Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jeremy Snyder, Professor, Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University

More than 300 ostriches have been threatened with destruction in eastern British Columbia after avian flu was detected in the flock. The birds’ owners have argued this is a case of “unjust governmental overreach.”

The owners’ plight received support from members of Donald Trump’s administration in the United States and raised more than C$290,000 for their legal and operating costs through a series of crowdfunding campaigns.

This level of financial support for a small ostrich farm shouldn’t be completely surprising. It demonstrates how crowdfunding rewards and encourages political polarization.

Government overreach

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s decision to cull birds at Universal Ostrich Farms in Edgewood, B.C., has echoes of debates over government policy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This includes decrying what is seen as government overreach into personal freedoms and medical decision-making, with comparisons drawn to 2022’s crowdfunded anti-vaccine Freedom Convoy.

The farm’s interest in researching natural immunity has attracted vaccine skeptics more generally and support from Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and others in the U.S.. This is reflected in some donors’ comments, where supporters have posted messages including “down with communism,” “the tyrannical leftist Canadian Government is to blame,” and “globalists don’t want natural cures. They only want to profit from their poison jabs!”

Political appeals

Crowdfunding campaigns of all stripes benefit from public attention and the ability to appeal to potential donors. But while appealing to the general public is a well-tested way to win the popularity contest that is built into crowdfunding, so too is connecting to a subset of partisan supporters who see donating to campaigns as way of expressing their political values.

This has been evident in many viral crowdfunding campaigns, including the hugely successful Freedom Convoy campaign in Canada that raised more than $10 million.

In the U.S., some Jan. 6 defendants used crowdfunding to great success, raising more than US$5 million to pay for their legal bills through these campaigns.

These viral politicized campaigns are associated with a range of forms of populist political mobilization, as well as extremism.

Most recently, this included a campaign to pay for the legal bills of Luigi Mangione, accused of killing an American insurance executive in 2024.

Politicising issues

Our research has demonstrated the benefits of linking campaigns with politicized issues. Crowdfunding campaigns for legal needs tend to perform much better when they are linked to political events. These include fundraisers for people seeking help defending themselves in court for violations of COVID-19 pandemic policies, legal campaigns linked to “election integrity” and politicized violence.

Take the case of Daniel Penny, for example, who was charged with manslaughter after killing a Black man on a New York subway train. After Penny’s case was publicized by Republican politicians and linked to wider issues of public disorder and racialized crime, Penny raised more than US$3.3 million to fund his legal defence.

By comparison, ordinary people accused of violent crimes who are not able to link their needs to political outrage are much less likely to be able to afford a world-class legal defence. Savvy campaigners know this and, in some cases, may actively promote the more politicized dimensions of their needs, values and personal stories.

This incentive structure means that rather than seeking compromise or reflecting on behaviours that led to legal trouble or public condemnation, crowdfunding campaigners can benefit financially from doubling down on the politically polarizing elements of their campaigns.

Profit incentives

Crowdfunding platforms can benefit from encouraging this politicization as well. GiveSendGo, a crowdfunding platform used for many politicized campaigns, has a practice of not restricting campaigns for the legal defence of violent behaviour. The platform has also hosted white nationalist causes.

Crowdfunding platforms are generally financed by voluntary tips from donors, and so the large amounts raised by some politicized campaigns contribute to these platforms’ own financial success.

Political outrage and political donations can be legitimate and even praiseworthy ways of engaging in political expression. The problem with politicized crowdfunding is that it financially rewards polarization and attention-grabbing rhetoric.

Happily, people who are genuinely interested in animal welfare and political reform can find many groups working to address these issues in ways that promote social and political progress rather than polarization.

Jeremy Snyder receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

Claire Wilson 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 anti-vaccine sentiment helped raise funds and saved the lives of some B.C. ostriches – https://theconversation.com/how-anti-vaccine-sentiment-helped-raise-funds-and-saved-the-lives-of-some-b-c-ostriches-267471

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ehsan Noroozinejad Farsangi, Visiting Senior Researcher, Smart Structures Research Group, University of British Columbia

Canada is facing larger wildfires, rising flood risks and worsening traffic congestion. The federal government’s infrastructure plan budgets at least $180 billion over 12 years, yet insured disaster losses hit a record $8.5 billion in 2024.

Despite these massive investments, too often problems are only discovered after construction begins. One way to address this is to model risks and impacts before they occur using a digital replica that mirrors how real systems work.

A “digital twin” — essentially a live virtual model of roads, transit, energy, water and public buildings — would let policymakers and planners test ideas and spot risks ahead of time. It blends maps and 3D models with data (some live, some updated regularly), so policymakers and planners can run “what-if” scenarios.

---

Read more:
What are digital twins? A pair of computer modeling experts explain

---

For example, policymakers could use a digital twin to see how a lane closure, new bus route or wildfire evacuation order might ripple through a city before making a decision. Singapore already uses this approach to test planning and emergency responses and its documented efficiency gains are clear.

As researchers, we see a national, federated digital twin improving Canada’s resilience and efficiency in three practical ways.

Benefit #1: Safer wildfire evacuations

Canada’s 2023 wildfire season was the worst on record, with more than 18 million hectares burned, and 2025 has already been called the second-worst on record.

When fires move fast, evacuation routes can become jammed and communication can break down. During the 2016 Fort McMurray wildfire, for instance, residents received “mixed messages” about the threat and proximity of the wildfire. Thousands of people ended up jamming Highway 63, the sole road in and out of the city.

Similarly, during Yellowknife’s 2023 evacuation, an after-action review found there was a lack of clear and transparent communication to the public about an evacuation plan, leading to “significant confusion and stress.”

A national digital twin could help emergency teams rehearse evacuations in advance. They could test detours, traffic signal plans, one-way controls, signage and reception-centre capacity; check if ambulances can reach hospitals when smoke closes a route; and push clear routes to navigation apps in real time.

Benefit #2: Faster, more reliable commutes

Traffic congestion and transit delays cost Canadians time, productivity and peace of mind. We all know what it’s like when a construction project snarls traffic or a crowded station slows trains.

A 2024 report from the Canadian Centre for Economic Analysis estimated that congestion cost Ontario $56.4 billion in total economic and social impacts. Of that, about $43.6 billion was linked to reduced quality of life, including stress, health impacts and time lost to delays.

A digital twin could help. With this technology, transit agencies could test bus-only lanes, signal timing, platform-crowding fixes and construction plans before rolling them out.

