The War of the Bucket: What one medieval battle tells us about history and myth

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kenneth Bartlett, Professor, Department of History, University of Toronto

A depiction of the War of the Bucket with victorious Modenese troops toting the bucket taken from the rival city of Bologna. (Museum of the History of Bologna)

Se non è vero, è ben trovato (even if it isn’t true, it makes a good story). This traditional Italian observation reflects a good deal of human history.

One such colourful event was the 14th-century War of the Bucket between the Italian cities of Bologna and Modena. The story is that after years of tension, a group of Modenese entered Bologna and stole the bucket from the town well.

The Bolognese demanded its return, but the ruler of Modena refused, and war ensued, culminating in the Modenese victory at the Battle of Zappolino in 1325.

It is an engaging story, but is it fact?

The reality is that the two cities were on either side of an ideological division that characterized the northern Italian states from the early 12th century. At the root of the conflict was a struggle for power and authority over Europe that pitted the Holy Roman Empire against the papacy.

The Guelphs and Ghibellines

a medieval era painting of two sets of men facing each other on a city street brandishing swords and pointing guns at each other.
Depiction of a 14th-century fight between Guelph and Ghibelline factions in Bologna, from the ‘Croniche di Luccha’ by Italian author Giovanni Sercambi.
(Giovanni Sercambi)

After the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the fifth century, Italy was a mosaic of small states trying to defend their territory while attempting to expand at the expense of their neighbours.

Rulers of city states sought alliances with powers who could defend and legitimize their rule. But who had the power to grant the right to rule in these often unstable, violent times?

One claimant was the Holy Roman Emperor, who claimed the authority of the ancient Roman Empire after the coronation of Charlemagne in St. Peter’s Basilica in 800 CE.

The other was the pope, who claimed universal dominion over Christendom as the heir of St. Peter, Christ’s vicar on Earth and the legal recipient of Roman imperial authority.

The papacy’s legal claim was based on one of history’s greatest forgeries: the Donation of Constantine. This was purported to be a document that Constantine I, the first Christian emperor of Rome, issued to Pope Sylvester I before the emperor moved his capital to Constantinople (present-day Istanbul) in 330 CE. It granted full imperial authority to the pope in gratitude for curing the emperor of leprosy and his role in leading a Latin Christian empire in the West.

Although there is no evidence of the donation existing before the eighth century, it was widely accepted. It was not proven to be a forgery until the mid-15th century when Italian scholar and priest Lorenzo Valla revealed it to be fraudulent through textual analysis. Nevertheless, it was still referenced well into the 16th century, including in the Sala di Costantino (Hall of Constantine) at the Apostolic Palace in the Vatican.

Those who saw ultimate authority in the papacy were called Guelphs, an Italianization of the House of Welf, who thwarted claimants to the imperial throne. Those who supported the Holy Roman Emperors were called Ghibellines, another Italianization of a German word: Waiblingen, the name of the castle and the battle cry of the House of Hohenstaufen, the family that most seriously threatened the papacy in the 12th century.

This ideological division was not only an abstract reflection of divergent concepts of sovereignty. It was a practical division often determined by class, geography, events and opportunity. If your enemy was a Guelph, you were a Ghibelline; if a usurper overthrew a rival who was Ghibelline, he claimed to be Guelph, generating immediate support from within and outside the city.

a large renaissance fresco with many characters in a large room. On the left a seated man in papal cassock is handed a gold figurine by a kneeling man.
The ‘Donation of Constantine’ in the Apostolic Palace, painted by assistants of the Renaissance-era Italian painter Raphael between 1520-1524. The painting depicts a kneeling Emperor Constantine offering Pope Sylvester authority over the Western Roman Empire.
(Vatican Museums)

The War of the Bucket

This struggle between the Guelphs and Ghibellines was the real issue in the Bucket War. Bologna was a leading Guelph city, later forming part of the Papal States and guarding passes through the Apennine Mountains of Italy. Modena was a state that depended on support from the Holy Roman emperors, who had entered Italy and granted authority to their supporters.

As two cities on the edges of this divide, tension was inevitable, leading to the story of the purloined bucket. But the reality was much deeper and more dangerous.

A far more likely cause of the war was not the theft of a bucket but the capture of the Bolognese fortress of Monteveglio by Modena in September 1325, a serious threat to Bolognese defenses and a reason to seek redress.

A photo of an old wooden bucket with a metal handle
The stolen bucket on display at the Palazzo Comunale in Modena.
(Palazzo Comunale di Modena)

After years of border incursions, the capture of Monteveglio was the final straw. Two cities and their rival world views were in conflict, so every small victory was celebrated.

In November 1325, a greatly outnumbered Modenese army met the Bolognese at Zappolino. The pope had excommunicated the Modenese leader, declaring him a rebel against God.

The Bolognese had superior numbers but were largely untrained, whereas the Modenese had professional German soldiers sent by the emperor. The result was a decisive Modenese victory, with many Bolognese casualties.

Such victories often occasion popular mythologies, and the bucket story was one. It is far more likely that the bucket was taken after the battle, not before, and its symbolism was codified in the 17th century with the creation of a mock epic poem by the poet Alessandro Tassoni, La Secchia rapita.

To this day, many people continue to believe the story. In Modena, the original bucket is proudly displayed in the town hall, and a replica in the Ghirlandina Tower of the cathedral, where the original had been kept for centuries.

History and myth are often merely different narrative techniques, and both can be used to stimulate national pride and cohesion and to celebrate events that defined a people. This is the significance of the War of the Bucket, a real war with real causes now characterized by charming, if unlikely, actions of distant but not forgotten ancestors.

The Conversation

Kenneth Bartlett 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 War of the Bucket: What one medieval battle tells us about history and myth – https://theconversation.com/the-war-of-the-bucket-what-one-medieval-battle-tells-us-about-history-and-myth-264751

Social media is teaching children how to use AI. How can teachers keep up?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Johanathan Woodworth, Assistant Professor, Education, Mount Saint Vincent University

Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping how students write essays, practise languages and complete assignments. Teachers are also experimenting with AI for lesson planning, grading and feedback. The pace is so fast that schools, universities and policymakers are struggling to keep up.

