Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Knut von Salzen, Senior Research Scientist, Marine Cloud Brightening Research Program, University of Washington

Winter is setting in across the Northern Hemisphere, and with it, cold and cloudy winter days. Clouds play a vital role in the environment, providing rain but also reflecting sunlight before it reaches the Earth’s surface.

But between 2003 and 2022, clouds over the North Atlantic and Northeast Pacific became less reflective, allowing more sunlight to reach the ocean surface and causing sea surface temperatures to rise.

My colleagues and I recent conducted research that shows global efforts to improve air quality have unintentionally accelerated climate warming by modifying clouds.

While cleaner air has major health benefits, decreasing the amount of particulate pollution has also reduced the cooling effect of clouds, accelerating climate warming.

Dimming clouds and rising temperatures

Our study relied on two decades of satellite data to analyze the impacts of changes in particulate pollution and climate warming on the clouds. The data shows that low-level clouds in the Northern Hemisphere have dimmed rapidly since 2003.

In particular, cloud reflectivity over the North Atlantic and Northeast Pacific has fallen by nearly three per cent per decade. During the same period, sea surface temperatures rose about 0.4 C, intensifying marine heatwaves that have damaged ecosystems and fisheries.

We expected that climate warming from greenhouse gas increases would lead to a decrease in low clouds over the ocean. However, the observed changes were too large to be explained by this process or by natural climate variability, pointing to an additional cause of warming that many climate models underestimated.

The key factor turned out to be aerosols — tiny particles that act as seeds for cloud droplets. When there are fewer aerosols, clouds contain fewer but larger droplets. Those droplets reflect less sunlight and are more likely to rain out quickly, producing shorter-lived, darker clouds. This process weakens the cooling influence that low clouds have over marine areas.

The effect stems from two known mechanisms: the Twomey effect, where fewer aerosols make clouds less reflective, and the Albrecht effect, where larger droplets shorten cloud lifetime. Together, these changes reduce the planet’s overall reflectivity.

A cleaner atmosphere, a warmer planet

Ultimately, our study exposes a paradox: cleaner air benefits human health while also revealing the full force of greenhouse-gas warming, which has historically been “masked” by the cooling effect of particulate pollution.

Sulfur dioxide (SO₂) emissions — the main source of sulfate aerosols — have fallen sharply as countries adopted stricter air-quality regulations. China’s SO₂ emissions alone dropped by about 16 million metric tonnes per decade since 2003, with similar reductions in the United States and Europe. Cleaner air means fewer aerosol particles available to form bright, reflective clouds.

Our study showed five to 10 per cent declines in cloud droplet concentrations, especially in regions where cloud brightness fell most. The close correspondence between reduced aerosols, larger droplet size and cloud dimming confirmed that cleaner air was driving regional warming.

We analyzed 24 Earth system models and found that most underestimated the magnitude and extent of observed cloud changes. Only models that accurately represented how aerosols affect clouds matched real-world observations, highlighting a major modelling weakness.

In our study, we separated the effects of particulate air-pollution cuts from cloud changes driven by general warming. The results showed that declining aerosols accounted for 69 per cent of the cloud reflectivity loss, while warming explained 31 per cent. Our simulations indicate that changes in cloud lifetime in response to having larger droplets (the Albrecht effect) proved more influential in the change in cloud droplet size itself (the Twomey effect).

Reduced cloud brightness in these ocean regions added about 0.15 watts per square metre (W/m²) per decade to Earth’s global energy imbalance, even though the regions cover only 14 per cent of the planet’s surface. Rising global CO₂ levels added roughly 0.31 W/m² per decade during the same time, meaning cleaner air produced nearly half as much additional warming as CO₂ itself in those areas.

This finding creates a policy challenge: air-quality improvements that save lives also remove a cooling shield that has been masking a significant portion of greenhouse-gas warming. Because aerosol emissions are projected to keep falling through mid-century, this “unmasking” could continue to contribute to faster rates of warming for decades.

Importance of continued observation

The satellites observing clouds and aerosols are nearing the end of their mission, with a phaseout expected in 2026. Long-term satellite monitoring proved essential for revealing the link between cleaner air, dimmer clouds and regional warming, and will continue to be essential for understanding future warming.

Our results suggest that many climate models may underestimate near-term regional warming as air particulate pollution declines. Improving the representation in models of how aerosols affect clouds and continuing global observations will be critical for more accurate projections.

Addressing the paradox of cleaner air uncovering hidden warming demands integrating air-quality and climate policy and accelerating the reduction of greenhouse gases — the only lasting way to cool the planet.

Knut von Salzen receives funding from the University of Washington’s Marine Cloud Brightening Research Program, which is funded by a consortium of individual and foundation donors. He is affiliated with the Climate Research Division of Environment and Climate Change Canada and the University of Victoria.

– ref. Reduced air pollution is making clouds reflect less sunlight – https://theconversation.com/reduced-air-pollution-is-making-clouds-reflect-less-sunlight-269805

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kerry McCuaig, Fellow in Early Childhood Policy, Atkinson Centre, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

Five years into Canada’s $10-a-day child care plan, affordability has improved dramatically for families fortunate enough to have a space. However, the families who need care the most are being left behind.

Both the auditor general of Canada and the auditor general of Ontario have warned that the Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) program, while successful in lowering fees, is failing to meet its other commitments — inclusion, quality and equitable access.

The $10-a-day plan was meant to be a nation-building project — one that gives every child, regardless of background, an equal start in life.

But affordability without equity is a hollow victory. If governments fail to correct course, inequities will harden into the system’s design, and the intergenerational cycle of poverty will deepen.

Subsidies down

Low-income families have traditionally been eligible for government subsidies to help pay for care. For the poorest families, the subsidy can cover the entire cost.

Yet since the program began, the number of children receiving subsidies has fallen sharply — Ontario’s auditor general reported a 31 per cent decline, and in Toronto, subsidy use has dropped below 80 per cent

Each time fees fall, more families want low-cost care. But the number of spaces hasn’t kept pace.

Competition intensifies — and more affluent families, who have greater networks and resources, move to the front of the line.

This is a well-documented social pattern known as the Matthew effect: advantage begets more advantage.

The problem is compounded by the fact that CWELCC-funded programs are not required to enrol families receiving subsidies.