Vancouver International Airport has already built a real-time digital twin to optimize passenger flows. The same principles can also be applied to transit hubs and busy corridors, helping cities identify problems early, reduce disruption and move people more efficiently.

Benefit #3: Better use of tax dollars

Cost overruns and rework continue to drain public budgets across Canada. Major infrastructure projects frequently exceed their initial pricetags, like the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, which is now projected to cost nearly $34 billion — almost six times the original $5.3 billion estimate.

Montréal’s Réseau express metropolitain light-rail project has faced multiple cost increases as wells, rising from an initial estimate of $6.3 billion to more than $7.9 billion as of 2023.

Digital twins can reduce these losses by identifying design conflicts early, comparing options side-by-side and improving transparency with the public.

Evidence suggests the savings can be substantial. A technical report from the National Research Council of Canada found that using digital design tools to resolve design conflicts early saved roughly 20 per cent of a project’s contract value.

The potential returns are equally clear abroad. The U.K. government estimates that applying digital twins to network management could deliver 856 million pounds in benefits over 10 years.

Canada is already testing these possibilities. Ontario’s $5 million digital twin pilot is exploring how they can be used to deliver hospitals, highways and transit projects on time and on budget.

Similarly, the federal government is exploring using a digital twin to improve infrastructure maintenance and planning. Public Services and Procurement Canada has issued a Request for Information on a digital twin platform for its building portfolio.

From scattered projects to a national framework

Canada already has a strong foundation to build on for a national digital twin. Many Canadian cities already publish detailed base spatial data, such as Toronto’s 3D massing models and Vancouver’s public LiDAR data that captures its urban form in high resolution.

Canadian universities are already leading the way. Researchers at Carleton University have been the first to model a digital twin at a national scale, and plan to release the project’s code as an open-source project and the platform for free.

Infrastructure Ontario and Toronto Metropolitan University have signed a two-year partnership to apply digital-twin technology to modernize provincial infrastructure planning. Meanwhile, four other Canadian universities are involved in a project to explore how these tools can improve development approvals and regulatory decision-making.

The challenge is not to start from scratch, but to connect these existing initiatives under a coherent national framework.

This means agreeing on a few shared rules: common formats so maps and assets line up, clear privacy and security standards that prohibit personal tracking (only anonymous or aggregated data) and a small federal team to maintain standards and allow the different systems to work together.

Transparency about how the digital twin models work will be essential. The government should publish the methods and test results online for communities, journalists and independent experts to check. Routine audits and a quick way to fix mistakes should also be added.

A practical first step is to focus on projects that address urgent, tangible issues, namely wildfire evacuation routes and commute reliability. Early successes in these areas would demonstrate value quickly while proving the model’s effectiveness.

Learning from global leaders

Canada does not need to invent its own rule book. It can adopt existing frameworks like the U.K.’s plain-English Gemini Principles and information-management playbook, which focuses on public benefit, openness and safety.

Singapore, the U.K. and the European Union have all developed, implemented and tested digital twin programs, showing how to set standards, protect privacy and deliver public benefits.

If Canada borrows their templates and lessons, it can move faster and at a lower cost. It will be able to link early adopters, focus on high-impact uses like wildfire evacuations and commute reliability, publish results for review and then expand.

By doing so, Canada would shift from fragmented projects to a national digital twin that strengthens resilience, protects privacy and improves everyday life.

Dr. Ehsan Noroozinejad has received funding from both national and international organizations to support research addressing housing and climate crises. His most recent funding for integrated housing and climate policy comes from the APPI. He has also been involved in securing funding from NSERC and Mitacs. He is also affiliated with Western Sydney University.

Professor T.Y. Yang secures funding from national and international organizations to develop innovative solutions for housing and climate crises, with a focus on modern methods of construction.

– ref. A digital twin could help Canada beat wildfires, fix commutes and save tax dollars – https://theconversation.com/a-digital-twin-could-help-canada-beat-wildfires-fix-commutes-and-save-tax-dollars-266460

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Adrian Ma, Assistant Professor, Journalism, Toronto Metropolitan University

In the debut episode of the new sitcom The Paper, freshly appointed editor-in-chief Ned Sampson tries to rouse the spirits of his colleagues at The Truth Teller, a fictional local newspaper in Toledo, Ohio.

It’s a community institution with a storied past but a precarious future — in recent years, the paper has relied almost exclusively on news wire articles and clickbait entertainment to meet its bottom line.

Ned makes a declaration while standing on a desk, as a documentary film crew records it all:

“If you have ever wanted to be the first person to know what’s going on in the place where you live, or if you want to make sure the people who are running your city are telling the truth … You are more than welcome, all of you, to volunteer your time at this newspaper.”

It’s meant to be an uplifting moment, with the earnest but inexperienced leader insisting that good journalism can make the paper profitable again. But, even as some colleagues respond with cautious optimism (if not skeptical curiosity), the episode ends by cutting back to an earlier gag — a nearby building has been on fire the entire time, unnoticed and unreported.

It’s an apt, if unsettling, metaphor for the state of local news in North America, where so many outlets have vanished that residents often don’t know what’s happening in their own backyard.

Alarming rate of collapse

Local newspapers are collapsing at an alarming pace. In Canada, more than 500 outlets have closed since 2008, affecting more than 370 communities, according to the Local News Research Project.

In the United States, the number exceeds 2,800 closures since 2005, based on research by Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism.

The result is what scholars call “news deserts” — places where no professional local news source remains to cover councils, courts or communities.

The causes of this decline are multifaceted. Reporters and editors need to be paid, newsrooms need resources and investigative journalism is costly and time-consuming. Print advertising, once the financial lifeblood of local papers, has been in steep decline for years as businesses moved their spending to platforms like Google and Facebook.

That collapse in revenue left papers more dependent on digital ads and subscriptions, neither of which has filled the gap. According to the Florida-based Poynter Institute for Media Studies, local news websites saw about a 20 per cent drop in page views and unique visitors in 2022, undercutting the ad impressions needed to sustain online revenue.

Patchwork assistance

Canadian news organizations have sought compensation for the ways tech platforms profit from news content. Google reached a deal with the Canadian government to provide $100 million annually for five years to domestic publishers in exchange for an exemption from the Online News Act, which allows continued access to Canadian news links.

As Gretel Kahn with the Reuters Institute reports, some Canadian outlets — including The Conversation Canada — have begun to benefit from these payments. The money is disbursed by the Canadian Journalism Collective, a federally incorporated nonprofit.

However, the effects are uneven: larger corporate chains such as Postmedia and Torstar are getting most of the support, while smaller independent and local publishers receive far less. This patchwork assistance offers temporary relief but does little to fix the deeper imbalance in how digital advertising profits are distributed.