What often gets overlooked in this rush is a basic question: how are students and teachers actually learning to use AI?




Read more:
AI in schools — here’s what we need to consider


Right now, most of this learning happens informally. Students trade advice on TikTok or Discord, or even ask ChatGPT for instructions. Teachers swap tips in staff rooms or glean information from LinkedIn discussions.

These networks spread knowledge quickly but unevenly, and they rarely encourage reflection on deeper issues such as bias, surveillance or equity. That is where formal teacher education could make a difference.

Vox looks at how AI is impacting education.

Beyond curiosity

Research shows that educators are under-prepared for AI. A recent study found many lack skills to assess the reliability and ethics of AI tools. Professional development often stops at technical training and neglects wider implications. Meanwhile, uncritical use of AI risks amplifying bias and inequity.

In response, I designed a professional development module within a graduate-level course at Mount Saint Vincent University. Teacher candidates engaged in:

  • Hands-on exploration of AI for feedback and plagiarism detection;
  • Collaborative design of assessments that integrated AI tools;
  • Case analysis of ethical dilemmas in multilingual classrooms.

The goal was not simply to learn how to use AI, but to move from casual experimentation to critical engagement.

Critical thinking for future teachers

During the sessions, patterns quickly emerged. Teacher candidates were enthusiastic about AI to begin with, and remained so. Participants reported a stronger ability to evaluate tools, recognize bias and apply AI thoughtfully.

I also noticed that the language around AI shifted. Initially, teacher candidates were unsure about where to start, but by the end of the sessions, they were confidently using terms like “algorithmic bias” and “informed consent” with confidence.

Teacher candidates increasingly framed AI literacy as professional judgment, connected to pedagogy, cultural responsiveness and their own teacher identity. They saw literacy not only as understanding algorithms but also as making ethical classroom decisions.

The pilot suggests enthusiasm is not the missing ingredient. Structured education gave teacher candidates the tools and vocabulary to think critically about AI.

Inconsistent approaches

These classroom findings mirror broader institutional challenges. Universities worldwide have adopted fragmented policies: some ban AI, others cautiously endorse it and many remain vague. This inconsistency leads to confusion and mistrust.

Alongside my colleague Emily Ballantyne, we examined how AI policy frameworks can be adapted for Canadian higher education. Faculty recognized AI’s potential but voiced concerns about equity, academic integrity and workload.

We proposed a model that introduced a “relational and affective” dimension, emphasizing that AI affects trust and the dynamics of teaching relationships, not only efficiency. In practice, this means that AI not only changes how assignments are completed, but also reshapes the ways students and instructors relate to one another in class and beyond.

Put differently, integrating AI in classrooms reshapes how students and teachers relate, and how educators perceive their own professional roles.

When institutions avoid setting clear policies, individual instructors are left to act as ad hoc ethicists without institutional backing.

Embedding AI literacy

Clear policies alone are not enough. For AI to genuinely support teaching and learning, institutions must also invest in building the knowledge and habits that sustain critical use. Policy frameworks provide direction, but their value depends on how they shape daily practice in classrooms.

  1. Teacher education must lead on AI literacy. If AI reshapes reading, writing and assessment, it cannot remain an optional workshop. Programs must integrate AI literacy into curricula and outcomes.

  2. Policies must be clear and practical. Teacher candidates repeatedly asked: “What does the university expect?” Institutions should distinguish between misuse (ghostwriting) and valid uses (feedback support), as recent research recommends.

  3. Learning communities matter. AI knowledge is not mastered once and forgotten; it evolves as tools and norms change. Faculty circles, curated repositories and interdisciplinary hubs can help teachers share strategies and debate ethical dilemmas.

  4. Equity must be central. AI tools embed biases from their training data and often disadvantage multilingual learners. Institutions should conduct equity audits and align adoption with accessibility standards.

Supporting students and teachers

Public debates about AI in classrooms often swing between two extremes: excitement about innovation or fear of cheating. Neither captures the complexity of how students and teachers are actually learning AI.

Informal learning networks are powerful but incomplete. They spread quick tips, but rarely cultivate ethical reasoning. Formal teacher education can step in to guide, deepen and equalize these skills.

When teachers gain structured opportunities to explore AI, they shift from passive adopters to active shapers of technology. This shift matters because it ensures educators are not merely responding to technological change, but actively directing how AI is used to support equity, pedagogy and student learning.

That is the kind of agency education systems must nurture if AI is to serve, rather than undermine, learning.

The Conversation

Johanathan Woodworth 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. Social media is teaching children how to use AI. How can teachers keep up? – https://theconversation.com/social-media-is-teaching-children-how-to-use-ai-how-can-teachers-keep-up-264727

Film festivals like TIFF set the tone for wider industry norms — here’s what we’re watching around AI

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lauren Knight, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Information, University of Toronto

This week, the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) is celebrating 50 years of films and programming.

Through its evolution, TIFF has become an industry staple for both artists and fans, and remains important as a “major launching pad for Hollywood.” It showcases a range of international and independent films to wider market success and connects filmmakers to distributors.

TIFF also plays an important international role by programming, launching and generating wider conversations — both at the festival and beyond via fan, industry, media and social media commentary — in response to emerging trends and technologies in the film industry.

By bringing together stakeholders and curating conversations, film festivals are also powerful cultural hubs that set the tone for the norms and practices of the industry. A major theme at the moment involves questions around AI.

Future of labour in film

In our work as researchers within the Creative Labour Critical Futures project at the University of Toronto, we are tracking and examining media responses to AI use across the film industry.

We’re also mapping emerging trends around policy, governance, worker organizing, creativity, discourses around venture-backed technology startups and acts of refusal when it comes to generative AI across the creative industries, in Canada and beyond.

Film festivals are trying different ways to address AI. One film festival founded and directed by American actor Justine Bateman promises no AI.

TIFF allows the use of AI-generated material in submissions but requires filmmakers to disclose how AI was used. The festival is providing a forum for AI-related conversations through a variety of panel discussions and events.