By mid-2025, according to reports published on the City of Toronto open data portal, roughly 30 per cent of Toronto’s CWELCC programs — representing over one-third of all infant-to-preschool spaces — had no contract with the city to serve subsidized children.

Meanwhile, more than 16,500 children in Toronto are waitlisted for a space, while nearly one in three publicly funded programs deny them access.

A quiet incentive to underspend

Funding structures further entrench inequity. Fee subsidies are paid from provincial budgets, while CWELCC affordability funding comes from the federal government.

When families stop using subsidies — because spaces are unavailable or eligibility rules too restrictive — provinces and territories save money, while still benefiting politically from federal investments that make care appear more affordable.

Some jurisdictions don’t bother with subtlety: Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Northwest Territories have eliminated subsidy programs altogether.

A fragile truce on funding

On Nov. 10, Ontario announced a one-year extension of its federal child-care deal, maintaining current funding terms while a longer agreement is negotiated. The extension preserves the current fee — roughly $22 a day — but does nothing to address the inequities embedded in the system.

The CWELCC framework rests on five pillars: affordability, access, quality, inclusion and data accountability. In practice, only affordability has advanced.

---

Read more:
Canada-wide child care: It’s now less expensive, but finding it is more difficult

---

Even if new funding materialized, money alone wouldn’t fix the problem. Federal and provincial governments control the purse strings, but in Ontario, regional policymakers already have the tools — and the responsibility — to act.

They allocate subsidies, set local priorities and conduct annual program reviews. With stronger direction, they could require all CWELCC-funded programs — both for-profit and non-profit — to:

• Accept subsidized children as a condition of continued funding;

• Meet quality standards, such as those in Toronto’s Assessment for Quality Improvement system; and

• Set targets for equitable access based on local demographics.

In areas identified as child-care deserts, where demand far outstrips supply, service managers could also give priority to neighbourhood families until new facilities are built.

Danger of unchecked for-profit expansion

Equity cannot be achieved by giving for-profit operators a free hand — yet that’s exactly what’s happening across several provinces.

For-profit growth has exceeded the limits set in child-care agreements. These operators naturally expand where profits are fastest — in higher-income communities. The result: rapid growth in affluent areas and stagnation in places where families most need affordable, high-quality care.

Ontario’s auditor general flagged this trend, finding that nearly half of all new licensed spaces were in for-profit centres — despite federal and provincial commitments to prioritize non-profit and public expansion.

Unfettered commercial growth not only weakens public accountability but also deepens the inequities the federal child-care program was meant to eliminate.

A system designed to build a public good cannot rely on private profit as its engine.

Redirect the savings

The one-year CWELCC extension gives Ontario breathing room to get this right. By our calculations, holding the line at a $22 daily fee — rather than dropping to the promised $12 — would free up roughly $100 million in Toronto alone.

Those funds could expand care in low-income neighbourhoods, strengthen program quality, stabilize the educator workforce and rein in for-profit expansion.

Contrary to political fears, this would not cause undue hardship for middle-income families. After applying existing federal and provincial tax benefits, the median Ontario family with two children in care pays approximately $15 per child per day, which is close to the $12 goal.

The greater hardship lies with families who still can’t find a space at all.

---

Read more:
Ontario’s child-care agreement is poised to fail low-income children and families

---

Beyond subsidies: making access universal

Expanding subsidies won’t fix structural inequality. Under current rules, parents must prove they are employed, in school or meeting specific “activity” requirements to qualify.

These conditions exclude children whose parents are outside the labour market — precisely those who could benefit most from early education.

These rules should be scrapped. Every child deserves access to quality care, regardless of their parents’ work status.

A choice about values

Over time, Canada should move toward a universal, income-based model — similar to the Canada Child Benefit — where all children qualify for early learning and fees are scaled to family income. Fees based on the family’s ability to pay are well-established in Nordic countries.

This would replace the costly and complex patchwork of subsidies and flat fees with a simpler and fairer system.

The next phase of Canada’s early learning and child-care plan must put equity at its centre — not as an afterthought, but as the measure of success.

Canada has already proven it can make child care affordable. Now it must make it fair.

Kerry McCuaig receives funding from the Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation, The Lawson Foundation, Atkinson Foundation and the Waltons Trust.

Michal Perlman receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Data Science Institute at the University of Toronto, the Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation and the Lawson Foundation.

Nina Howe has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Economic and Research Council of the UK..

Petr Varmuza is affiliated with B2C2 – (Building Blocks for Child Care) as an advisory board member

– ref. Child-care affordability is coming at the expense of equity — and it’s time governments acted – https://theconversation.com/child-care-affordability-is-coming-at-the-expense-of-equity-and-its-time-governments-acted-269266

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Victoria (Vicky) McArthur, Associate Professor, School of Journalism and Communication, Carleton University

Canadian politicians have increasingly taken to social media to campaign as well as communicate with constituents, sharing updates on policies, local events, emergencies or government initiatives.

But stories have emerged of constituents being blocked by their representatives. Should Canadian politicians be free to block their own constituents?

Some politicians claim the blocking is to combat increased online harassment, while constituents have claimed that simply being critical of policies or initiatives is enough to get them blocked.

Some recent cases in Canada include federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault being asked to unblock Ezra Levant on X in 2023, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith blocking constituents on X in 2023 and Montréal Mayor Valérie Plante blocking comments on X and Instagram in 2024. In 2018, Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson was sued by three local Ottawa activists after blocking them on X.

Research has indicated that politicians in Canada are subject to uncivil messages on their social media accounts and increasing threats and hate are directed to candidates online. Furthermore, social media has been attributed to rising political polarization and the spread of disinformation. The RCMP is currently investigating online threats made to MP Chris d’Entremont after he crossed the floor to join the federal Liberals.

Constituent rights

AI bots on social media are influencing political discourse online in Canada; one researcher has warned these bots “amplify specific narratives, influence public opinion, and reinforce ideological divides.”

But where do Canadian politicians draw the line, and does blocking constituents violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically regarding the rights of citizens to access government information?

The Charter recognizes a derivative right to access government information when it’s essential for meaningful expression about government operations. This is why a court ordered Guilbeault to unblock Levant, founder of Rebel News, two years ago. However, this wasn’t an official ruling, but rather a settlement.

