Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Basema Al-Alami, SJD Candidate, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto

British Columbia Premier David Eby recently called on Prime Minister Mark Carney to designate the India-based Bishnoi gang a terrorist organization.

Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown echoed the request days later. The RCMP has also alleged the gang may be targeting pro-Khalistan activists in Canada.

These claims follow a series of high-profile incidents in India linked to the Bishnoi network, including the murder of a Punjabi rapper in New Delhi, threats against a Bollywood actor and the killing of a Mumbai politician in late 2024.

How terrorism designations work

Eby’s request raises broader legal questions. What does it mean to label a group a terrorist organization in Canada and what happens once that label is applied?

Under Section 83.05 of the Criminal Code, the federal government can designate an entity a terrorist organization if there are “reasonable grounds to believe” it has engaged in, supported or facilitated terrorist activity. The term “entity” is defined broadly, covering individuals, groups, partnerships and unincorporated associations.

The process begins with intelligence and law enforcement reports submitted to the public safety minister, who may then recommend listing the group to cabinet if it’s believed the legal threshold is met. If cabinet agrees, the group is officially designated a terrorist organization.

A designation carries serious consequences: assets can be frozen and financial dealings become criminalized. Banks and other institutions are protected from liability if they refuse to engage with the group. Essentially, the designation cuts the group off from economic and civic life, often without prior notice or public hearing.

As of July 2025, Canada has listed 86 entities, from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to far-right and nationalist organizations. In February, the government added seven violent criminal groups from Latin America, including the Sinaloa cartel and La Mara Salvatrucha, known as the MS-13.

This marked a turning point: for the first time, Canada extended terrorism designations beyond ideological or political movements to include transnational criminal networks.

Why the shift matters

This shift reflects a deeper redefinition of what Canada considers a national security threat. For much of the post-9/11 era, counterterrorism efforts in Canada have concentrated on groups tied to ideological, religious or political agendas — most often framed through the lens of Islamic terrorism.

This has determined not only who is targeted, but also what forms of violence are taken seriously as national security concerns.

That is why the recent expansion of terrorism designations — first with the listing of Mexican cartels in early 2025, and now potentially with the Bishnoi gang — feels so significant.

It signals a shift away from targeting ideology alone and toward labelling profit-driven organized crime as terrorism. While transnational gangs may pose serious public safety risks, designating them terrorist organizations could erode the legal and political boundaries that once separated counterterrorism initiatives from criminal law.

Canada’s terrorism listing process only adds to these concerns. The decision is made by cabinet, based on secret intelligence, with no obligation to inform the group or offer a chance to respond. Most of the evidence remains hidden, even from the courts.

While judicial review is technically possible, it is limited, opaque and rarely successful.

In effect, the label becomes final. It brings serious legal consequences like asset freezes, criminal charges and immigration bans. But the informal fallout can be just as harsh: banks shut down accounts, landlords back out of leases, employers cut ties. Even without a trial or conviction, the stigma of being associated with a listed group can dramatically change someone’s life.

What’s at stake

Using terrorism laws to go after violent criminal networks like the Bishnoi gang may seem justified. But it quietly expands powers that were originally designed for specific types of threats. It also stretches a national security framework already tainted by racial and political bias.

---

Read more:
Canadian law enforcement agencies continue to target Muslims

---

For more than two decades, Canada’s counterterrorism laws have disproportionately targeted Muslim and racialized communities under a logic of pre-emptive suspicion. Applying those same powers to organized crime, especially when it impacts immigrant and diaspora communities, risks reproducing that harm under a different label.

Canadians should be asking: what happens when tools built for exceptional threats become the default response to complex criminal violence?

As the federal government considers whether to label the Bishnoi gang a terrorist organization, the real question goes beyond whether the group meets the legal test. It’s about what kind of legal logic Canada is endorsing.

Terrorism designations carry sweeping powers, with little oversight and lasting consequences. Extending those powers to organized crime might appear pragmatic, but it risks normalizing a process that has long operated in the shadows, shaped by secrecy and executive discretion.