For example, on Sept. 8 at a “Visionaries” industry conference event, Andrea Scrosati of Fremantle, a major production and distribution company, spoke about Fremantle’s AI-focused Imaginae Studios.

He discussed unlocking new possibilities, noting that AI “tools will permit a new generation of talent to emerge, because they are taking away the barriers to entry.”

Yet the role of AI is a hot-button issue that all stakeholders — filmmakers, tech companies, distributors, creatives’ guilds and unions, policymakers and viewers — are struggling to negotiate.

This negotiation involves narrating and interpreting the meaning of AI in the film industry, which in turn establish new norms and practices.

The ‘ethical’ AI narrative

A key aspect of what’s being negotiated across culture industries is how the public, fans, media commentators and creative professionals understand responsible AI creation and how this intersects with legal issues around ownership, fairness issues around compensation and philosophical issues related to creativity and authenticity.

A notable participant at a TIFF industry event was the company Moonvalley, a Toronto-based AI research firm.

With the company Asteria Film Co., co-founded by American actor and writer Natasha Lyonne and entrepreneur Bryn Mooser, Moonvalley built a generative AI model called Marey, trained only, as the company notes, on “licensed, high-resolution footage.”

Asteria Film identifies itself as “an artist-led generative AI film and animation studio” which, alongside Moonvalley, “has built the first of its kind clean foundational AI model.” Some media reporting amplifies this discourse about it being “clean” and “ethical.”




Read more:
AI is bad for the environment, and the problem is bigger than energy consumption


Yet, there are questions around private companies, including Moonvalley, and public transparency and accountability in terms of how AI has been trained. A Vulture story that covered a visit to Asteria’s Los Angeles studio and interview with Mooser reports the company ultimately declined to provide details about where and how exactly the company paid for and acquired data for training, citing confidentiality.

Labour concerns

Amid conversations about the potential of AI, debates were amplified this year in labour disputes, union strikes and changes to major award regulations.

In July 2024, 2,500 voice-acting members of the SAG-AFTRA union began what would become a year-long strike against 10 video game companies, including Electronic Arts and Activision. The strike outlined 25 disputes, but the primary concern was the industry’s use of AI to “replicate” or “replace” human performers.

This debate began alongside the announcement of an AI Darth Vader non-playable character in Fortnite. Trained using the voice of James Earl Jones, with approval from Jones written into his estate, players could interact with Darth Vader during gameplay.

This integration has become controversial partly because the AI Darth Vader has been recorded swearing or using homophobic slurs in conversation with players.

SAG-AFTRA members reached an agreement on July 9, 2025, noting the addition of “consent and disclosure requirements for AI digital replica use” in union contracts.




Read more:
When does an actor stop, and AI begin? What The Brutalist and Emilia Pérez tell us about AI in Hollywood


Following debates about AI use in Oscar-nominated films, the Academy Awards has similarly amended qualification requirements to account for AI use and disclosure. The academy announced that “the use of generative AI will neither help, nor hinder, a film’s chances of nomination,” though it has stressed that voting members should consider the role of the human at the heart of the creative process.

As these controversies show, the role of AI in the film industry is far from decided. Instead, it is being continually negotiated by many stakeholders.

Festivals like TIFF not only provide a window into these debates, but also play an active role in shaping their direction.

The Conversation

Lauren Knight receives funding from Creative Labour and Critical Futures (CLCF) project.

Daphne Rena Idiz receives funding from the Creative Labour and Critical Futures (CLCF) project.

Rafael Grohmann receives funding from Creative Labour and Critical Futures (CLCF) project and SSHRC Connection Grant (Workers Governing Digital Technologies).

ref. Film festivals like TIFF set the tone for wider industry norms — here’s what we’re watching around AI – https://theconversation.com/film-festivals-like-tiff-set-the-tone-for-wider-industry-norms-heres-what-were-watching-around-ai-264225

Political tensions and border anxiety pushed Canadians away from the U.S. this summer

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Moira A. McDonald, Associate Professor, Director, School of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Royal Roads University

Global attitudes towards the United States as a tourism destination are plunging. Travel pressures, exchange rate shifts and increasing economic uncertainty have all damaged the reputation of the American travel sector.

Canadian travellers are increasingly turning to domestic destinations instead of heading south. In July, Canada recorded its seventh consecutive month of declining travel by Canadians to the U.S..

Political tensions appear to be playing a role in this shift.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s repeated remarks about wanting to annex Greenland and make Canada the “51st state” continue to strain relations between the U.S. and its allies.




Read more:
Allies or enemies? Trump’s threats against Canada and Greenland put NATO in a tough spot


For travellers, these tensions are one more deterrent for travelling to the U.S. About three-quarters of Canadians say Trump is “dangerous” and favourable views of the U.S. are at an all-time low.

Impact south of the border

This year, many Canadians reconsidered plans to visit the U.S. for business, leisure or school-related excursions, and some also boycotted American products.




Read more:
Canadian retailers are seeing a surge in domestic sales amid the ‘Buy Canadian’ movement


A spring 2025 prediction by Tourism Economics anticipated a 20 per cent drop in Canadian travellers to the U.S.. The U.S. Travel Association trade group warned that even a 10 per cent decrease would translate to two million fewer visits and US$2.1 billion in lost spending.

By the end of the summer, year-to-date Canadian visitation numbers to the U.S. had dropped about 25 per cent, confirming that U.S.-inbound travel continues to under-perform.

These choices also reflect anxiety over border-related issues. Measures such as selected detainment and asking Canadians to register with Homeland Security if they plan to stay in the U.S. for 30 days or more has raised concerns among those accustomed to a less intrusive cross-border experience, with some even describing the U.S. as a “hostile state.”




Read more:
Travelling to the U.S.? Here’s what you need to know about the risks and your rights


U.S. border cities feel the pinch

The consequences of declining travel are being felt most acutely in U.S. border cities that rely heavily on Canadian visitors. Canadians are no longer “flooding the streets of Seattle,” but instead are supporting their own tourism economy.