Within Ontario, the Office of the Integrity Commissioner has provided guidance on the use of social media accounts by provincial members of parliament (MPPs). The policy states that MPPs may have social media accounts in their own names, and provides advice on how they are used, but this advice mostly covers polices about partisan content or campaign rules.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association notes that there is, “a special incentive for politicians to make sure that the online record casts them in the best possible light, even if that means silencing critical or otherwise inconvenient voices.”

Social media platforms generally do not effectively or consistently intervene when it comes to targeted harassment of Canadian politicians. For Canadian politicians who maintain active, public-facing social media accounts, this leaves managing online abuse to the candidates and their staff.

What about constituents who are simply unhappy with their elected officials?

In an era where Canadian politicians increasingly use social media to communicate policy and promote transparency, shouldn’t citizens be able to post critical comments in those same spaces? If these platforms serve as modern public forums, where exactly should democratic debate take place if not there?

Silenced by elected officials?

The issue presently lacks legal precedence in Canada. In the case of Levant/Guilbeault, the decision ordering the former environment minister to unblock Levant appeared to hinge on the nature of Guilbeault’s X account: whether it was a personal account or whether he was using it in an official capacity to communicate updates on his work in Parliament.

In the case of Watson in Ottawa, the three blocked plaintiffs argued the mayor had “infringed their constitutional right to freedom of expression by blocking them from his official Twitter account.” They further argued that his Twitter feed was “a public account used in the course of his duties as mayor” — a point he later conceded in unblocking them and ending the legal battle.

As Canadian politics continues to become integrated with social media, Canada still has no clear legal framework governing when or if politicians can or should block constituents online. The issue sits at the crossroads of digital safety, public accountability and freedom of expression.

Until clearer guidelines emerge, the question remains: how can politicians in Canada safely and effectively use social media to engage with constituents? And how can constituents confidently engage in critique via those same channels without fear of being silenced by their elected officials?

Victoria (Vicky) McArthur receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, and the Canadian Foundation for Innovation.

– ref. Should Canadian politicians be allowed to block their constituents on social media? – https://theconversation.com/should-canadian-politicians-be-allowed-to-block-their-constituents-on-social-media-269165

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jennifer Walinga, Professor, Communication and Culture, Royal Roads University

In the sports documentary miniseries The Last Dance, Michael Jordan describes how, as a young rookie, he was confronted with an invitation to take part in illicit activities with teammates, including drugs and gambling.

He “did not go through that door,” realizing “he was in the NBA to get better.” Nowadays that kind of moral compass feels increasingly rare.

The recent gambling and fraud scandal rocking the NBA, for example, illustrates how, when sport leaders compromise on sport values — respect, excellence, safety and fairness — they compromise the value of sport to individuals and society as a whole.

The purpose of sport is individual and community development. The word “compete” is derived from the Latin competere which means to strive (for excellence) together.

Money changes the game

Adding money to sport requires a high level of regulation to prevent the associated pitfalls of corruption, fraud, power imbalances and excess.

Allowing gambling in sport places stress on sport governance, but also erodes cultural integrity. Betting communicates a tolerance for what has been considered criminal in the past and corrupting in the present.

When a referee tolerates cheating behaviour on the field, they soon lose control of the game, and the game soon loses its value.

Canadian researchers have repeatedly shown the value of sport in fostering individual and community development. From positive youth development to significant social impact and social inclusion of people with disabilities, research shows the positive role sport can have through inspiration, health, confidence, belonging and connection.

The Power of Sport: The True Sport Report 2022, a research series by the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport that provides evidence for a values-based approach to sport, consistently finds that “the sport Canadians want” includes safety, integrity and community.

What women’s sport teaches us

A recent report from Women and Sport Canada shows the sport Canadians want is equitable, inspiring and community-oriented. Women’s sport in Canada, for example, has doubled in value over two years to $400 million and is expected to reach $500 million within a year.

Sport organizations such as Speed Skating Canada, Rugby Canada and the Toronto Blue Jays are modelling positive sport values and the result is a growing fan base and participation, record ticket sales and exceptional performances.

In their studies of Speed Skating Canada and Rowing Canada, former professional athletes and organizational psychologists Katrina Monton and Jennifer Walinga found that cultural integrity — living the values of respect, safety and excellence — has created a foundation for optimal performance. Indeed, the Canadian Speed Skaters enjoyed a dominant performance at the recent World Cup.

Rugby Canada leadership stood by the women’s team through two cases of coach abuse to see the women earn Olympic and World Cup silver medals.

In studying rugby and other sports, our research team has found cultural integrity to be essential to a team’s resilience and success.

The Blue Jays have also confirmed it: the Canadian public wants a sport that upholds friendship, respect and excellence on the diamond. Fans are enthusiastically celebrating the expressed and enacted love the players have for one another, the game and the country.

---

Read more:
Boys do cry: The Toronto Blue Jays challenge sport’s toxic masculinity with displays of love and emotion

---

Fair play and the public’s trust

The recent gambling scandals in the NBA and the MLB are a product of ill-governed sport. Insider betting and games rigging involving players, coaches and organized crime rings are the fallout of legalized sports betting.

When sport leaders place winning or money at the centre of sport, a “win at all costs” mentality prevails, rationalizing and indirectly promoting behaviours like cheating, inequity and corruption — and the costs are well-documented.

Compromising on sport values creates cultural fractures, contradictions and incongruities across sport, which then undermine public trust and the participation that comes with it.

The Hockey Canada sexual assault settlement scandal, which involved the board using registration fees to settle the claims, is another example of values undermined under the guise of protecting players or the sport. Despite their acquittals, a group of junior hockey players compromised human dignity.

This type of behaviour stems from a cultural belief system that values violence — permitted and promoted in hockey — and leads to compromise across the hockey environment, including fan violence, referee abuse, hazing, bullying, misogyny and toxic masculinity.

These sport scandals are examples of how rationalizing illicit behaviours for the sake of sport — for example, gambling that increases the fan base and ticket sales, which fund sport — leads to value compromises across the sport environment.

UK Sport has relied on $1.5 billion in lottery funding since 1997. Most Canadian provinces rely on gaming grants to fund community sport — arguably a slippery slope.

Gaming, sponsorship and “targeted” performance-based funding models like UK Sport and Canada’s Own the Podium privilege money over ethics and safety, and communicate to athletes, coaches and fans that compromising values is acceptable. Yet, it can be argued, these models enhance funding and bring success. The question becomes: where do we draw the line?

