energy has drastically decreased the costs of wind and solar power.

• The growth of municipal, sub-national and transnational efforts expanded the reach of climate action while also maintaining some momentum in countries, like the U.S., that were reluctant to move aggressively.

• Public support and concern over the climate has grown, in part because the increasing impacts of climate change have made it a tangible problem of the present, not future.

• There’s now a different global architecture for climate governance with the Paris Agreement — one based on collected national actions rather than global collective action. This new architecture was less vulnerable to the first U.S. withdrawal in 2016.

Possibilities for progress

These sources of past progress on climate action could survive the current disruption and play a role in increasing momentum in the global response to climate change. But uncertainties and questions are more plentiful than answers.

A coalition of the ambitious is clearly what Carney’s speech is seeking to catalyze among middle powers. He was not talking about climate change, but a commitment to climate action could and should be a cornerstone that a new order is built upon. This may even attract one of those competing great powers that he alluded to — China. Will China see climate leadership as a means to enhance its global position?

The political economy of renewable energy has momentum that is at least somewhat insulated from the current disruption. How insulated it remains depends on a number of uncertainties.

What will trade rules and practices look like moving forward? What happens within the fossil-fuel energy sector as the U.S. continues to engage in resource imperialism? How will resource competition and co-operation in the renewables sector (over critical minerals, for example) play out moving forward?

Can experimental efforts be a source of resistance and change within the U.S., especially among individual states? And can they play the same role that they did previously, catalyzing further innovation and public support?

Public support for climate action in this new era will likely vary wildly by country. How will growing dissatisfaction with the status quo play out as it intersects with increasingly severe climate impacts?

This could generate further support for right-wing populism. However, affordability and inequality concerns could also become the foundation for building support for climate action and a just transition.

Does the Paris Agreement survive this? It could become a backbone institution for the coalition of the ambitious. The U.S. is gone, again. Maybe other recalcitrant governments should be sidelined from multilateral climate efforts as well, and those willing to act can proceed.

If full global co-operation around climate change is no longer even a façade of the possible now, then the imperative to bring everyone along at each step in the process may evaporate.

None of the ways forward I’ve laid out here are easy. Even if the positive possibilities materialize, they do not guarantee decarbonization and a just transition that is fast and effective enough to matter; to head off the worst of climate change.

What is clear, though, is that like Carney, climate scholars and activists may need to let the fiction of the global rules-based order go. It was not working either in addressing climate change or enhancing justice. Perhaps its disruption is an opportunity to build better foundations for a just and effective global response to climate change.

Matthew Hoffmann receives funding from Social Science and Humanities Research Council and the Lawson Climate Institute.

– ref. Addressing climate change without the ‘rules-based order’ – https://theconversation.com/addressing-climate-change-without-the-rules-based-order-273745