As national security law expands, Canadians should ask not just who gets listed, but how those decisions are made and what broader political agendas they might serve.

Basema Al-Alami 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. Calls to designate the Bishnoi gang a terrorist group shine a spotlight on Canadian security laws – https://theconversation.com/calls-to-designate-the-bishnoi-gang-a-terrorist-group-shine-a-spotlight-on-canadian-security-laws-259844

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Torsten Jaccard, Assistant Professor of Economics, University of British Columbia

It should come as no surprise that United States President Donald Trump’s tariff threats have renewed interest in building pipelines that don’t rely on access to the American market. Almost four million barrels of crude oil cross the Canada-U.S. border each day, generating revenue of more than $100 billion per year — a quarter of Alberta’s GDP.

A February survey by the Angus Reid Institute found that half of Canadians believe the federal government isn’t doing enough to expand pipeline capacity. Meanwhile, two-thirds said they would back reviving the Energy East project — a cancelled pipeline that would have transported oil from western Canada to New Brunswick and Québec.

But would new pipelines truly insulate Canada from the threat of U.S. tariffs? And how much new pipeline capacity is necessary? Despite the apparent urgency of approving new infrastructure projects, these questions remain surprisingly unexplored.

In a recent paper I co-authored with researcher Jotham Peters, which is currently under revision, we applied formal economic modelling techniques to parse through the costs and benefits of new pipelines, and in particular to understand the role of American tariffs in shaping these costs and benefits.

How tariffs could hit Canadian oil producers

In a worst-case scenario where the U.S. follows through on its threat of a 10 per cent tariff on Canadian oil exports, Canadian producers could lose as much as $14 billion in annual revenue — roughly a 10 per cent decrease.

Simply put, Canada’s existing pipeline network severely limits access to markets other than the U.S., and as a consequence oil producers bear the full brunt of American tariffs.

But what if Northern Gateway and Energy East — two previously cancelled pipelines that would have brought Canadian oil to tidewater — had been built?

If Northern Gateway and Energy East were operational in 2025, Canada would be more resilient, but not completely immune, to U.S. tariffs. Instead of a $14 billion loss, tariffs would reduce annual revenue by $9 billion.

Ultimately, the combined capacity of Northern Gateway and Energy East, which would be 1.625 million barrels per day, pales in comparison to the four million barrels per day of existing pipeline capacity connecting Canadian producers with American refineries.

Closing this gap would require an expansion of east-west pipeline capacity far beyond the cancelled pipelines of the last decade.

The economic case for pipelines

So have the recent shifts in U.S. trade policy fundamentally altered the economic case in favour of new east-west pipelines? As with most economic analyses, the answer is complicated.

On the one hand, any progress that mitigates the significant cost of U.S. tariffs are likely dollars well spent. Building new pipelines strengthens the bargaining power of Canadian producers, which carries an additional benefit of potentially increasing the return on each barrel sold to our southern neighbour.

There’s also a long-term capacity issue. Existing pipelines may reach their limit by 2035. In the absence of new pipelines, any new production after 2035 would either need to be transported by rail at a higher cost, or left in the ground.

On the other hand, if the U.S. never follows through on tariffs on energy exports — or if future administrations do not share Trump’s affinity for chaotic trade policy — Canada could end up right back where it started when these projects were cancelled.

All pipelines carry some economic benefit, but such benefits were not enough in 2016 and 2017 to warrant the construction of the Northern Gateway and Energy East pipelines.

Inflated construction costs threaten benefits

The elephant in the room is whether a significant expansion in pipeline capacity could realistically be achieved at reasonable cost. Recent evidence suggests it could be a challenge.

The Trans Mountain expansion project, for instance, was initially estimated to cost $5.4 billion in 2013. By the time it was completed in 2024, the final price tag had ballooned to $34 billion — a cost overrun of 380 per cent when accounting for inflation.