When referees compromise on fair play or lose sight of their role, the game unravels — and so can sport in general unravel without proper governance, accountability, transparency and independence. When the rules no longer seem to apply, athletes believe they are free to push boundaries or take their own form of recourse.

The Edmonton Oilers/St.Louis Blues NHL hockey game in April 2025, when referees were accused of making several questionable calls, is a good example. The doping track-and-field scandals in the 1980s were yet another. When winning becomes the priority, other values fall by the wayside.

Rebuilding sport from the inside out

Sport must be governed by the same principles that define it at its best: excellence, respect, safety, community, accountability, independence, transparency, accessibility and fairness.

Sport based on Olympic and Paralympic values brings tremendous value to society.

Compromising on sport’s values and integrity only serves to squander its local, national and global power. Sport, when done right, unites the world.

Jennifer Walinga receives funding from SSHRC, WorkSafeBC and Royal Roads University

– ref. When we gamble with the integrity of sport, we risk losing the values it offers – https://theconversation.com/when-we-gamble-with-the-integrity-of-sport-we-risk-losing-the-values-it-offers-268731

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ahmed Al-Juhany, PhD Candidate, University of Calgary

In 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) released the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases — a global, standard-setting guideline for how institutions should understand and organize health information. In it was a new diagnostic category for symptoms and signs of disease: “old age.”

The new category sparked outrage and, in 2021, the WHO backed down. It replaced “old age” with the more cumbersome but less incendiary category of “ageing-associated declines in intrinsic capacities.”

The reversal dealt a blow to scientists who, for years, had fought to have institutions formally classify aging as a disease. Older age, after all, is a major predictor of hypertension, cancer and other chronic conditions. And if we delve into the biology behind this association, we’ll find that the changes making us visibly “age” also make us more susceptible to those chronic conditions over time. The same cellular changes that cause wrinkles, for example, are also involved in atherosclerosis — a chronic condition that can lead to stroke and heart attacks.

With these facts in mind, it can be hard to see why we shouldn’t classify aging as a disease.

And yet, there’s good reason not to. Doing so risks stigmatizing older age and exacerbating ageism. Ethical concerns like these should factor into our medical classifications; in fact, they’re unavoidable. To see why, we’ll need to take a closer look at what it means to call anything a disease.

What we do when we classify diseases

A label is a powerful thing — the “disease” label, especially so.

Classifying anything as a disease marks it as something bad: a defect, a disorder, something we most definitely don’t want.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons why something might be classified as a disease, despite the label’s connotations. It may help set a clear target for medicine to cure, like distinguishing Alzheimer’s disease from other causes of dementia. Or it may help find the right framing for a problem. Classifying alcoholism as a disease, for example, can clarify the fact that people’s struggles with alcohol aren’t owed to a lack of willpower.

But if our classification of diseases depends on our strategic aims, then by implication, they also depend on the ethical values our aims reflect.

Think of the pathologizing views of autism and ADHD that the neurodiversity movement resists. In taking neurodivergent brains to be diseased or disordered, these views implicitly brand them as defective — unfortunate deviations from the way “normal” brains are supposed to work. This results in stigma: prejudicial attitudes that take neurodivergent people to be inferior in some way.

The neurodiversity movement resists these views primarily on ethical grounds. Treating people as though they’re inferior goes against the fundamental belief that, no matter our differences, we should all be able to interact as social equals. We all deserve some baseline of mutual respect.

Why aging shouldn’t be classified as a disease

Which brings us back to aging, an incredibly complex process that influences almost every aspect of our lives. It might make us more vulnerable to some diseases, but it’s more than just a health risk.

It is, in many ways, embodied biography — a physiological testament to all the changes we go through in life (anti-ageism activist Maggie Kuhn took pride in her wrinkles, seeing them as “a badge of distinction”).

Aging is also an opportunity for us to grow. It can mean change, but change that helps keep our lives as rich and rewarding as ever. If, for example, our libidos happen to wane with age, we can often learn to appreciate and practise new ways of showing affection, exploring different touches and intimacies that make us feel even more connected with our partners.

And, contrary to stereotypes, science shows that many things can improve with age, like our emotional well-being, semantic memory and some aspects of our executive function.

There’s a lot to value and celebrate about growing older.

But classifying aging as a disease would flatten all these nuances, all these gains, and frame it as a process of mere decline — one that only robs us of our health.

In an already ageist world, the consequences could be dire. Think of the people pressured out of jobs because their employers believe they’re “too old,” or of the people whose medical concerns get ignored because their doctors believe their ailments are just a “natural” part of getting older. These people aren’t made vulnerable because they’ve aged, but because of the mistaken belief that aging is a process that’s worn them out.

The belief, then, stigmatizes older age. It implies that older people have “deteriorated” and, as a result, have somehow become inferior. Classifying aging as a disease would risk bolstering this harmful belief. It could cement the negative associations people already have about aging and strengthen the hold of their prejudices.

In other words, it could exacerbate ageism.

That is a strong ethical reason to not classify aging as a disease.

Ahmed Al-Juhany 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 aging shouldn’t be classified as a disease – https://theconversation.com/why-aging-shouldnt-be-classified-as-a-disease-268277

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Rebecca H. Hogue, Assistant Professor, Department of English, University of Toronto

Following recent comments on nuclear testing by United States President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin, it’s more important than ever to remember that nuclear detonations — whether in war or apparent peace time — have long-lasting impacts.

Over a 40-year period, up to 1989, the Soviet Union detonated 456 nuclear weapons in present-day Kazakhstan (or Qazaqstan, in the decolonized spelling).

During the time of the detonations, approximately 1.5 million people lived near the sites, despite Soviet claims that the area was uninhabited.

In the ensuing decades, diagnoses of cancers, congenital anomalies and thyroid disease affected the surrounding communities at an alarming rate, particularly for women.

A new independent documentary, JARA Radioactive Patriarchy: Women of Qazaqstan, examines the impacts of nuclear weapons in Qazaqstan. Jara means “wound” in the Qazaq language.

The film is directed by Aigerim Seitenova, a nuclear disarmament activist with a post-graduate degree in international human rights law who co-founded the Qazaq Nuclear Frontline Coalition. Seitenova grew up in Semey (formerly called Semipalatinsk), Qazaqstan.