Expectation of free news

Audiences have now grown accustomed to receiving news instantly and for free, often through social media feeds or aggregators rather than directly from a newspaper. Younger readers in particular encounter news on platforms like TikTok, Instagram or YouTube, where entertainment and opinion often overwhelm verified reporting.

---

Read more:
More Canadians are paying for news this year, but it’s still too early to celebrate

---

In this environment of declining ad dollars and fragmented attention, local outlets are trying harder than ever to convince audiences their work is worth supporting. This is the tension The Paper plays for laughs.

Throughout the series, the characters contend with all manner of challenges as they strive to keep their newspaper relevant and viable. They get scooped on major stories by a teenage blogger. They struggle to decide whether to chase sensationalism that attracts eyeballs or invest in reporting that actually matters. They try to revive accountability coverage by investigating local businesses but must tread carefully not to alienate the few remaining advertisers willing to support them.

Reporters as underdogs?

On screen, journalists have often been depicted as crusaders for truth — from All the President’s Men to Spotlight to The Newsroom. Even shows and films that explore the darker side of the industry, like The Wire, Bombshell or Tokyo Vice, frame journalism as a profession of serious consequence and high-stakes drama.

The Paper suggests something different: reporters not as larger-than-life figures, but as struggling underdogs doing their best and often getting it wrong. On one hand, this risks trivializing the work of local journalists at a time when the survival of their industry is already in doubt.

For real reporters, it’s no laughing matter. A 2022 Canadian study found many are experiencing high rates of burnout, anxiety and online harassment. In 2021, in the U.S., newsroom employment had fallen by more than a quarter since 2008, with those left behind facing heavier workloads as colleagues were laid off.

The loss of reporters has created gaps in coverage of councils, courts and communities that once formed the backbone of civic accountability.

Heartfelt missive

On the other hand, when it’s at its best, The Paper is a heartfelt missive about why local journalism has always mattered: that despite its sometimes dysfunctional newsroom, the reporters are people who truly understand and care about the community they cover because they live there too.

This kind of connection has long been a foundation for building public trust and encouraging dialogue. But it has been severely eroded as outlets close and news deserts spread.

Research shows that as local news declines, so does voter turnout, civic engagement and political accountability.

The Paper doesn’t pretend to solve the seemingly insurmountable problems facing local news, but it does capture the messy reality of trying to do the job. In a moment when journalists are often idealized or demonized, showing them as flawed but dedicated may not be comforting — but it may be closer to the truth.

Adrian Ma 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 ‘The Paper’ reveals about local news and journalism today – https://theconversation.com/what-the-paper-reveals-about-local-news-and-journalism-today-264849

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Bhavini Gohel, Clinical Associate Professor, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary

Wildfires are no longer rare disasters in Canada. They are now an annual reality, and 2025 has already been one of the worst on record, with 3,582 fires burning 6.2 million hectares as of July 30 — quadruple the 10-year average.

At a time when hospitals are already strained by staff shortages, long wait times and rising costs, wildfires add yet another layer of pressure.

Rural communities are usually the hardest hit by wildfires. These communities rely on small health facilities with limited staff and equipment.

When fires cut off access or force evacuations, these facilities struggle to provide even basic care. As a frontline health-care worker and system leader, I have seen first-hand how every part of health system — from hospital operations to workforce readiness and community partnerships — is being tested. Leading resilience initiatives has shown me how urgently we need system-wide co-ordination and investment to protect patients when disasters strike.

Frontline health-care workers face surging pressure during wildfires: treating burns, vehicle accidents during evacuation and smoke-related illnesses that damage lungs, worsen asthma, and increase risks of strokes, heart attacks and cardiac arrest. Seniors, children, pregnant women and people with chronic illnesses are especially vulnerable.

Beyond physical harm, survivors often face lasting anxiety, depression and trauma. Wildfires are not just environmental events; they are public health crises that demand stronger, more resilient health systems.

Preparing for a predictable risk

During wildfires, poor air quality makes it difficult for both patients and staff to stay safe indoors. Fires can disrupt medical supply chains, damage buildings and force hospitals, clinics and operating rooms to close. Surgeries can be delayed, emergency care becomes harder to access, and patients often crowd into the few facilities still running, stretching resources even thinner.

Health-care workers face their own challenges: finding safe routes to work, arranging child or elder care during evacuations, and coping with the uncertainty of when, or if, they can return home.

Past wildfires in Alberta, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories have forced urgent evacuations of patients, the relocation of health-care workers and the rapid reorganization of care at enormous cost. Each of these events has added millions of dollars in costs and created more strain for a health system already struggling to keep up.

Wildfires are now a predictable part of Canada’s climate reality. Yet health systems remain under-prepared. While emergency management frameworks exist, they often fall short of addressing broader and long-term needs during wildfires and fail to build true resilience. The Climate-Resilient Acute Care Clinical Operations framework and wildfire framework highlight what is required, but these requirements must be scaled and integrated across the entire health system.

What resilience looks like

Building climate resilience in health care requires focusing on several key pillars.

Leadership and governance must come first. Yet many health leaders are not provided with the knowledge or training they need to understand how wildfires affect both health outcomes and health-care systems. Leaders must be equipped to make quick, informed decisions that safeguard patients and staff when disasters strike.

Financing is another critical piece. Resources must be directed to the areas most at risk during wildfire season and reviewed regularly to ensure funding keeps pace with reality. Without sustainable financing, health systems are left reacting instead of being prepared.

Health information systems also need to be strengthened. Power outages and connectivity failures can wipe out access to patient records and communication tools at the worst possible moment. Developing reliable backup systems and clear plans ensures that records, co-ordination and critical data are not compromised.

At the same time, the health-care workforce must be supported. Staff need training, such as simulation-based exercises that prepare them for wildfire events. Protecting the mental health of staff and encouraging personal resiliency plans are equally important, allowing workers to remain in the system when demands are highest. Workers can only serve patients effectively if they themselves are supported.

Workforce planning must also account for seasonal risks. Wildfire season falls in the summer, when health systems are already short-staffed due to vacations. Every winter, we prepare for respiratory virus surges, but we do not treat wildfires with the same seriousness. This must change.

Strengthening access to care

Protecting medical supply chains is another priority, as disruptions are common during wildfires. Identifying alternatives and ensuring backups to maintain critical supplies is key. Technology can help fill gaps: virtual care platforms can keep patients connected to doctors even when roads are closed, facilities are damaged or patients are displaced.