The Coastal GasLink pipeline, which transports natural gas, faced similar issues. It was initially projected to cost $4 billion in 2012 and was completed in 2023 at a final cost of $14.5 billion, with an inflation-adjusted overrun of 180 per cent.

While some of these costs were circumstantial — a major flood affected Trans Mountain, for example — increased efficiency in pipeline construction is necessary for the economic benefits of new pipelines to be realized, regardless of U.S. trade policy.

Beyond economics costs

While our research explores the economic impact of new pipelines in the face of U.S. tariffs, we acknowledge there are other issues that need to be considered.

Chief among them is ensuring Canada meets its constitutional obligation to consult First Nations on decisions, like natural resources projects, that affect their communities and territories. Although this lies beyond our area of expertise, it will inevitably be an important element of consideration for any new pipeline developments.

---

Read more:
The complicated history of building pipelines in Canada

---

The environmental impacts of new pipelines are another key concern. These impacts range from local exposure to oil spills to upstream greenhouse gas emissions associated with oil production. While these varying and complex impacts are also beyond the scope of our current work, future research should focus on quantifying the potential environmental impacts of new pipelines.

Our research cannot say whether any new pipeline project is good, bad or in Canada’s national interest. But we can help Canadians reach an informed decision about how changes in U.S. trade policy may or may not alter the economic case for new pipelines in this country.

While Canada would undoubtedly be in a stronger position to respond to U.S. tariffs were Northern Gateway and Energy East operational in 2025, it would still find itself significantly exposed to Trump’s tariff threats.

Fully removing this exposure would require not one but seven pipelines equivalent to Northern Gateway. Whether that’s a goal worth pursuing is a broader question — one we hope our research can help Canadians and policymakers reach on their own.

Torsten Jaccard receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Could new pipelines shield Canada from U.S. tariffs? The answer is complicated – https://theconversation.com/could-new-pipelines-shield-canada-from-u-s-tariffs-the-answer-is-complicated-259660

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Charlotte Milne, PhD Candidate, Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia

Every spring, melting snow and heavy rainfall brings a higher risk of flooding and riverbank erosion to parts of Canada. Bank erosion is responsible for a significant portion of annual flood damage in Canada, with estimates suggesting the costs could grow as high as $13.6 billion anually by the end of the century.

In British Columbia, erosion is primarily managed by “hardening” riverbanks with large rocks called riprap. These rocks are so prevalent along B.C. rivers that you might think they are part of the natural environment, but they are not.

Hardened riverbanks offer temporary protection from river movement, but riprap can lead to degraded rivers. Erosion is a natural process that helps maintain healthy and diverse river habitat. However, as societies expand, there is more demand to control river movement and prevent erosion.

Through my work as a river scientist and flood risk researcher in New Zealand and Canada, I have witnessed the sometimes devastating impacts of river erosion and have also seen just how lifeless rivers can become when overly restricted.

Of course we need to protect people, property and infrastructure from riverbank erosion. But current erosion management is hurting B.C. rivers.

The problem with riprap

Riprap is essential for stabilizing riverbanks when infrastructure and property are at immediate risk. The rocks are often laid down as “temporary” erosion prevention before or during floods.

The problem is, if you harden one area with riprap, that bank transfers the erosion-hungry current elsewhere, driving the need for further riprap to be installed.

The exact impact that riprap is having on B.C. waterways requires more research, but professionals working in the province’s rivers are already seeing the damage.

During a workshop I led with colleagues from Resilient Waters and Watershed Watch, we found that in a group of 83 river and flood management professionals, 53 had witnessed adverse impacts from riprap use in the province’s Lower Mainland region.

It is now estimated that more than half of the gravel sections of the Fraser River have been hardened through riprap. To date, there has been limited consideration of the environmental consequences of such widespread bank hardening.

Riprap can bury the shallow spawning habitats preferred by many fish. It can prevent the “undercutting” of banks, a process that creates important spaces that salmon species prefer for shelter.