Cities such as Buffalo, N.Y., hoped to entice Canadians with welcoming billboards and special incentives over the summer. But according to Patrick Kaler, CEO of Visit Buffalo Niagara, it was clear their efforts were not working, and the customary wave of Canadian visitors never arrived.

The ripple effects extend well beyond traditional tourism destinations as well. One New York golf club reported losing US$400,000 in Canadian revenue, for instance.

It’s not just Canadian travellers, either. While Canada has seen an increasing number of European visitors, the U.S. recorded a 17 per cent decline in European arrivals this past spring, also likely due to the Trump administration’s policies and general actions.

Canadian tourism grows stronger

While U.S.-bound travel declines, domestic tourism in Canada is on the uptick. Tourism is the country’s second-largest service export, bringing $31 billion into the country last year, according to Destination Canada.

Unlike traditional exports, where goods are shipped out of the country, tourism brings the world’s travellers to Canada — and increasingly, keeps Canadians exploring at home.

Canadians took a total of 77.4 million trips within Canada in the first quarter of 2025. This shift has been a welcome trend to local tourism organizations and businesses that have been increasingly relying on the support of local travellers.

More Canadians are avoiding U.S. travel amid the ongoing trade war. (Global News)

But the increasing fear and uncertainty of American tariffs, policies and bilateral relationships are also causing unrest among Canadian tourism businesses.

The impact from Trump’s tariffs are felt particularly strongly by many Indigenous business owners who are now navigating inflationary pressures and workforce shortages.

Looking forward

The downturn in U.S.-bound travel could extend beyond the summer as travel trends continue to evolve. The statistics underscore the challenges that the U.S. tourism sector is facing and is likely to continue to face in to the future.

With World Tourism Day approaching on Sept. 27, travel and tourism professionals are encouraged to reflect on the industry’s development.

A central goal of World Tourism Day is to inspire “awareness among the international community of the importance of tourism and its social, cultural, political, and economic value.”

As tourism experts, we continue to promote Canadian generosity through professionals and travellers who keep kindness at the centre of their travel — an action that may be even more important than many realize.

Intentional travel and tourism can foster both peace and understanding. While the focus of World Tourism Day and the United Nations World Tourism Organization is to bring the world closer, this year Canadians worked to bring Canada itself closer together.

The Conversation

Moira A. McDonald is affiliated with Tourism and Travel Research Association Canada (TTRA).

Ann-Kathrin McLean is affiliated with Tourism and Travel Research Association Canada (TTRA).

ref. Political tensions and border anxiety pushed Canadians away from the U.S. this summer – https://theconversation.com/political-tensions-and-border-anxiety-pushed-canadians-away-from-the-u-s-this-summer-254780

How international aid cuts are eroding refugee protections in the Global South

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Tanya Basok, Professor, Sociology, University of Windsor

Cuts to humanitarian aid by the United States government under Donald Trump are triggering a global dismantling of humanitarian infrastructure, which is severely undermining asylum systems.

These cuts are occurring alongside the current rise of a “post-humanitarian” approach to the U.S. border characterized by militarization, deterrence and deportation that is quickly replacing protection and care for those in need.

Many asylum-seekers have seen their lives plunged into turmoil by Trump’s policies, in particular the cancellation of all appointments for presenting asylum claims at ports of entry, the removal of temporary protection status for nationals of many countries (including Honduras, Nicaragua and Venezuela) and the deportations of asylum-seekers, regardless of their country of origin. Asylum-seeked have been deported to countries that include Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador, Eswatini, Libya and South Sudan.




Read more:
Supreme Court rules Trump can rapidly deport immigrants to Libya, South Sudan and other countries they aren’t from


At the same time, the U.S. administration has also weakened the capacity of many countries in the Global South to provide protection to asylum-seekers by suspending funds for foreign aid first announced in January 2025 and reaffirmed in August 2025.

The vital role of the UNHCR

Cutting funds to the United Nations refugee agency, known as the UNHCR, has harmed many asylum-seekers.

The UNHCR says that by June 2025, it had to reduce its global staffing costs by 30 per cent via downsizing or closing offices and eliminating 3,500 permanent staff posts and hundreds of temporary staff positions.

The agency warned that the budget cuts weaken the health of 12.8 million displaced people, including 6.3 million children. These people depend on the UNHCR for access to various aid involving primary health and mental health care, nutrition programs, prenatal care, gender-based violence programs, sexual and reproductive health care for women and girls and HIV and TB testing and treatment in countries such as Bangladesh, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Egypt and Jordan.

Other international organizations, such as UNICEF, the International Organization for Migration and the Red Cross, have also lost international funds and had to withdraw their support to asylum-seekers.

International co-operation is one of the core principles of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention. By providing funding, channelled mainly through UNHCR to countries of the Global South, northern states ensure that the responsibility for refugee protection does not fall disproportionately on poorer states.

Our research

Over the years, we have conducted research on UNHCR aid and humanitarian support provided by other international organizations at refugee camps in countries that include Namibia and Uganda. We’ve also examined aid in Turkish cities.

We have documented the vital role the UNHCR has played in supporting refugees in Costa Rica, Cyprus and Mexico, and third-country resettlement from Turkey to northern countries.

But we’ve also shown that some of the UNHCR’s initiatives in collaboration with northern states can keep refugees in the Global South for long periods of time, which, in turn, can violate their human rights.

Nonetheless, we recognize that without UNHCR support, many refugees would be deprived of crucial forms of protection and resources needed to successfully migrate.

The UNHCR has been dealt a severe blow by recent developments. By early May 2024 in Costa Rica, for instance, the UNHCR budget had been cut by 41 per cent, reducing the capacity of the state refugee agency by 77 per cent.

Such a reduction resulted in considerable delays in documenting asylum-seekers and granting them access to health care, the labour market and education.

The impact on community organizations

The budget cuts have not only weakened state systems and international agencies, but have also severely undermined the ability of civil society organizations to provide aid to asylum seekers and migrants, as we have learned through our research.

In Costa Rica in January 2025, for example, Casa Esperanza — a front-line shelter for migrants in transit at the northern border — was forced to close after losing international funding, leaving hundreds without a safe place to stay and receive assistance.