Close to Semey is the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site, also known as The Polygon, in Qazaqstan’s northeastern region. It’s an area slightly smaller than the size of Belgium — approximately 18,000 square kilometres — in the former Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic.

Nuclear Truth Project

Seitenova introduced her film in March 2025 at the United Nations headquarters in New York, hosted by the Nuclear Truth Project. The documentary premiere was a side event at the Third Meeting of States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

As a literary and cultural historian who examines narratives of the nuclear age, I attended the standing-room-only event alongside many delegates from civil society organizations.

Nuclear disarmament activist

Seitenova, who wrote, directed and produced JARA Radioactive Patriarchy on location in Semey, aims to bring women’s nuclear stories to Qazaqstan and international audiences.

The 30-minute documentary features intimate interviews with five Qazaq women. The film shares the women’s fears, grief and the ways they have learned to cope, as well as reflections from Seitenova filmed at the ground-zero site.

For Seitenova, it was essential that the film be in Qazaq language.

“Qazaq language, like Qazaq bodies,” she said in an interview after the premiere, “were considered ‘other’ or not valuable.” Seitenova acknowledged it was also important to show a Qazaq-language film at the UN, as Qazaq is not an official UN language like Russian.

Women consensually share experiences

One of Seitenova’s directorial choices was not just what or who would be seen, but specifically what would not be seen in her film.

“I’m really against sensationalism,” said Seitenova. “If you Google ‘Semipalatinsk’ you will see all of these terrible images of children and fetuses.”

Seitenova accordingly does not show any of these images in her film, and instead focuses on women consensually sharing their experiences.

Seitenova explained how narratives regarding the health effects in Semey are often disparaged. When others learn she is from Semey, Seitenova shared, some will make insensitive jokes like “are you luminescent at night?” — making nuclear impact into spectacle, instead of taking it as a serious health issue.

These experiences have propelled her to take back the narrative of her community by correcting misconceptions or the minimization of harms. Instead, she brings attention to the larger structural issues.

“Everything was done by me because I did not want to invite someone who would not take care of the stories of these women,” said Seitenova.

Likewise, Seitenova only interviewed participants who had already made decisions to speak out about nuclear weapons. She did this so as not to risk retraumatizing someone by asking them to discuss their illnesses, especially for the first time on camera.

Global legacy of anti-nuclear art, advocacy

Seitenova also wanted to show a genealogy of women speaking out about nuclear issues in Qazaqstan, contributing to a global legacy of anti-nuclear art and advocacy.

The film features three generations of women, including Seitenova’s great aunt, Zura Rustemova, who was 12 at the time of the first detonations.

As part of this genealogy of nuclear resistance, the film includes footage of a speech from the Qazaq singer Roza Baglanova (1922-2011), who rose to prominence singing songs of hope during the Second World War.

Effects felt into today

JARA Radioactive Patriarchy shows how the impacts of nuclear weapons are felt intergenerationally into the present.

“Many women lost their ability to experience the happiness of motherhood,” interviewee Maira Abenova says in the film. Abenova co-founded an advocacy group representing survivors of the detonations, Committee Polygon 21.

Other interviewees shared how often men left their wives and children who were affected by nuclear weapons to begin a new family with someone else.

Seitenova looks at the roles of women and mothers not just as protectors, but also as those who have launched formidable advocacy.

The film highlights the towering monument in Semey, “Stronger than Death,” dedicated to those affected by nuclear weapons.

The Semey monument depicts a mother using her whole body to protect her child from a mushroom cloud. Just like the monument, Seitenova and the women in her documentary use the film to show how women have been doing this advocacy work in the private and public spheres, with their bodies and with their words.

“I want to show them as being leaders in the community, as changing the game,” Seitenova said.

While the film brings a much-needed attention to the gendered impact of nuclear weapons in Qazaqstan, she makes clear that this is, unfortunately, not an issue unique to her homeland or just to women.

“The next time you think about expanding the nuclear sector in any country” Seitenova said, “you can think about how it impacts people of all genders.”

Rebecca H. Hogue 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. ‘Radioactive patriarchy’ documentary: Women examine the impact of Soviet nuclear testing – https://theconversation.com/radioactive-patriarchy-documentary-women-examine-the-impact-of-soviet-nuclear-testing-256775

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Philippe Le Billon, Professor, Geography Department and School of Public Policy & Global Affairs, University of British Columbia

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has dubbed COP30 the forest COP. Taking place in Belém, a large urban centre in the Amazon, this choice signals a welcome shift from the capital cities of petro-states to the heart of the world’s most bio-diverse rainforest.

Yet, even as Belém hosts global climate negotiators, the Amazon and its coastline are under renewed pressure. While the spotlight is on protecting trees, new oil concessions are being awarded to keep rigs pumping.

On Nov. 11, dozens of Indigenous protesters forced their way into the COP30 venue demanding an end to industrial development in the Amazon. Indigenous leaders attending COP30 are demanding more say in how forests are managed.

Amid this tension, a new financial initiative has emerged as the potential solution: the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF). Managed by the World Bank as a multilateral trust fund, it would mobilize US$125 billion from public and private investors to reward forested countries for keeping their forests standing — forever.

The pitch is seductive — save forests, earn profits and mitigate climate change all at once. But the proposal raises two questions that demand scrutiny: Will this scheme actually make a major difference for the climate, and how will it impact communities who live in forests?

---

Read more:
From the Amazon, Indigenous Peoples offer new compass to navigate climate change

---

Protecting trees

The first question is easier to tackle. Yes, tropical forests store immense amounts of carbon so protecting them is vital. But this contribution is largely contingent on keeping global temperature below 2 C and is dwarfed by the emissions risked if fossil fuels buried beneath those same forests are extracted and burned.

Out of the 74 countries with TFFF-qualifying forests, 68 countries have fossil fuel deposits within them. In total, according to a study by the NGO Leave It In The Ground, there would be some 317 billion tonnes of potential carbon dioxide emissions from recoverable reserves and more than 4.6 trillion tonnes if all deposits were exploited.

Nearly all of it is concentrated in just three countries: China, India and Indonesia. To be truly effective, forest protection must come with a firm commitment: no fossil fuel extraction underneath.

To be equitable, a similar scheme must cover non-TFFF countries, and in particular those with boreal forests covering major fossil fuel deposits, namely in Canada and Russia.