In addition, riprap causes water temperatures to rise as rocks trap heat from sunlight that would normally be shaded by riparian vegetation. That lack of vegetation also means less wood and debris in the rivers, which would normally add essential habitat complexity that is preferred by many fish species.

Riprap also acts as a potential migration barrier for salmon and other species trying to navigate the riverbanks. Finally, as riprap lessens available habitat for indigenous species, it can offer preferential habitat for invasive ones instead.

Given the potential for environmental harm, there have been calls to limit riprap use in British Columbia. Experts have suggested it should only be used in essential cases, ideally in river systems that are already heavily impacted by humans.

Bioengineering, revegetation alternatives

The good news is that there are bank-stabilizing alternatives to riprap.

Bioengineering involves using vegetation to create or support engineered structures. For example, live tree cuttings can be woven together to create wattles or brush mattresses. This process creates living tree walls and coverings that grow and strengthen over time.

Revegetation is another approach, using riparian planting to strengthen riverbanks with root systems. In some cases, this can be as simple as laying down seeds at the right time of year, often with other erosion control options like mulch terraces.

The key to the success of bioengineering and revegetation efforts is that they need to be done proactively. Unlike riprap, which can be installed as an emergency response measure, vegetation needs time to grow.

Next steps for B.C.

Is it possible to move on from our over-reliance on riprap in B.C.?

During our workshop, experts discussed what needs to happen to support environmentally friendly bank stabilization options.

First off, we need to be talking about the overuse of riprap more. Currently, decision-makers and property-owners are often unaware of the potential harm that riprap can have on our rivers, or that alternatives exist. While many alternatives won’t be appropriate in extreme erosion cases, for the province’s smaller and healthier rivers, they would be ideal.

For this to happen, the bank-stabilization regulation process in B.C. needs to change. Currently it is hard to receive consent or funding to undertake bank strengthening activities outside of emergency riprap installation.

The B.C. government needs to adapt local guidelines and regulations to allow wider use of alternative methods, prioritizing proactive bank strengthening. They can draw on findings from elsewhere in Canada where alternative bank-stabilization options are already being tested.

Shifting away from a dependence on riprap won’t be easy, but in a province that relies on healthy rivers and fish, it should be a priority.

As one workshop attendee put it: “We don’t want to see sterile kilometres of riprap.”

Charlotte Milne receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Public Scholars Initiative at UBC. The research mentioned in this article received funding from UBC’s Sustainability Scholars Program and support from Resilient Waters and the Watershed Watch Salmon Society.

– ref. Overuse of riprap to prevent riverbank erosion is harming B.C. rivers – https://theconversation.com/overuse-of-riprap-to-prevent-riverbank-erosion-is-harming-b-c-rivers-255283

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Elena Merenda, Associate Head of Early Childhood Studies, University of Guelph-Humber

This story contains spoilers about Lilo & Stitch.

At first glance, Disney’s Lilo & Stitch, set in Hawaii, seems like a playful, heartwarming film about an alien’s misadventures and a young girl’s search for connection and friendship. But there’s a deeper story — one about childhood grief in the life of the main character, Lilo, and how she navigates the loss of her parents.

Lilo’s story offers a meaningful glimpse into how grief shows up in children through their emotions and actions.

Grief in childhood is often misunderstood and overlooked. A common misconception is that children don’t grieve because they’re too young to understand loss. But just because children don’t express grief the way adults do, it doesn’t mean they aren’t grieving.

As an early child educator who teaches families and post-secondary students about children’s grief, I often say this: anyone who is capable of loving is capable of grieving — and children are deeply capable of love.

Children express grief through behaviours

Lilo’s grief is never directly named in the film, but it’s everywhere — she lashes out, isolates herself and clings tightly to Stitch. These behaviours mirror how many children express grief through actions rather than words.

Research from the National Child Traumatic Stress Network notes that young children often grieve through behaviour — aggression, regression, somatic complaints or withdrawal. This is tied to their stage of cognitive development.