In Mexico, the non-profit feminist organization Fondo Semillas has warned of a serious financing crisis, with migrant-serving organizations hit especially hard.

Some organizations have lost more than half of their capacity when key donors withdrew, jeopardizing food distribution, shelter and legal aid for migrants. A director of a migrant shelter we interviewed in Mexico City told us that two-thirds of roughly 50 migrant organizations were expected to close after the cuts.

These losses not only dismantle critical services but also weaken the capacity of these organizations to advocate for the rights of asylum-seekers and migrants.

Today, Global South countries are pressured to shoulder an ever-growing share of asylum hosting, but without adequate financial support. The loss of donor support for international organizations, such as the UNHCR, has in turn crippled many other community groups and non-governmental aid organizations that assist asylum-seekers.

Building communities

One immediate way forward is to locate new sources of funding for these and other aid organizations. Another solution is to foster stronger commitments toward building communities among concerned citizens, migrants, workers, volunteers, activists, artists, and others representing diverse ethnic, national, socioeconomic, religious and gender-based groups.

As we have witnessed elsewhere, building these communities often requires voluntary labour and, where possible, donations from local residents. The communities support the everyday lives of asylum-seekers and other displaced people seeking protection by enhancing their friendship circles, networks, education, language and training skills, and can ultimately help improve their precarious status.




Read more:
The Learning Refuge: How women-led community efforts help refugees resettle in Cyprus


These communities may initially form locally but have regional, national or transnational reach.

Furthermore, in an increasingly polarizing world, expanded forms of solidarity among activists and others who support migrants are needed to fight against the rising xenophobia and racism that are shaping the current crisis.

Fostering solidarity through community building can help mitigate social and political divisions among migrants struggling with precarity, isolation and exploitation. It can also strengthen inclusive dialogue, assist in bolstering democratic values and build a more socially just future.

Canada’s role

In light of the U.S. retreat from humanitarian leadership, countries like Canada must assume a more prominent role in sustaining global protection systems.

Canada’s recent multi-year funding to UNHCR and its commitment to refugee resettlement signal a willingness to lead.

But further steps are needed: Canada could expand its support to grassroots organizations in the Global South, simplify access to funding for smaller aid organizations and use its G7 presidency to rally international partners around a renewed commitment to refugee protection.

The Conversation

Tanya Basok receives funding from Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada

Guillermo Candiz receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

Suzan Ilcan receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

ref. How international aid cuts are eroding refugee protections in the Global South – https://theconversation.com/how-international-aid-cuts-are-eroding-refugee-protections-in-the-global-south-264560

Québec’s school cellphone ban won’t solve the challenges of family tech use

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alex Baudet, Assistant professor in Marketing, Université Laval

This back-to-school season, students across Québec are adjusting to a significant policy change: cellphones are now fully banned in elementary and secondary schools. This conversation, though contentious, is not new, nor is it unique to Québec.

With stories ranging from teenage suicide after conversations with ChatGPT to allegations of child exploitation on Roblox feeding parental anxiety, policymakers worldwide have been responding to rising concerns about the effects of digital technology on youth.

But as researchers of everyday technology use, we argue that a ban alone overlooks a key challenge that families face: once children return home for the day, parents must independently manage tech-related negotiations. But because much of children’s online activities are hidden, it’s difficult to set boundaries and maintain open communication.

Parents need digital literacy

According to l’Observatoire de la parentalité et de l’éducation numérique, a think tank based in France, 53 per cent of parents believe that they lack support when it comes to the digital education of their children.

Our research shows that the issue isn’t just screen time, but the invisibility of children’s activity that fuels household conflicts.

For example, a teenager we interviewed used gaming to stay in touch with friends, but his mother saw it as a way to isolate himself. A simple conversation might have eased tensions, but the stigma around gaming made it harder.

These misunderstandings widen the digital literacy gap between parents and children.

Thinking beyond screen time

Screen time alone doesn’t tell us much about youth’s online activities. Some studies link moderate use rather than none — roughly an hour a day — to lower depression rates, and show that digital platforms can foster more diverse and inclusive friendships than offline ones. Context matters: what children are doing, with whom, and under what conditions.

Focusing on gaming, our study explored how families experience technologies at home.

We found that parents worry not only about gaming itself — often seen as isolating and unproductive — but also about how it disrupts routines. A child refusing to quit a game for dinner is one example. Because technologies are designed to absorb the user, their impact on others in the household is often overlooked.

The challenge of invisibility

These struggles are worsened by the invisibility of online activity. Watching a child at a screen offers no insight into whether they are bonding with friends, arguing with strangers or facing harm.

We found that this opacity complicates household negotiations.

Parents certainly do set limits: “one hour of gaming,” “no phone after 9 p.m.,” but without understanding gaming dynamics, these rules can feel arbitrary and unfair to teens.

In our study, players were often caught between competing demands: leaving mid-session could mean penalties or letting down teammates, while staying online clashed with family expectations like coming to dinner. These clashes left parents feeling disrespected and children feeling misunderstood.

Why bans fall short

From a policy perspective, banning devices in classrooms may reduce distractions, but it does little to help families manage tech use at home, where tensions quickly resurface.

Evidence from abroad shows bans rarely solve deeper issues.

In Australia, for example, where several states restrict phones in schools, researchers warn such measures shouldn’t altogether replace broader digital literacy efforts.

Fostering literacy and dialogue

If we want to support families, we need to better understand the hidden aspects of digital life. This means helping parents develop the literacy to ask informed questions, grasp usage contexts and negotiate fair rules.

Phones and gaming consoles are often treated as private devices which leaves parents guessing about what’s happening behind the screen. Dialogue helps, but parents need specific support systems.

In Québec, for example, Vidéotron has partnered with CIEL to offer tools that help families discuss and manage phone use.

In our study of competitive gamers, we found that such initiatives show how intermediaries can act like coaches: guiding youth and adults toward healthier, more balanced tech practices. Rather than leaving families to navigate this alone or relying solely on school bans, structured support can make the invisible side of technology more manageable.