That means prioritizing forests located above fossil fuel reserves and ensuring they remain completely off-limits to exploitation.

For this to happen, countries must make binding commitments, investors must accept lower-risk but longer-term returns and local communities must hold forest tenure rights that cannot be overridden by state ownership of subsoil resources. It’s a tall order — but without such a framework, the “forever forest” concept risks becoming just another limited climate solution.

The term forever forests evokes the advertising slogan of diamond company De Beers — “A Diamond is forever” — and reveals a similar logic: to turn nature into financial assets. A more fitting concept might be what fisheries economist Rashid Sumaila would call the infinity forest — a forest that, like fish stocks, is renewable when soundly managed as a common good.

Many of the world’s forests are not untouched wildernesses but co-created landscapes, shaped through millennia of Indigenous and local stewardship. The Amazon, for instance, is a complex social biome, nurtured through practices such as controlled burning, seed dispersal and farming.

While not all traditional practices are benign, archaeological and ecological evidence shows that many Indigenous and peasant communities have managed forests sustainably — often more effectively than state-led conservation programs and with major implications for biodiversity protection.

In fact, many studies show that biodiversity conservation is more effective in territories governed by Indigenous peoples than in state-managed protected areas.

A financial trap for forest communities

Beyond its likely ineffectiveness for the climate, the TFFF could also have devastating consequences for forest communities. Under Brazil’s current proposal, countries would receive around US$4 for every hectare of protected forest, with 80 cents trickling down to local communities.

But they would be fined US$400 per hectare for any deforestation. This creates a dangerous dynamic: states will crack down on small-scale forest use by local people while giving free rein to industries — such as oil — that generate far higher returns.

In effect, the scheme risks criminalizing traditional forest practices — from small-scale clearing to hunting or gathering — that have sustained these ecosystems for centuries.

As governments seek to avoid penalties, forest communities could face exclusion, forced resettlement or even violence, echoing a long history of displacement caused by “conservation” projects and carbon offset schemes such as REDD+.

Financializing the forest’s future

This brings us to the Indigenous and forest defenders who disrupted COP30 events on Nov. 11. Their protest highlighted the real danger behind the TFFF: the financialization of Indigenous territories.

The scheme does nothing to prevent oil and gas extraction beneath forest lands. What were once commons could become commodities promising investors lucrative returns.

In short, “forever forests” may deliver forever profits — not so much for the people who protect them as for those who exploit their value. This is, bluntly, a new form of green colonialism — a profitable appropriation of the forest’s future.

If the TFFF goes ahead, it must first grant some degree of self-government to Indigenous forest communities — as Colombia recently did — and explicitly prohibit fossil fuel extraction in protected forests.

Investors should pay a premium for forests covering fossil fuel reserves, and both state and community rights must be rebalanced to make no-go zones truly binding. In this way, “forever forests” can become territories of life — not assets of accumulation.

Ultimately, no financial mechanism will save the world’s forests unless it also saves the people who depend on them, and the carbon that must remain buried beneath.

The path to a livable planet runs not through markets or bonds, but through justice: recognition of forest community stewardship and a global commitment to keep fossil fuels in the ground.

Philippe Le Billon receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. COP30: Governments must empower forest communities to keep fossil fuels underground – https://theconversation.com/cop30-governments-must-empower-forest-communities-to-keep-fossil-fuels-underground-269686

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Bonnie Campbell, Professeure émérite en économie politique. Département de science politique de l’Université du Québec à Montréal., Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)

Gold mining operations recently restarted at the Loulo-Gounkoto complex in western Mali after being shut down for several months. In January, the Malian government started blocking exports from the mine owned by Canada-based Barrick Mining (formerly called Barrick Gold).

The government blocked exports and took control of three tonnes of bullion following a dispute with Barrick Mining over alleged unpaid taxes.

This particular case is too complex to be discussed here. But disputes over revenue distribution raise important questions about how mineral-rich countries can benefit from their natural resources.

According to the International Monetary Fund, tax avoidance by multinational mining companies costs African countries between US$470 million and US$730 million per year in tax income.

Generating government revenue through natural resource taxation is critically important for sub-Saharan African countries seeking to improve infrastructure, health services and meet social development goals.

A variety of reasons explain why mineral-rich countries in sub-Saharan Africa are not profiting appropriately from their mineral wealth.

Power imbalances, unfavourable revenues

The Intergovernmental Forum on Mining and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development have identified different obstacles to mining revenue collection including faulty legislation, abusive transfer pricing and other artificial profit-shifting.

In addition, fiscal incentives commonly provided to attract mining investment, such as significantly lowering tax and royalty rates, rarely prove to be worth the loss in government revenue.

These excessive concessions to foreign mining companies have led to widespread discontent, poverty and underdevelopment in Africa, despite abundant mineral wealth. This situation has been condemned by leaders across the continent.

In response, the African Union’s African Mining Vision and the policies it has inspired, notably the reform of mining codes, are attempts to ensure a more lasting contribution of the continent’s mineral resources.

Yet the power imbalances between foreign companies and African governments remain very much in place and shape negotiations around mining codes, contracts and practices.

While situations vary from country to country, sector to sector and site to site, research has sought to identify key obstacles to increased State mining revenue.

The unequal influence in negotiations that favours mining companies leads to numerous irregularities. Examples include prolonging stability clauses despite regulatory reforms and prioritizing mining contracts over broader national regulatory frameworks.

At the international level, African states are hindered from implementing policies that benefit local communities due to international trade regime practices, tariff import privileges and bilateral conventions that act as powerful deterrents.

Mali’s mining code

In Mali, the mining sector is a key part of the economy. In 2022, the sector contributed 9.2 per cent of GDP, 76.5 per cent of export revenue and 34.8 per cent of state revenue.

As is the case elsewhere on the continent, new Malian mining legislation aims to help rectify the legacy of environmental damage and disappointing mining revenue. Mali’s 2023 mining code reflects reforms to improve national benefits from the sector similar to measures in Tanzania, Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Such reforms included increased state ownership requirements (typically 10-30 per cent), higher royalty and tax rates, local content and employment requirements, greater environmental and social responsibility provisions and enhanced community development obligations.

The 2023 code aims to strengthen Mali’s sovereignty over its resources and bring about a more equitable distribution of the benefits.