As the theory of cognitive development by renowned psychologist Jean Piaget outlines, children aged two to seven think concretely and egocentrically, making abstract concepts like death hard to understand.

In one scene, Lilo insists on feeding a sandwich to her pet fish Pudge, believing he controls the weather — an imaginative ritual that helps her feel a sense of control in a world that feels uncertain and unstable. In multiple scenes she refuses to listen to her sister Nani, reflecting how grief often shows up through routines, symbolic actions or emotional withdrawal.

Grief can make children feel ‘different’

The Canadian Alliance for Children’s Grief estimates that one in 14 children in Canada will lose a parent or sibling before age 18. Yet despite how common it is, childhood grief is often overlooked — especially in schools, where emotional pain may go unnoticed.

In Lilo & Stitch, we see this reality through Lilo. She knows she doesn’t fit in and asks her sister why no one likes her. Her classmates tease her for being “weird” and emotionally reactive. In one scene, she tries to share a handmade bracelet during dance class, only to be mocked and excluded. The moment may seem small but it reveals a deeper truth: grief can make children feel isolated, overwhelmed and fundamentally different from their peers.

Research confirms this. Studies in the Journal of School Psychology show that bereaved children often describe themselves as “not normal” or “different,” especially when their peers haven’t experienced a similar loss. Without safe, validating spaces to process their grief, these feelings can lead to loneliness, behavioural struggles and low self-esteem.

Grief grows with us

Grief in childhood isn’t a single moment — it evolves and deepens over time. As children grow, so does their understanding of what they’ve lost. They often revisit their grief at new developmental stages, carrying it in different ways.

Lilo & Stitch reflects this beautifully. Lilo doesn’t talk much about her parents’ death, but we see her grief in the routines she clings to — like listening to Elvis or sharing old family photos. These aren’t just quirks; they’re ways she keeps her parents close.

This reflects what grief researchers call the continuing bonds theory, which emphasizes that maintaining emotional connections to the deceased can support healthy adaptation. Grief isn’t something children “get over.” It’s something they learn to carry — with support, connection and love.

Healing doesn’t mean Lilo returns to who she was before her parents’ deaths. Her grief remains, but she begins to rebuild her world with Stitch, Nani and her new ‘ohana (family).

They don’t replace what was lost, but they become a space where grief and love can coexist.

One of the film’s most memorable lines captures this truth:

“This is my family. I found it, all on my own. It’s little and broken but still good. Yeah… still good.”

Connection is the path to healing

Just as grief is rooted in love, healing is rooted in connection.

Lilo’s healing comes from presence. Despite the chaos he brings, Stitch stays. Nani, overwhelmed and unsure, keeps showing up.

Their love and steady, unconditional presence allow Lilo to begin feeling safe enough to grieve and grow.

This reflects what attachment research tells us: strong, secure relationships are among the most powerful protective factors for children navigating loss. When a child feels emotionally safe with a caregiver, they’re better able to regulate emotions, build resilience and integrate the pain of loss into their development. In bereavement, the presence of a stable, responsive adult can determine whether a child’s grief becomes traumatic — or transformative.

In Lilo & Stitch, connection becomes both the container for Lilo’s grief and the bridge to her healing. The film gently reminds us: love may be the reason we grieve, but it’s also the most powerful way through it.

How caregivers can support a grieving child

1. Maintain routine and consistency.

In times of grief, structure helps children feel safe. Predictable routines — like mealtimes, bedtime rituals and daily rhythms — offer a sense of stability when everything else feels uncertain

2. Normalize and validate emotions.

Help your child name what they’re feeling and let them know it’s OK. Say things like, “It’s OK to feel that way,” or “Whatever you feel is welcome here.” Validation helps reduce shame and gives children permission to process their grief openly.

3. Answer questions honestly.

Children need truthful, age-appropriate information about what has happened. Avoid euphemisms like “went to sleep” or “passed away,” which can cause confusion. Instead, use clear, simple language: “Their body stopped working and they died.” Honesty builds trust and supports children’s cognitive and emotional development as they process the permanence of death.