Equally important is ensuring that patients and communities know how to access care under stress. Preparedness should include clear communication, education kits, checklists, extra medication supplies and mental health resources. Collaboration with municipalities, under-served groups and high-risk communities is vital, since they often feel the effects of wildfires first and most severely.

An investment that pays off

Strengthening health systems for wildfire resilience will require resources. But it’s anticipated that these investments will ultimately save money in the long run by reducing disruptions, preventing costly emergency transfers and minimizing long-term health impacts. Most importantly, they protect access to health care for patients with urgent or ongoing chronic conditions.

If we fail to prepare, wildfires will continue to exacerbate the cracks in our health system. Patient-centred, climate-resilient care is no longer optional; it is essential.

Bhavini Gohel is affiliated with Canadian Coalition for Green Healthcare & Brain Climate Equity Collaborative

– ref. How wildfires and other climate disasters put health systems under extreme pressure – https://theconversation.com/how-wildfires-and-other-climate-disasters-put-health-systems-under-extreme-pressure-265483

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Scott J. Davidson, Assistant Professor and CARCLIQUE Research Chair, Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en limnologie (GRIL), Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)

Peatlands are among the world’s most important yet underappreciated ecosystems. They are a type of wetland that covers a small fraction of the Earth’s land, while containing the most carbon-rich soils in the world.

Healthy peatlands shape water cycles, support unique biodiversity and sustain communities. Yet for all their importance, we still lack a clear picture of how peatlands are changing through time.

When peatlands are drained, degraded or burned, the carbon they hold is released into the atmosphere. More than three million square kilometres of wetlands have been drained by humans since 1700, meaning we have lost a huge amount of carbon sequestration potential globally. This makes it all the more important for us to understand and conserve remaining peatlands.

Traditionally, studies of peatlands have focused on a few well-researched sites, often in temperate or boreal regions. But climate change, land use pressures and extreme weather are affecting peatlands everywhere, including in remote, tropical and under-studied regions.

To predict how peatlands will change and react under future conditions, we need frequent data on different types of peatland habitats that captures how they change over seasons and years.

In our recent research, we harnessed the power of people, easily accessible technology and a research network to collect data using a distributed data approach. This means using data collected following a standardized methodology: everyone collecting similar data using the same methods regardless of location.

---

Read more:
Canadian wetlands are treasures that deserve protection

---

Methods that make a difference

Our study, called The PeatPic Project, used smartphone photography to collect data. We connected with peatland researchers around the world via social media and word of mouth and asked them to collect photographs of their peatlands during 2021 and 2022. We gathered more than 3,700 photographs from 27 peatlands in 10 countries.

We analyzed these photographs to look at the plant colour, telling us how green leaves are across the year, and providing rich information on the vegetation growing there. Changes in green leaf colour indicate when plants start their growing season.

They also indicate how green or healthy plants are, how much nutrient plants take up and when they turn brown in the autumn. Colour shifts can also signal changes in moisture or nutrient conditions, temperature stress or disturbance.

This kind of science, conducted by a global community of researchers, amplifies reach. Local observers can use smartphones to record seasonal changes, water levels, vegetation colour or cover, land use or disturbance. With training, standardized protocols, good metadata and validation, community-generated data can be robust. These methods lower the cost, increase the amount of data available to researchers, and build local stewardship and global networks.

Better predictions of peatland function are not just academic; they are essential for mitigating the effects of climate change, protecting biodiversity, water security and reducing risks from disasters like fires and droughts.

Information derived from images can be converted into mathematical representations of plant behaviour and this can in turn be added into digital twins of peatlands.

Creating digital twins of peatlands can help experts simulate “what if” scenarios. For example, what happens if drainage increases after a wildfire or restoration is initiated? But to build useful digital twins, we need data in place: across biomes, seasons and scales.

---

Read more:
What are digital twins? A pair of computer modeling experts explain

---

What needs to happen next

We now have easily accessible tools and technology that allow us to monitor peatlands in ways that were not possible a decade ago. But advancing this depends on action from multiple fronts:

• Research networks should develop, share and adopt standard protocols and data practices so that data from different places and sources can be combined, compared and scaled.

• Communities, including members of the public, can be partners in observation. Training, co-design, fairness and recognition are essential. Local observations, including smartphone photography, could feed directly into decision-making.

• The public can help by supporting policies that fund this work by participating in community science initiatives and recognizing how something as simple as a smartphone photo can significantly contribute to understanding how our planet works.

In fact, the PeatPic Project inspired us to create another community science project called Tracking the Colour of Peatlands. This project involves fixed point locations on 16 peatlands around the world, where members of the public can take a photo of the peatland at different times to help us build a picture how the ecosystem changes over the year.

Peatlands are not fringe ecosystems. They matter for people, climates, water and biodiversity. Harnessing distributed data gathering across a global community, and accessible tools like smartphones gives us a chance to see how peatlands change, to predict where they are most at risk and to act ahead of crisis.

The future of peatlands, and of the Earth’s carbon and water cycles, depends on seeing, recording, sharing and acting together on what is happening now.

Scott J. Davidson receives funding from the Québec Ministry of the Environment. He is a member of the Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en limnologie (GRIL), an FRQNT-funded network.

Avni Malhotra’s research was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation.

– ref. Harnessing technology and global collaboration to understand peatlands – https://theconversation.com/harnessing-technology-and-global-collaboration-to-understand-peatlands-265472

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Emily Gilbert, Professor, Canadian Sudies and Geography & Planning, University of Toronto

At a testy meeting in Banff recently, the American ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, mused about the future of pre-clearance in Canada. Cross-border travel numbers are down, he complained, which makes the cost of the program less appealing to Americans.

Hoekstra’s comments came across as a threat — almost a demand that Canadians resume travelling to the United States.

But should Canadians continue to stay away? Maybe it’s time to rethink Canada’s pre-clearance program with the U.S. and the ways it can undermine Canadian civil rights and sovereignty.

Started informally, then expanded

The origins of U.S. customs pre-clearance in Canada date back to 1952. It began as an informal arrangement made at the request of American Airlines, which was interested in building up its business in Canada.

Since then, the program has expanded to nine Canadian international airports and the Alaska Marine Highway System Ferry Terminal in Prince Rupert, B.C. The U.S. has also expanded its pre-clearance facilities to the Bahamas, Bermuda, Ireland and the United Arab Emirates.

Under Canada-U.S. pre-clearance arrangement, American border agents are located in Canada so that travellers can clear customs, immigration, public health and safety and agriculture inspection before they travel. This provides an additional layer of security for the U.S. since it can screen travellers much earlier in their travel journeys and stop suspicious travellers before they board their flights.