The fiscal regime has been reformed so that, among other measures, certain tax exemptions that mining companies received were abolished. Similarly, the new code puts an end to the fiscal concession of 25 per cent for a period of 15 years permitted by former codes. The new code introduces a royalty on production of 10 per cent for that exceeding the quantity projected.

In addition, several funds were created to respond to the needs of the sector and favour social inclusion.

Another important innovation is the law concerning local content in the mining sector. This law aims to encourage the participation of national enterprises and workers in the mining sector.

As occurs in other mineral-rich countries, Mali has faced strong pushback, particularly from the largest and most powerful companies. This has led to an escalation of conflict rather than negotiated solutions.

Significantly, several companies have reached agreements with the Malian government, such as Robex Resources. The U.K.-based Endeavour Mining has negotiated terms with the government to operate under the new mining code.

Two additional gold producers have also signed agreements to operate under the new mining code: Faboula Gold and Bagama Mining.

These projects, while less capital-intensive than others, illustrate the possibility of successful initiatives under the new code. They also provide important employment opportunities in rural areas.

Greater resource sovereignty

Some industry analysts have criticized mineral-rich countries for adopting a “resource nationalism” approach. However, research shows that well-managed, transparent and stable mining revenue in Mali and Senegal could help improve access to health care and social services.

Exercising greater sovereignty over natural resources to ensure the well-being of a country’s population might better be commended as responsible resource nationalism.

There are serious military and security threats facing Mali and its neighbours. By providing revenue and employment, the mining industry can play a key role in addressing these insecurities.

This role involves respecting national regulations and paying a fair share of tax revenue. Ultimately, the industry’s profitability is very much tied to the social stability of the country and the health, social and economic welfare of its people.

Bonnie Campbell has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the International Development Research Centre of Canada.

Moussa Doumbo 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 Africa’s mineral-rich countries are not reaping the rewards of their wealth – https://theconversation.com/why-africas-mineral-rich-countries-are-not-reaping-the-rewards-of-their-wealth-262424

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Tamara Krawchenko, Associate Professor, School of Public Administration, University of Victoria

Canada and Ontario are accelerating efforts to attract global investment and speed up approvals for new mining projects.

Ontario’s government has introduced new policies aimed at attracting investors and accelerate project timelines. Central to this strategy are laws like Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act, and Bill 71, the Building More Mines Act.

The surge in global demand for “critical minerals” such as nickel, lithium and cobalt — essential inputs for electric vehicles and clean energy technologies — has positioned mining as a cornerstone of energy transition strategies. Northern Ontario, endowed with vast mineral resources, has become a focal point in Canada’s emerging green economy.

Yet this potential is shadowed by the legacy of “sacrifice zones” — regions where the environmental and social costs of mining have fallen heavily on Anishinaabe, Cree and Oji-Cree Nations and communities, while most benefits have accrued elsewhere.

How governments advance Indigenous inclusion, share prosperity with First Nations and create greater project certainty will depend on principles of respectful partnership, shared rewards and risks and long-term stewardship.

Environmental and Indigenous rights concerns

Canada’s accelerated approach to mining raises major concerns for both the environment and Indigenous rights.

The Hudson Bay Lowlands, for example, are one of the world’s largest carbon sinks and disturbances there could release vast amounts of greenhouse gases. Building mines, roads and energy lines in these sensitive ecosystems threatens biodiversity, water systems and the traditional livelihoods of First Nations communities.

Ontario’s digitized “claim-staking” system allows companies to register mining claims instantly without prior consultation. In some cases, exploration occurs on lands still under legal negotiation or where Indigenous title is unresolved.

Many First Nations have voiced frustration that the current consultation process is too brief and procedural to meet constitutional or treaty obligations.

The Chiefs of Ontario have called for a pause on new mining claims and deeper reforms to ensure that any future developments align with Indigenous consent.

A rights-based approach to mining

A recent OECD report outlines both the opportunities and challenges that rising mineral demand brings to First Nations and local communities in Northern Ontario. The report also lays out a practical road map for a more sustainable mining sector.

As contributing authors, we accompanied the OECD process of extensive interviews and roundtables with First Nations leaders, mining companies, policymakers and community organizations across the region.

We sought to understand on-the-ground realities and to identify ways to align economic development with Indigenous rights and community well-being.

From the recommendations of the report, we interpret three key actions for a rights-based territorial development approach that promotes responsible mining while upholding Indigenous rights.

3 key actions

1. Investing in communities

Many First Nations need major investments in water, housing, infrastructure, health and social supports to meet basic human rights. Without addressing these foundational needs, asymmetrical development will only deepen inequalities between national interests and wealth creation. It is very hard to think about mining development when basic needs are not being met.

2. Gaining Indigenous consent

Following the lead of British Columbia and the Northwest Territories in legally committing to implement UNDRIP (the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples), Ontario should build on existing efforts to provide a formal mechanism for guiding companies towards securing free, prior and informed consent and align provincial legislation with UNDRIP.

Indigenous rights-holders must be properly informed, meaningfully consulted and give their consent before any projects go forward. This consent should apply throughout the entire project life cycle, from exploration and feasibility studies to mine closure and land restoration.

This should also pertain to “brownfield” sites (existing mines) and patented lands, some of which are currently exempt from consultation under Ontario’s Mining Act. While major changes to a mine site that could negatively affect Indigenous rights will trigger the duty to consult, smaller changes may not and this is decided on a case-by-case basis. This can create grey areas and a lack of legal levers for communities to renegotiate when amendments are made to mining projects.

3. Capital, equity ownership and royalty frameworks

To move beyond one-time compensation agreements, some First Nations may be interested in securing equity stakes in mining ventures, sharing both risks and rewards through access to capital.

When First Nations participate as co-investors, it signifies that the project has undergone a free, prior and informed consent processes, meaning potential legal, reputational and social risks — including community opposition or court challenges — are significantly minimized.

Indigenous co-investment typically requires the establishment of strong governance mechanisms, including clear arrangements for shared decision-making, benefit sharing, formal agreement-creation and high environmental and social standards, all of which enhance a project’s reputation for responsible operation.

Direct resource revenue-sharing agreements are another option. The Ontario government has already signed such agreements with some First Nations and Tribal Councils. This ensures equity among participating First Nations.