4. Seek support.

Grief can feel overwhelming — for children and their parents or caregivers. Reach out to school counsellors, grief therapists or local support groups, because support can reduce isolation, support expression and improve coping in grieving families.

Elena Merenda 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. Lilo & Stitch: With love, a bereaved child feels safe enough to grieve and grow – https://theconversation.com/lilo-and-stitch-with-love-a-bereaved-child-feels-safe-enough-to-grieve-and-grow-259873

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Rebecca Woods, Associate Professor, Institute for the History & Philosophy of Science & Technology, University of Toronto

In just the last several months, de-extinction — bringing back extinct species by recreating them or organisms that resemble them — has moved closer from science fiction to science fact. Colossal Biosciences — an American for-profit de-extinction startup headed by geneticists George Church and Beth Shapiro — announced two major achievements almost back-to-back.

In the first, scientists spliced part of the woolly mammoth’s genome into mice to create “woolly mice,” incredibly cute pom-pom like rodents sporting coats that express the genes of long-extinct woolly mammoths.

Just a few weeks later, Colossal announced an even bigger achievement, claiming to have brought back the dire wolf, a contemporary of the woolly mammoth who, like their Ice Age proboscidean co-travellers, last roamed the Earth roughly 10,000 years ago.

---

Read more:
Colossal Bioscience’s attempt to de-extinct the dire wolf is a dangerously deceptive publicity stunt

---

Mammoth popularity

Woolly mammoths are at the forefront of these controversial de-extinction efforts. Despite a deep bench of more recently extinct species — the dodo, the moa, passenger pigeons, the bucardo, quagga, thylacine, aurochs and a whole host of others — readily available to take centre stage in de-extinction efforts, woolly mammoths figure prominently in de-extinction stories, both scientific and popular.

Woolly mammoths featured prominently in the imagery of Revive & Restore, a “genetic rescue” conglomerate of scientists and futurists headed by tech-guru Steward Brand; in 2021, Colossal “established ownership” over woolly mammoth revival. Colossal’s own logo visualizes CRISP-R, the gene-splicing technology that facilitates de-extinction, and the signature spiralled tusks of Mammuthus primigenius.

In popular culture, woolly mammoths have been a source of fascination for the last several centuries. Thomas Jefferson famously held out hope that live mammoths would be found beyond the frontier of American colonialism in the late-1700s, while early excavations of American mastodons were major events in the early 1800s. American painter Charles Willson Peale captured the first such excavation in oils, and later capitalized on that mastadon’s skeleton in his Philadelphia museum.

More recently, Manny the mammoth featured in the ongoing Ice Age animated film franchise, first launched in 2002.

Climate icons

At the same time, woolly mammoths have also become an emblem of the contemporary climate crisis. During the recent wave of defacing famous artwork in order to draw attention to the climate crisis, environmental activists painted the (fortunately artificial) tusks of the Royal B.C. Museum’s woolly mammoth model bright pink.

In a 2023 publicity stunt, the Australian cultured-meat startup, Vow, unveiled a mammoth meatball produced out of the woolly mammoth’s genome with sheep DNA as filler. Not for sale, the mammoth meatball was scorched before an audience at the Dutch science museum, Nemo.

The stunt was intended to call attention, again, to the plight of the Earth’s climate, the unsustainability of industrialized food systems and the potential for lab-grown meat to square this particular circle.

Model animals

For a creature that no human being has ever seen live and in the flesh, woolly mammoths certainly get a lot of media exposure. How did this long-extinct species become the emblem of contemporary extinction and de-extinction?

People have been interacting with the remains of woolly mammoths for hundreds of years. Dig a hole deep enough almost anywhere in the northern hemisphere, and you are apt to come across the bones or maybe the tusks of extinct mammoths or mastodons.