It also means recognizing that technology use is rarely solitary. A child gaming is connected to peers; a teen scrolling social media is navigating complex social pressures. By acknowledging these connections, parents can move beyond screen-time limits toward conversations about safety and balance.

Our research shows that when families can talk openly about online life, even if parents don’t fully understand the platforms, tensions ease and rules become easier to follow.

Where do we go from here?

Technology will always evolve faster than policy. And while bans may offer short-term relief, they’re no substitute for open dialogue, digital literacy and patient understanding at home.

As the new school year begins, the real challenge isn’t just deciding whether phones belong in class.

It’s finding realistic ways to support families in navigating a digital world where much remains hidden from view.

The Conversation

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

ref. Québec’s school cellphone ban won’t solve the challenges of family tech use – https://theconversation.com/quebecs-school-cellphone-ban-wont-solve-the-challenges-of-family-tech-use-264079

Smart textiles may soon be able to control devices or monitor health

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sara Nabil, Assistant Professor of Human-Centered Computing, Queen’s University, Ontario

Imagine adjusting the temperature of the air conditioning or skipping a song in your car, not by fiddling with a screen or voice command, but simply by swiping your hand across the fabric of your seatbelt.

It sounds futuristic, but this is the direction automotive design could be shifting towards — away from screens and buttons, and towards multi-touch textiles that sense your gestures and respond to them.




Read more:
Interior design of the future will seem like magic


I am an interaction design professor and director of a research lab that develops smart textile technology. These textiles can transform how people interact with everyday objects and materials, including car interiors, by embedding touch-sensing stitches directly onto fabric elements.

These fabric-based interfaces can sense gestures like swipes, taps and presses, offering a safer and more intuitive alternative to touchscreen systems.

Touch screens and textiles

Advances in technology have led to the proliferation of screens for control and feedback in cars. In luxury cars, these screens are progressively becoming more advanced. Elon Musk’s Tesla, for example, has famously moved most vehicle controls onto a central touchscreen.

the inside of a car showing the steering wheel and touch screen
The interior of a Tesla Model 3.
(Shutterstock)

While this makes for a sleek interior, it’s not necessarily safer or easier to use.

My colleagues and I conducted a user study that showed how interacting with touchscreens while driving can significantly increase distraction and lane deviations. You have to take your eyes off the road, locate the button (while the car is moving and vibrating) and confirm the change, diverting your attention from what really matters.

As a multidisciplinary team of researchers — from electrical engineering and computing to art and design — who study human-computer interaction, we explored 3D-embroidery technology and computational design of e-textile sensors.

Inspired by traditional crafts, smart materials can be used to incorporate interaction as part of the process itself. In this way, we are able to digitally design multi-touch embroidered sensors (stitched using conductive thread into automotive materials like leather) to support wireless gesture-based control.

Technologies like 3D printing and laser-cutting help manufacture and prototype new products. Similarly, we have developed new fabrication methods in smart textile design, from e-sewing and e-serging to WovenCircuits.

These novel techniques support the integration of electronic threads while machine sewing, serging and overlocking, or weaving with little to no need for post-fabrication assembly of sensors or other parts.

A video showing how the smart seatbelt works.

Touch control

Voice input is a popular method for controlling devices and machines, but in vehicles, it’s neither reliable nor safe. Voice recognition technology has come a long way, but is still considered by scholars as an “unfulfilled promise.” For voice input to perform well, the user needs to be a native English speaker, in quiet surroundings and have a clear voice.

While voice input may work well during the software development and testing of those systems, real-world scenarios are different. Think of a user with loud children in the back seat, people with different accents, or what happens when driving through a loud construction zone.

Rather than using voice, screens or other inputs, our lab researched whether a car’s interior could become the interface. We digitally embroidered e-textile sensors onto faux leather seat and steering wheel covers and seatbelt pads.

For proof-of-concept, we designed three prototypes that control media while driving, with touch-sensing stitches that could play or pause audio, skip to the next track and adjust the volume. Our design was wire-free, relying solely on conductive thread, connected via Bluetooth and fully customizable to any vehicle.

Future applications

Our research lab develops touch-responsive interactions with everyday objects as part of a larger push towards designing interactive interior spaces. This is also known as “interioraction” and near-future “decoraction”.

A video showing how digital weaving can help make smart home furniture like a rug that detects when people step on it or a seat cover that corrects posture.

From stained-glass animation that act as information displays to interactive garments that support people with physical disabilities, some of these designs go beyond aesthetics and functionality. They open up new ways to think about usability, accessibility, and the way we design future tech.

E-textiles have applications that range from delivering health care to transforming any kind of object into a smart one. Circuits can be sewn into pre-existing textiles or rugs can be woven to detect accidental falls and send signals. Seat covers can detect pressure to subtly correct posture.

In these ways, smart textile designers are making future technologies less intrusive and more accessible and fun to interact with.

The Conversation

Dr. Sara Nabil receives funding from the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI), Queen’s University Research Initiation Grant, and The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

ref. Smart textiles may soon be able to control devices or monitor health – https://theconversation.com/smart-textiles-may-soon-be-able-to-control-devices-or-monitor-health-252495

Today more than ever, biodiversity needs single-species conservation

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Chris Johnson, Professor of Wildlife and Conservation Ecology, University of Northern British Columbia

Focused conservation efforts are essential for the protection and recovery of many species at risk, such as the monarch butterfly. (Chris Johnson), CC BY

Through the federal Building Canada Act, “projects of national interest” are being fast-tracked while hundreds of major resource projects are already under construction or planned in the next decade.

Clean water, climate stability, economic health and cultural heritage all depend on biodiversity. Yet this foundation is hardly mentioned as the government seeks to shore up Canada’s economic future amid a shifting global order.

The pressure to expedite approvals to dig, drill, cut and pipe has the potential to further weaken already fragile biodiversity protections. This is particularly the case for species at risk — those on the front lines of biodiversity loss that have never been adequately safeguarded under Canada’s existing policies.

Dedicated laws to protect individual species began to emerge in the 1970s, creating some of the best known and tested tools for preventing extinction. Yet in Canada, implementation has consistently fallen short: the federal Species at Risk Act has been the subject of sustained criticism over the past 20 years.