For Canadian travellers, it makes crossing the border faster. By clearing customs in Canada, they don’t need to wait in long lines when they arrive in the U.S. This makes it much easier to catch connecting flights and also means airlines can fly into smaller American airports from Canada, which can be cheaper and more convenient.

Police powers

Pre-clearance in Canada has become so commonplace that it’s not faced significant scrutiny, even though recent legislation raises pressing concerns.

In 2015, the U.S. and Canada signed a new treaty on land, rail, marine and air transport pre-clearance. This legislation opened the door to expanded pre-clearance with new facilities at Québec City’s airport and Billy Bishop airport on the Toronto islands, scheduled to open soon. Pilot projects have also been introduced at train stations and ports, which raise their own issues because they’re often located in city centres.

Subsequently, Canada passed its new Preclearance Act that entered into force in 2019. The legislation updated the terms for pre-clearance but also introduced worrisome and expansive new police powers for U.S. officers on Canadian soil.

American border agents now have the power to conduct strip searches if a Canadian officer is not available or is unwilling to participate. American border agents also have the authority to carry weapons.

Under the previous legislation of 1999, U.S. border agents were authorized to use “as much force is necessary to perform their pre-clearance duties” if they did so “on reasonable grounds.” But under the recent legislation, U.S. officers are “justified in doing what they are required or authorized to do under this Act and in using as much force as is necessary for that purpose.” In other words, the use of force is now legitimized.

Furthermore, while it was previously possible for travellers to remove themselves from inspection without prejudice, under the 2017 legislation, their withdrawal from the border process could be interpreted as grounds for suspicion.

The act of withdrawal itself becomes suspect, with refusal to answer taken as obstruction, which is a criminal offence in both the U.S. and Canada. This can impede someone’s ability to enter the U.S. at a later date.

If someone is suspected of committing an offence, U.S. border agents are also able to detain them as long it does not “unreasonably delay the traveller’s withdrawal” from the process. There is no time limit placed on what is meant by “unreasonably delay.”

Worrisome legislative changes

When the new Preclearance Act was introduced, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried to assuage concerns by explaining that pre-clearance allowed more protections for travellers because the Canadian Constitution would apply in Canada.

The act itself states:

“The exercise of any power and performance of any duty or function under United States law in Canada is subject to Canadian law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Canadian Human Rights Act.”

But can these protections really be assured when there are overlapping jurisdictions at play?

Take U.S. President Donald Trump’s most recent 2025 travel ban that fully bans nationals of 12 countries and partially bans nationals of seven others.

As Amnesty International argues, Trump’s bans are “targeting people based on their race, religion, or nationality, from countries with predominantly Black, Brown and Muslim-majority populations.” Yet these bans are being enforced in Canada via these pre-clearance areas, meaning the rights and protections against discrimination set out in Canadian laws are not being upheld.

Under the terms of the 2015 treaty, pre-clearance officers also receive immunity for civil and administrative offences in their host countries. Furthermore, the U.S. passed legislation a year later stipulating the U.S. has jurisdiction over offences committed by American personnel stationed in Canada.

As Canada’s privacy officer has stated, this lack of accountability in Canada means there is little recourse for someone in Canada who experiences an incident with American border officers when going through pre-clearance. If there is no accountability, then Canadian laws are essentially meaningless.

Border politics

For these reasons, a Canadian reassessment of the pre-clearance program is all the more pressing since efforts are already underway to implement Canadian pre-clearance at land borders with the U.S.

In January 2025, before Trump’s inauguration, a two-year pilot project was announced at the Cannon Corners facility on the New York-Québec border. This would be somewhat different from the police powers granted to American border officials at Canadian airports, but Canada’s objectives have been similar to U.S. security directives — make admissibility determinations before someone enters Canada.

In other words, Canada is proceeding with pre-clearance initiatives that make it more difficult for people to make asylum claims when crossing the Canada-U.S. border.

Hoekstra has put the future of pre-clearance in question. This provides an excellent opportunity to reconsider whether the costs of the program outweigh the benefits in today’s political climate. That’s because no matter how convenient and efficient pre-clearance programs might be, they raise challenging questions about Canadian sovereignty and the rights of Canadian citizens.

The question should really be whether Canada wants to pursue America-style border politics rather than trying to build more humane border policies and practices.

Emily Gilbert has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

– ref. Is the end looming for Canada’s border pre-clearance program with the United States? – https://theconversation.com/is-the-end-looming-for-canadas-border-pre-clearance-program-with-the-united-states-266764

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Tracy Smith-Carrier, Professor and Canada Research Chair (Tier 2) in Advancing the UN Sustainable Development Goals, Royal Roads University

With one-quarter of Canadians struggling to put food on the table, Canada has recently received a D grade from Food Banks Canada for its performance in meeting the country’s food security needs.

According to a 2024 report by the federal government’s National Advisory Council on Poverty, poverty is also on the rise, and people who once thought they were financially secure are starting to feel the squeeze.

Canada is a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, recognizing the right to food, housing and an adequate standard of living.

As a social scientist, my research shows that Canada is struggling to realize these rights because decision-makers often lack the political will to act, and the judicial system still relies on an outdated approach that cannot hold these decision-makers accountable.

Understanding the rights split

Human rights are indivisible, meaning they’re all equally important and interdependent: one right cannot be realized without realizing the others. To meet their commitments, signatory states have agreed to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and to use the “maximum available resources” at their disposal to progressively achieve them.

While Canada and other United Nations member states have endorsed social and economic rights, these rights have often been treated differently from their civil and political counterparts.

Civil and political rights are typically considered negative rights, which do not require the government to act or provide anything, but rather to protect or not interfere with people’s rights, such as freedom of expression or religion. Social and economic rights, on the other hand, have often been deemed positive rights, meaning they require the state to act or provide resources to meet them, like education or health care.

In 1966, human rights were split: civil and political rights were placed under one covenant, and economic, social and cultural rights under another, rather than having them all affirmed under one, as was originally envisaged in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

Weaker language was deliberately included in the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by the rights architects, particularly those in the United States, who felt that its ratification should not encroach on state autonomy or require “thicker social programs and a robust welfare state.”

Consequently, the courts, particularly Canadian lower courts and others internationally, have over the years commonly affirmed that social and economic rights are policy matters best determined by political entities and given democratic legitimacy at the ballot box.