Building a stronger, more prosperous Ontario

The future of mining in northern Ontario sits at a crossroads. Governments want to move quickly to capitalize on mineral demand, but unless this growth is tied to consent (real engagement), equity and stewardship, it risks reproducing past injustices. This is unacceptable risk to all parties.

True prosperity means development that upholds the rights of First Nations, protects their ecosystems and ensures communities share in the benefits.

If implemented, these priorities — consent, ownership and stewardship — could transform the region from a site of resource extraction into a model of partnership and resilience. It means a different kind of mining anchored in respect and sustainability.

The article was co-authored by Andres Sanabria, Coordinator of the OECD Mining Regions and Cities Initiative and Bridget Donovan, Policy Analyst at the OECD.

Tamara Krawchenko consults for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and was a contributing author to the Mining Regions and Cities in Northern Ontario, Canada study. She is a Visiting Scholar with the Institue for Research on Public Policy and a board member of Ecotrust Canada.

Darren Godwell 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 path to responsible mining in northern Ontario starts with Indigenous consent – https://theconversation.com/the-path-to-responsible-mining-in-northern-ontario-starts-with-indigenous-consent-267935

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ilona Dougherty, Managing Director, Youth & Innovation Project, University of Waterloo

Every year on Remembrance Day, I think about my grandfathers — my American grandfather who flew his Stinson L-5 along the coast of Burma and my Hungarian grandfather who fought in the Second World War.

I also reflect upon my grandmothers, one of whom used her language skills to translate for army officers and the other who suffered the loss of her first child while her husband was overseas.

These stories are often shared in our family as remembrances of young people who served and sacrificed during difficult times.

Buried deep in the Liberal government’s recently released 2025 budget is a line that is worth paying attention to: “Modernizing the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) enhances opportunities for youth to serve and lead.” With that one sentence, the federal government connected the dots between Canadian sovereignty, youth employment and youth service.

But if Canada hopes to see its current generation of young people thrive, it must ensure that youth employment and youth service programs are expanded.

The only way this will happen, given the investments outlined in the federal government’s budget, is if organizations dedicated to youth employment issues and youth service work closely together to ensure the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) figures out how to recruit and meaningfully retain young Canadians.

Paltry investments

As outlined in the budget, there is a clear commitment from Mark Carney’s Liberals to rebuild and reinvest in the CAF to protect Canadians and lead internationally. This commitment includes an investment of more than $9 billion in 2025-2026.

An important part of this rebuilding will require recruiting and retaining new members, which is being facilitated by a significant pay increase for the lowest paid recruits.

But as young people in Canada face the worst job market in more than a decade, which is only projected to worsen with the widespread adoption of AI, it was troubling that funding related to tackling youth unemployment was limited in this year’s budget.

The investment in Canada Summer Job placements, while up from the investment made in the 2024, was only brought back to pre-pandemic funding levels, not actually increased.

The Youth Employment and Skills Strategy investment in the budget was up slightly from 2025-2026, but down significantly from 2024-2025 and far below investments made in 2019-2020.

The only significant increase came with the investment in the Student Work Placement Program, which increased by more than $100 million per year.

The most generous read of investments in youth employment-related programs in the 2025 budget would suggest the government is investing approximately $220 million more per year. But this pales in comparison to the $20.4 billion over five years that the government has committed to investing in recruiting and retaining “a strong fighting force” for the CAF.

When it comes to youth service, supporting young people who are struggling to enter the job market — and providing them with opportunities to serve their communities — can be achieved in part through the Youth Climate Corps and the Canada Service Corps. Combined, their budgets represent a moderate increase in spending of about $20 million per year.

But it’s unclear whether the Canada Service Corps will receive additional funding in the future, parallel to the Youth Climate Corps funding, or whether it will be phased out and replaced.

Despite it being touted as a budget containing generational investments, the government has made minimal investments to seriously tackle the youth employment crisis in the 2025 budget.

Recruitment challenges

It’s no secret that recruiting and retaining new members is a significant challenge for the CAF. A 2025 Auditor General of Canada’s report outlines how the CAF is not recruiting and training enough candidates to meet its operational needs.

To make matters worse, even when a recruit does join, a recently leaked internal report suggests that many leave in frustration shortly after joining due to their inability to get trained and to secure roles within the CAF that they’re interested in.

Adding to this is the CAF’s well-documented issues with radicalization and hate speech, racial discrimination and sexual harassment. As an external monitor outlined in a recent report, “a culture that is largely misogynistic has created an environment that allows and sometime encourages unprofessional conduct to persist.”

---

Read more:
Not just a few bad apples: The Canadian Armed Forces has a nagging far-right problem

---

Despite recent apologies and signs that things are changing for the better within the CAF, these issues make the institution unattractive for young Canadians even if they don’t feel as though they have any other employment options.

There is also the perception that joining the army means going into active combat. Around 65.2 per cent of CAF members ever deploy — and deploying doesn’t necessarily mean active combat. In fact, it can very often mean humanitarian missions either domestically or internationally.

Making the CAF attractive to youth

All of this presents a unique opportunity for Canadian policymakers.

There are many organizations in Canada working to tackle youth employment — and the CAF has just been given what can actually be called a generational investment. That investment could significantly enhance existing government initiatives aimed at addressing the youth employment crisis and preparing young people for the future of work.

For this to happen, youth employment and service organizations must leverage the government’s investment in the CAF to expand their impact. At the same time, the CAF will need to engage with civilian organizations that specialize in recruiting and supporting young people. CAF recruiters should adopt best practices in youth-focused recruitment, training and retention to ensure meaningful participation and long-term success.

Young people will only be attracted to and stay in the CAF if they feel valued, if they’re offered meaningful opportunities to contribute and if intergenerational collaboration is prioritized.

In a time of multiples crises, none of them can be viewed in isolation. Disparate groups need to work together to address their unique challenges.
Canadian young people have a lot to offer — they’re the most educated generation in Canadian history, they have the desire to make a difference, their brains are wired to be bold problem solvers and they have diverse and relevant lived experiences.

This is a generation Canada can’t afford to leave on the sidelines of its economy or in the fight for Canadian sovereignty.

Ilona Dougherty 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 the Canadian Armed Forces could help solve the youth employment crisis – https://theconversation.com/how-the-canadian-armed-forces-could-help-solve-the-youth-employment-crisis-268433