Academic researchers and civil society groups have shown that implementation has been inefficient and inconsistent. The evidence is clear that single-species conservation is taking too long, failing to recognize all endangered or potentially threatened species and their habitats and suffering from biases that favour economic priorities over protection.

In their race toward deregulation, some Canadian governments are using critiques of existing single-species laws to argue that they’re defunct or of relatively little value. The British Columbia government appears to have walked away from long-standing commitments to develop a provincial statute focused on the needs of individual species. The Ontario government recently repealed and replaced one of the strongest species-at-risk acts in the country.




Read more:
Ambitious changes to Canadian conservation law are needed to reverse the decline in biodiversity


a group of caribou
Endangered mountain caribou benefit from supplemental feeding, a single-species conservation effort.
(Chris Johnson)

Individual species need protection

In our recent study, we argue that these legislative tools are essential for assessing and protecting individual species. While current single-species conservation is costly, inefficient and biased, weak implementation doesn’t mean there’s no need for legislation. Deregulation in the name of economic expedience is not reform; it’s erosion of essential protections for biodiversity.

Species such as the swift fox and the whooping crane have been pulled back from the edge of extinction through intensive, costly and invasive conservation actions. Species-at-risk legislation is intended to enable this kind of dedicated attention through measures like captive breeding, translocation, veterinary care or active management of people, predators and ecological competitors.

Despite those successes, Canada lacks a coherent approach to halting biodiversity loss. Even commitments for more protected and conserved areas, while important and overdue, have not been designed to prioritize the needs of at-risk species.

two large white birds with long beaks in a green marshland
Species like the whooping crane have been pulled back from the edge of extinction through dedicated conservation efforts.
(Unsplash/Josie Weiss)

What the evidence says

We used publicly available conservation data to count the number of species that were threatened because there were only a few individuals, or that were found across a very small area in the wild. These are species that need help now. We also quantified threats to at-risk species, identifying those threats that need to be addressed directly by tailored actions, not simply more protected land and water.

Of the 550 wildlife species in Canada that were assessed as threatened or endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, more than 20 per cent were classified as at risk because they were a small population or had a very restricted distribution and were at risk of becoming extinct over a short time. For example, 97 endangered species had less than 250 mature individuals.

Data from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (ICUN) revealed that the most prominent threats facing at-risk species were from consumptive use including deliberate and unintentional harvesting, followed by pollution and the effects of climate change. These threats are not easily addressed by only focusing on increasing protected areas.

What’s at stake

Conservation success stories tell us that focused actions, such as captive breeding, are sometimes the only way to maintain small and range-restricted populations. Equally important are efforts to manage ecosystems on a large enough scale through protected areas, and by addressing pressures from human development and cumulative impacts that steadily erode habitats.

These broader measures can deliver long-term benefits for biodiversity as a whole, but they cannot substitute for processes that assess the status of individual species and empower targeted recovery actions. Weakening or abandoning species-specific policies is not just a policy shift; it is the loss of a crucial set of conservation tools.

Critiques of single-species approaches must not come at the expense of their continued implementation, whether through species at risk legislation or sector-specific natural resource regulation.

a sign featuring silhouettes of caribous and reading: caribou maternity pen ahead
Species-at-risk legislation facilitates focused recovery actions, such as maternity pens that reduce mortality for caribou calves.
(Chris Johnson)

These conservation tools can mobilize public and political will by drawing on the emotional power of threatened species and generating essential information about ecosystem change. They can also provide mechanisms to begin the process of rebuilding populations.

Although species-focused efforts have played an essential role in conservation, a fundamental shift is needed to move beyond crisis-driven, reactive measures and toward proactive, preventative strategies.

Addressing biodiversity loss at its roots requires mitigating systemic drivers of decline and adopting policies that prioritize long-term ecosystem resilience. To forsake species protections is not to move forward. It is to close the door on recovery before the story is over.

The Conversation

Chris Johnson receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Mitacs, and the British Columbia Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation.

Justina C. Ray is President and Senior Scientist of the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) Canada. Funding sources to WCS Canada can be viewed through annual reports available at: https://www.wcscanada.org/About-Us/Annual-Reports.aspx.

ref. Today more than ever, biodiversity needs single-species conservation – https://theconversation.com/today-more-than-ever-biodiversity-needs-single-species-conservation-263023

Flight attendants have gone 50 years without ground pay — here’s the reason behind it

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Isabelle Dostaler, Vice-rectrice aux études et à la recherche, Université de l’Ontario français

The recent labour dispute between Air Canada and its flight attendants pulled back the curtain on one of the airline industry’s longest-standing injustices: flight attendants are paid only when planes are in motion, a practice that has persisted for more than 60 years across the global aviation industry.

On Aug. 14, Air Canada began cancelling flights ahead of a potential strike to allow an “orderly shutdown.” The strike started on Aug. 16, but less than 12 hours into it, the federal government attempted to force binding arbitration between the airline and its union.

The union defied the government order to return to work — an order that was never ratified by the court — until a tentative agreement was reached in the early hours of Aug. 19.

Much was at stake during the conflict, and both unions and carriers around the world likely followed it closely. Passenger traffic had returned to pre-pandemic levels, but profit margins were still thin. Stable fuel prices provided some financial relief, but economic and geopolitical uncertainties made carriers cautious about increasing labour costs.

The union, of course, had a very different perspective. For them, the dispute was an attempt to break new grounds and see compensation for ground duties become the new norm across the industry.

Why has such unfairness endured?

The persistence of unpaid ground time in the aviation industry can be explained through institutional isomorphism theory, a concept introduced by sociologists Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell in 1983.

While organizational theorists had traditionally focused on the variety of organizational structures and strategies, DiMaggio and Powell argued that, over time, organizations in the same field tend to look and behave alike.

Institutional isomorphism helps explain why managers in the aviation industry often conform to established practices, even when change might make business sense. While we tend to think business performance is the primary goal pursued by managers, a key driver of their behaviour is actually legitimacy.