While there is overlap between the two sets of rights, social and economic rights have frequently been deemed non-justiciable — not something people can challenge in court — and therefore not ones people can directly claim or pursue legal remedies for. Instead these rights have taken on an aspirational quality.

When courts are reluctant

Gosselin v. Québec set an important precedent for how social and economic rights would come to be interpreted in Canada.

This case relates to a regulation in the 1980s that set Québec’s social assistance benefits for people under 30 at only two-thirds of the regular benefit ($170 rather than $466 per month). The plaintiff claimed that the regulation was age-discriminatory and violated the Québec and Canadian Charters of Rights and Freedoms under Sections 7 and 15.

Judges in Québec, and later in 2002 in the Supreme Court — although the justices were split on the decision — confirmed the Charter did not impose positive-rights duties on governments, even while the Supreme Court left the door open that it could do so in the future.

Yet some legal scholars contend that the case took constitutional law “two steps backward” and failed to debunk the prejudicial stereotypes surrounding people living in poverty that influenced the decision. In 1992, a Québec Superior Court judge said “the poor were poor for intrinsic reasons” — that they were under-educated and had a weak work ethic.

Such reasoning, however, reflects an individual explanation of poverty — that financial hardship derives from personal failings or deficits — rather than a structural one, where poverty stems from economic downturns, weak labour markets and a lack of affordable child care or housing.

A significant body of evidence now shows that poverty largely has structural origins. Although there have been some victories on social and economic rights, many cases have followed the interpretation in Gosselin.

The right to housing was explicitly identified in the 2019 National Housing Strategy Act. The act introduced the National Housing Council and a complaints and monitoring mechanism through the federal housing advocate, a model that limits people from demanding state-provided housing and suing if they don’t receive it.

Lacking an ecosystem of rights compliance and enforcement, governments have turned to less effective options like charity, rather than engaging solutions that could actually end poverty and hunger, such as a basic income guarantee.

The impasse on social and economic rights has led to the denial of these rights for those living in poverty.

Enforcing implemented rights

Some, like Oxford legal scholar Sandra Fredman, argue the courts should use legal frameworks not to defer to politicians or usurp their decision-making capacity, but to require them to provide reasoned justifications for their distributive decisions.

Although non-binding, the UN’s judicial body, the International Court of Justice, recently concluded that countries have legal obligations to curb their emissions. Some courts, domestically and globally, are also gravitating toward the enforcement and justiciability of human rights, particularly in climate-related cases and the right to a healthy environment.

These could provide new precedents that transform how these rights are understood and enforced in the future.

Without concrete resources, targets and accountability mechanisms to ensure people have dignified access to food, housing and social security, these rights will remain largely hollow.

The “climate of the era” has changed. It’s time for politicians to actively work to fulfill social and economic rights and for the courts to hold them accountable when they fail to do so.

Without substantive rights — ones backed by action — poverty will continue to rise and people will be denied justice.

Tracy Smith-Carrier receives funding from the Tri-agency’s Canada Research Chairs program and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

– ref. Canada’s rising poverty and food insecurity have deep structural origins – https://theconversation.com/canadas-rising-poverty-and-food-insecurity-have-deep-structural-origins-265570

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Billie Anderson, Lecturer, Disability Studies, King’s University College, Western University

In Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein, the true horror lies in scientist Victor Frankenstein’s hubris and refusal to care for The Creature he creates.

Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel Frankenstein gave The Creature an eloquent voice — but cinema has often silenced him, rendering him mute, groaning and monstrous in both appearance and behaviour.

Del Toro’s Frankenstein, which arrives in select theatres and on Netflix this fall, presents a Creature who thinks, feels, suffers and demands recognition.

The film, which I saw recently at its Toronto International Film Festival screening, restores to The Creature not only speech, but also, as some reviewers have noted, subjectivity.

Del Toro’s Frankenstein offers audiences a chance to reconsider how we regard “the monster,” not just in horror cinema, but in stories that reflect attitudes about difference — especially difference in embodiment.

Depictions of bodily difference

The tendency for film to punish difference has long persisted. From the silent era onward, films have used bodily difference as shorthand for inner corruption: the scarred face, the twisted body, the corrupt mind.

Disability studies scholar Angela Smith argues that the horror genre’s visual and narrative conventions were shaped by eugenic beliefs about bodily wholeness.

Another disability studies scholar, Rosemarie Garland-Thomson has noted that disabled figures are often trapped as spectacles: seen but not heard, as well as pitied or feared.

By giving The Creature an interior life, del Toro insists on humanity where cinema once imposed monstrosity.

Shift is more than aesthetic

The shift matters for how popular culture links monstrosity and disability. For nearly a century, films like the 1931 Frankenstein, directed by James Whale, encoded the monster as “deformed,” “broken,” or pathologically violent.

Whale’s Frankenstein is a landmark of horror cinema, but it also cemented some of the most troubling tropes about disability on screen.

The Creature (played by Boris Karloff) was made grotesque through design choices: a flat head, sunken eyes, heavy gait. These features mark him as visibly other, a body built for the audience to recoil from.

The film doubles down with plot devices: instead of receiving a “normal” brain, the monster is mistakenly given a “criminal brain.” Violence, the story suggests, is not the result of isolation or trauma but the natural consequence of defective biology. The message is clear: difference equals danger.

Difference as innate fault

From a disability studies perspective, this is called pathologization — the act of treating difference as if it were a medical defect that explains everything about a person. Whale’s Creature’s strangeness is presented as something built into his body. His scars, his staggered walk, his inability to communicate in words — all of these are framed as signs of an innate fault.

This is what theorists mean when they talk about “otherness.” Otherness refers to the way societies define who counts as normal, human or acceptable by pushing certain groups outside those boundaries. The Creature’s stitched, scarred body signals that he is not simply different but a threatening body to fear and control.

Over time, these representations cemented a cultural shorthand: to be visibly different, to bear scars, to move awkwardly or speak strangely, was to embody danger. The monster on screen taught viewers to associate disability with deviance and fear.

Looking ‘wrong’ and being ‘dangerous’

The story tells us if someone looks or moves “wrong,” then violence or danger must be lurking inside them.

That way of thinking didn’t come out of nowhere. It echoes early 20th-century ideas of eugenics, which tried to link disability and criminality. When you watch Whale’s Frankenstein through this lens, The Creature is a cautionary tale about why difference itself must be feared, controlled or even eliminated.

Mary Shelley’s original 1818 novel tells a much more complicated story. Her Creature is eloquent, self-aware and painfully conscious of how he is rejected by every human being he meets.

As noted by literary critic Harold Bloom, Shelley’s narrative insists humans “can live only through communion with others; solitude, for her, represents death.” Shelley shows us the social roots of monstrosity: rejection and isolation, not biological fate.

---

Read more:
Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’ legacy lives through women’s prison poetry project

---

But the 1931 film stripped that complexity away. Over time, audiences learned to read disability-coded traits — a limp, a scarred face, halting speech — as cinematic signs of danger.

A Creature with soul

Del Toro’s narrative follows Shelley more closely than the 1931 film. The Creature learns to speak, contemplates justice and articulates the pain of being abandoned. His violence, when it occurs, is not framed as the inevitable product of a defective brain but as the consequence of rejection, loneliness and abuse.

Del Toro’s version feels like a correction. Rather than leaning into horror, the film prioritizes tenderness, existentialism, love and understanding.

The design of The Creature reflects a shift in perspective. While his stitched body is unmistakably scarred, the makeup emphasizes vulnerability as much as grotesquerie. The Creature is unsettling because he is both human and not — beautiful, wounded and deeply present. The stitching and scars become traces of experience, history and survival.

From monstrosity to humanity

Movingly, the question becomes not “what is wrong with him?” but “why does society fail him?” This reorientation:

• Rejects the idea of defect as destiny. The Creature’s tragedy comes from rejection, not innate flaw.

• Restores voice and agency. In del Toro’s hands, The Creature is eloquent, thoughtful and capable of moral reasoning. That matters for audiences used to seeing disability-coded figures as voiceless.

• Shifts monstrosity onto society. The true horror is Victor Frankenstein’s hubris and refusal to care for what he made. The violence arises from abandonment, not deformity.

This is a disability-affirming move. Rather than imagining disability as pathology, or the monster as metaphor for disability, the film asks audiences to look at the structures of exclusion. Representations shape perception. If difference is always framed as frightening or tragic, those ideas seep into how we treat real people.

The Creature becomes legible as disabled because he shows us what it is like to live in a body that others cannot accept. His tragedy mirrors the lived reality of many disabled people: not inherent brokenness, but the pain of exclusion.

Monsters, disability and empathy

Frankenstein stories endure because they dramatize the question: What do we owe each other?

Whale’s 1931 version presented the monster as proof that boundaries must be enforced because the abnormal body is a threat.

Del Toro answers differently. His Creature reveals that what makes us monstrous is not our difference but our refusal to accept others as fully human. We are asked to fear the consequences of our own failure to care.

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

– ref. In Guillermo Del Toro’s ‘Frankenstein,’ what makes us monstrous is refusing to care – https://theconversation.com/in-guillermo-del-toros-frankenstein-what-makes-us-monstrous-is-refusing-to-care-265829

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

There’s recently been a significant uptick in Russian incursions into Europe. They started in mid-September with Russian drones violating Polish airspace, resulting in Poland being forced to deploy its air force to protect its sovereignty.

Subsequently, a Russian drone violated Romanian airspace. Perhaps most disconcerting, three Russian MiG-31s deliberately violated Estonian airspace in a clearly provocative act.

But these known Russian incursions are being overtaken by a troubling phenomenon. Airports in Europe, including but not limited to Copenhagen and Munich, have seen their operations disrupted by unknown drones.

Analysts increasingly believe these mysterious drones are operated by Russian agents to sow fear and tension in Europe. Whether that’s true remains to be seen.

Russian offensive weakening

While these incidents may appear designed to escalate the conflict by threatening to draw the European Union and NATO into the conflict, they instead reflect Russian strategic weakness as winter approaches.

Throughout 2025, Russia had several advantages over Ukraine. Russian superiority in arms production and mobilization, supplemented by direct and indirect aid from states like North Korea and China put it in a favourable strategic position compared to Ukraine.

---

Read more:
Amid the West’s wavering aid to Ukraine, North Korea backs Russia in a mutually beneficial move

---

Russia has hit Ukraine on multiple fronts.

While Russian frontline forces advance against Ukrainian positions, Russia increased the tempo and volume of its drone and missile strikes against Ukrainian cities. Nonetheless, even though Russian drones and missiles have inflicted considerable destruction and casualties on Ukraine in 2025, Ukrainians have yet to lose their will to resist.

Russian forces took advantage of this strategic imbalance against Ukraine to seize Ukrainian territory. Critically, however, while Russian forces have made gains, they have not achieved a decisive breakthrough against Ukraine. Russia’s minimal gains in September, furthermore, indicate that its offensive is stalling.

The fall weather and resulting cold and rain will further stall Russian offensive operations in Ukraine. The year 2025, initially looking like it would favour Russia, has resulted in Putin having little to show for it.

What’s more, Ukraine has not been passive during this period.

Exploiting Russian vulnerabilities

From a numbers and material standpoint, Ukraine is at a considerable disadvantage against Russia. But Putin’s government has two interrelated points that Ukraine seeks to undermine: domestic support for Putin and the Russian economy.

The extent of domestic support for Putin is a subject of debate among scholars and analysts. But Putin’s actions suggest he’s nervous enough about it that he’s seeking to insulate his support base against the effects of the war. To do so, he’s maintaining the illusion of a strong Russian economy.

But Elvira Nabiullina, Russia’s central bank governor, has warned the Russian economy is in trouble. Putin has ignored her warnings and has instead offered pithy retorts to criticisms of the Russian economy.

Despite Putin’s nonchalant reaction to the weakness of the Russian economy, Ukraine recognizes the fragility of his stance. In fact, Ukraine is now repeatedly striking the resource at the heart of Russia’s precarious prosperity: oil.

Oil and natural gas account for at least 30 per cent of the federal Russian budget. Ukrainian innovations in drone and missile technology has allowed Ukraine to repeatedly strike Russian oil and natural gas refining and logistical facilities.

This has resulted in Russia declaring a full moratorium on gasoline exports for the rest of the year. Furthermore, Russia was recently forced to partially extend an export ban to diesel as well.

Fuel shortages will only become more pronounced as energy demands increase over the cold Russian winter. Putin’s base, in short, could finally be forced to confront the consequences of his policies.

Escalate to de-escalate

Russian strategic failures in 2025, along with increased Ukrainian pressure, help explain Russia’s subversive efforts in Europe.

A misunderstood element of Russian strategic doctrine is the concept of escalating to de-escalate. Although this tactic is most commonly applied to nuclear strategy, it applies to all aspects of Russia’s strategic doctrine.