For example, while offering higher salaries to attract employees to an industry still suffering from a labour shortage might be a rational business decision, the reluctance to act differently from companies in the same sector can outweigh that logic.

The forces sustaining unpaid ground time

DiMaggio and Powell defined three types of institutional isomorphism: coercive, mimetic and normative. First, coercive isomorphism refers to the pressures organizations face from formal and informal constraints in an industry. Such constraints are particularly acute in air transportation, which is highly regulated in order to guarantee safety to passengers.

Within this regulatory framework, airtime — the period of time when an aircraft is in the air between takeoff and landing — has become a standard industry measure. Aviation authorities and industry bodies such as the International Air Transport Association, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency have all reinforced its use by embedding it in the safety standards, operational practices and regulatory frameworks that airlines and national regulators must follow.

The concept of airtime also endured due to mimetic isomorphism, which occurs when organizations imitate the practices of others. In the case of aviation, reproducing historical practices like pay structures has allowed airlines to cope with the uncertainty of a business that has become highly cyclical ever since deregulation started in the United States in 1978.

The last, and one of the most interesting processes pushing organizations to look alike, is normative isomorphism. This refers to the influence of educational institutions and professional networks on organizational behavior.

It stems from the professionalization of work, according DiMaggio and Powell. Nurses, doctors, engineers, accountants, pilots and flight attendants all identify with their professions at least as much as they identify with the company they work for, if not more.

Air transport was a prestigious domain in its early days, which might have contributed to the belief that “real work” meant work in the air. In this sense, flight attendants themselves may have unintentionally helped reinforce this norm.

Could the Air Canada dispute spark a shift?

The Air Canada dispute may mark a turning point for labour standards in the airline industry.

In the post-pandemic period, when delays have been frequent due to labour shortages among mechanics, air traffic controllers and pilots, the unfairness of not paying flight attendants for work performed on the ground has become more visible.

A union victory on this front has the potential to create a snowball effect, with unpaid ground time becoming an illegitimate practice in the industry.

Whether the high-profile Air Canada labour dispute will cause a paradigm shift that causes ground pay to become the new norm in the airline industry remains to be seen. What does seem likely, however, is that after standing by the flight attendants despite the inconvenience and disruptions caused by the strike, the travelling public may view such a profound institutional change in a positive light.

The Conversation

Isabelle Dostaler 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. Flight attendants have gone 50 years without ground pay — here’s the reason behind it – https://theconversation.com/flight-attendants-have-gone-50-years-without-ground-pay-heres-the-reason-behind-it-263887

New research indicates caribou populations could decline 80 per cent by 2100

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Elisabetta Canteri, Postdoctoral Researcher, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen

Caribou will likely face population declines rarely experienced in 21,000 years due to climate change. That’s the main finding from our recently published research on the historical resilience of caribou populations.

Caribou, also called reindeer, are a majestic species with remarkable adaptations to the cold Arctic environments of Eurasia and North America. Despite surviving through large climatic fluctuations in the past, future climate warming may cause a drastic decline in caribou populations. Arctic environments are extremely sensitive to climate change, and they are expected to warm two times more than the global average.

In our research, we simulated how caribou population abundance shifted in response to climate change since the last ice age to the present day, and projected it into the future to 2100. This allowed us to directly compare past and future rates of declines.

We decided to look back 21,000 years because, in the past, Arctic climates have fluctuated abruptly, with temperatures in areas such as Greenland increasing by up to 10 degrees in just a few decades. We figured that if we could identify the traits that helped caribou to survive these past warming events, we would be able to better predict their vulnerability to future climate change.

To do this we combined fossils and historical observations with climate reconstructions to map caribou habitat suitability across regions and time at a high resolution. We then used computer modelling to simulate how populations responded to changes in the suitability of these environments following the last ice age.

What our research shows

We found that caribou were able to survive past climatic fluctuations thanks to their ability to live in diverse environments, move long distances and survive in low numbers.

However, when projecting these models forward in time we discovered that these traits might not be enough to safeguard future populations. If action is not taken to mitigate climate change, we project a 58 per cent decline in population size across the whole geographic distribution of the species by 2100.

Losses in North America are likely to be most severe, with decreases of 84 per cent predicted in response to Arctic warming. This is because North America is projected to be the region losing the largest extents of habitats suitable for caribou due to climate change and other human impacts on the land.

Even under a more optimistic climate change scenario, with less temperature change, we still expect North American caribou populations to experience large losses. This suggests that recent declines observed in large herds of caribou are expected to continue into the future.

Threats not directly included in our models, such as diseases, extreme weather die-offs and unregulated hunting, could further worsen the impacts of climate change on caribou populations.




Read more:
Whether caribou migrate or stay put is determined by genes that evolved in the last ice age


Broader ecological implications

Dramatic declines in caribou populations might have far-reaching ecological implications. Thanks to their feeding behaviour, caribou help stop the advancement of forests to northern latitudes and maintain the diversity of plants in the tundra.

In doing so, caribou play a key role in maintaining healthy tundra environments. A decrease in tundra plant diversity affects carbon uptake, soil nutrient availability and even how well the landscape reflects light. Therefore, declines in caribou populations will have knock-on effects on tundra ecosystems that will further accelerate climatic warming.




Read more:
Global warming is changing Canada’s boreal forest and tundra


These drastic declines in caribou populations will have impacts that go beyond the Arctic’s natural environment. For many Indigenous Arctic communities, caribou are essential. People in these regions rely on caribou for food and economy, cultural identity and an overall sense of well-being. Population declines will therefore cause profound losses, impacting the livelihoods of many communities.

Our findings suggest a grim future for caribou, and signal an urgent need for governments to increase investments in the conservation and management of the species. This should include protecting and ensuring access to historical pastures and migration routes.

Actions that we take today to reduce our carbon footprint will benefit caribou, nature and Arctic Indigenous communities in the decades to come.

The Conversation

Damien Fordham receives funding from the Australian Research Council

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

ref. New research indicates caribou populations could decline 80 per cent by 2100 – https://theconversation.com/new-research-indicates-caribou-populations-could-decline-80-per-cent-by-2100-263696