Russian politicians and generals are calculating that Europe is simultaneously unprepared and unwilling to wage war against Russia. Furthermore, Russian leaders are relying on the belief that European leaders, despite their rhetoric, will do whatever possible to eliminate the root cause of Russia’s recent incursions into European airspace: the Russia-Ukraine war.

Putin, after seemingly pushing Europeans to the brink of war, will likely pivot to a policy that encourages a diplomatic solution to Ukraine. Putin has followed a similar strategy of appearing to be more diplomatically inclined in the winters of 2024 and early 2025. World leaders, desperate for the war to end, have treated such proposals more seriously than warranted.

---

Read more:
Trump-Putin ceasefire conversation shows no initial signs of bringing peace to Ukraine

---

Russian drones and missiles may have proven devastating for Ukraine, but they haven’t altered the strategic balance.

Ukraine’s strikes, on the other hand, appear to be bearing strategic fruit at a critical moment of Russian vulnerability, forcing Putin to use unconventional means to try to secure victory against Ukraine.

James Horncastle 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. Why Russia’s provocations in Europe actually signal a weakened strategic position – https://theconversation.com/why-russias-provocations-in-europe-actually-signal-a-weakened-strategic-position-266883

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Gordon A. Gow, Director, Media & Technology Studies, University of Alberta

Earlier this year, a band called The Velvet Sundown racked up hundreds of thousands of streams on Spotify with retro-pop tracks, generating a million monthly listeners on Spotify.

But the band wasn’t real. Every song, image, and even its back story, had been generated by someone using generative AI.

For some, it was a clever experiment. For others, it revealed a troubling lack of transparency in music creation, even though the band’s Spotify descriptor was later updated to acknowledge it is composed with AI.

In September 2025, Spotify announced it is “helping develop and will support the new industry standard for AI disclosures in music credits developed through DDEX.” DDEX is a not-for-profit membership organization focused on the creation of digital music value chain standards.

The company also says it’s focusing work on improved enforcement of impersonation violations and a new spam-filtering system, and that updates are “the latest in a series of changes we’re making to support a more trustworthy music ecosystem for artists, for rights-holders and for listeners.”

As AI becomes more embedded in music creation, the challenge is balancing its legitimate creative use with the ethical and economic pressures it introduces. Disclosure is essential not just for accountability, but to give listeners transparent and user-friendly choices in the artists they support.

A patchwork of policies

The music industry’s response to AI has so far been a mix of ad hoc enforcement as platforms grapple with how to manage emerging uses and expectations of AI in music.

Apple Music took aim at impersonation when it pulled the viral track “Heart on My Sleeve” featuring AI-cloned vocals of Drake and The Weeknd. The removal was prompted by a copyright complaint reflecting concerns over misuse of artists’ likeness and voice.

The indie-facing song promotion platform SubmitHub has introduced measures to combate AI-generated spam. Artists must declare if AI played “a major role” in a track. The platform also has an “AI Song Checker” so playlist curators can scan files to detect AI use.

Spotify’s announcement adds another dimension to these efforts. By focusing on disclosure, it recognizes that artists use AI in many different ways across music creation and production. Rather than banning these practices, it opens the door to an AI labelling system that makes them more transparent.

Labelling creative content

Content labelling has long been used to help audiences make informed choices about their media consumption. Movies, TV and music come with parental advisories, for example.

Digital music files also include embedded information tags called metadata, which include details like genre, tempo and contributing artists that platforms use to categorize songs, calculate royalty payments and to suggest new songs to listeners.

Canada has relied on labelling for decades to strengthen its domestic music industry. The MAPL system requires radio stations to play a minimum percentage of Canadian music, using a set of criteria to determine whether a song qualifies as Canadian content based on music, artist, production and lyrics.

---

Read more:
How do we define Canadian content? Debates will shape how creatives make a living

---

As more algorithmically generated AI music appears on streaming platforms, an AI disclosure label would give listeners a way to discover music that matches their preferences, whether they’re curious about AI collaboration or drawn to more traditional human-crafted approaches.

What could AI music labels address?

A disclosure standard will make AI music labelling possible. The next step is cultural: deciding how much information should be shared with listeners, and in what form.

According to Spotify, artists and rights-holders will be asked to specify where and how AI contributed to a track. For example, whether it was used for vocals, instrumentation or post-production work such as mixing or mastering.

For artists, these details better reflect how AI tools fit into a long tradition of creative use of new technologies. After all, the synthesizer, drum machines and samplers — even the electric guitar — were all once controversial.

But AI disclosure shouldn’t give streaming platforms a free pass to flood catalogues with algorithmically generated content. The point should also be to provide information to listeners to help them make more informed choices about what kind of music they want to support.

Information about AI use should be easy to see and quickly find. But on Spotify’s Velvet Sundown profile, for example, this is dubious: listeners have to dig down to actually read the band’s descriptor.

---

Read more:
The triumph of vinyl: Vintage is back as LP sales continue to skyrocket

---

AI and creative tensions in music

AI in music raises pressing issues, including around labour and compensation, industry power dynamics, as well as licensing and rights.

One study commissioned by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers has said that Gen AI outputs could put 24 per cent of music creators’ revenues at risk by 2028, at a time when many musician careers are already vulnerable to high costs of living and an unpredictable and unstable streaming music economy.

The most popular AI music platforms are controlled by major tech companies. Will AI further concentrate creative power, or are there tools that might cut production costs and become widely used by independent artists? Will artists be compensated if their labels are involved in deals for artists’ music to train AI platforms?

The cultural perception around musicians having their music train AI platforms or in using AI tools in music production is also a site of creative tension.

---

Read more:
AI can make up songs now, but who owns the copyright? The answer is complicated

---

Enabling listener choice

Turning a disclosure standard into something visible — such as an intuitive label or icon that allows users to go deeper to show how AI was used — would let listeners see at a glance how human and algorithmic contributions combine in a track.

Embedded in the digital song file, it could also help fans and arts organizations discover and support music based on the kind of creativity behind it.

Ultimately, it’s about giving listeners a choice. A clear, well-designed labelling system could help audiences understand the many ways AI now shapes music, from subtle production tools to fully synthetic vocals.

Need for transparency

As influence of AI in music creation continues to expand, listeners deserve to know how the sounds they love are made — and artists deserve the chance to explain it.

Easy-to-understand AI music labels would turn disclosure into something beyond compliance: it might also invite listeners to think more deeply about the creative process behind the music they love.

Gordon A. Gow receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Brian Fauteux 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. Why industry-standard labels for AI in music could change how we listen – https://theconversation.com/why-industry-standard-labels-for-ai-in-music-could-change-how-we-listen-262840