In early modern Europe, mammoth fossils were famously interpreted as the bones of unicorns and giants before being recognized as belonging to elephant-like creatures around 1700. Only around 1800 were mammoths recognized as a distinct and extinct species of proboscidea.

Elsewhere in Arctic regions, especially Siberia, Indigenous Peoples were familiar with mammoth remains preserved by permafrost. As rivers and their tributaries surged during annual thaws, whole carcasses of mammoths (and woolly rhinos) were sometimes exposed.

Local peoples who came across these remains, apparently recently dead but belonging to creatures they never saw walking the Earth’s surface, surmised that they were great burrowing rodent-like animals that tunnelled through the ground and perished if they accidentally came into contact with atmosphere.

---

Read more:
Ancient DNA suggests woolly mammoths roamed the Earth more recently than previously thought

---

Around the Arctic, including in Alaska, permafrost prevented the fossilization of mammoth tusks as well as bodies, and this ice ivory was — and remains — an important element of Arctic economies, carved locally and exchanged into historically regional, and now global, markets.

Continued relevance

Despite their association with the distant past, woolly mammoths have long resonated with modern human cultures as their fossilized or preserved body parts entered economic practices and knowledge systems alike. But as the extinction of once numerous species like the passenger pigeon, the American bison and African elephant began to loom over the late 19th century, woolly mammoths took on new meanings in the context of modern extinction and emergent understandings of human evolution.

Revolutions in geology, archeology, paleontology and related disciplines were changing long-held assumptions about the origin of humankind.

Narratives of the rise of “man the hunter” arose in natural history institutions such as the American Museum of Natural History and the Field Museum in Chicago. These origin stories were explicitly connected to the presumed extinction of woolly mammoths and their evolutionary relatives, the mastodons.

These led to some of the most powerful expressions of mammoths in visual form, like the frescoes and paintings produced by renowned paleoartist Charles R. Knight.

At the same time, cave paintings in France, Spain and elsewhere came to light in the early 20th century. For example, the 40,000-year-old frescoes at Rouffignac, France clearly depicting woolly mammoths were interpreted as further evidence of this deep and powerful historical connection.

It is this connection — the association of the rise of modern humankind with the decline and extinction of the woolly mammoth — that feeds today’s continued fascination. Notions of human complicity in extinction stories have long been embedded in modern scientific understandings of woolly mammoths. It is no accident that woolly mammoths are so central to de-extinction projects and climate activism alike.

Rebecca Woods received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Why are we so obsessed with bringing back the woolly mammoth? – https://theconversation.com/why-are-we-so-obsessed-with-bringing-back-the-woolly-mammoth-253432

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hanika Rizo, Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

Earth formed about 4.6 billion years ago, during the geological eon known as the Hadean. The name “Hadean” comes from the Greek god of the underworld, reflecting the extreme heat that likely characterized the planet at the time.

By 4.35 billion years ago, the Earth might have cooled down enough for the first crust to form and life to emerge.

However, very little is known about this early chapter in Earth’s history, as rocks and minerals from that time are extremely rare. This lack of preserved geological records makes it difficult to reconstruct what the Earth looked like during the Hadean Eon, leaving many questions about its earliest evolution unanswered.

We are part of a research team that has confirmed the oldest known rocks on Earth are located in northern Québec. Dating back more than four billion years, these rocks provide a rare and invaluable glimpse into the origins of our planet.

Remains from the Hadean Eon

The Hadean Eon is the first period in the geological timescale, spanning from Earth’s formation 4.6 billion years ago and ending around 4.03 billion years ago.

The oldest terrestrial materials ever dated by scientists are extremely rare zircon minerals that were discovered in western Australia. These zircons were formed as early as 4.4 billion years ago, and while their host rock eroded away, the durability of zircons allowed them to be preserved for a long time.

Studies of these zircon minerals has given us clues about the Hadean environment, and the formation and evolution of Earth’s oldest crust. The zircons’ chemistry suggests that they formed in magmas produced by the melting of sediments deposited at the bottom of an ancient ocean. This suggests that the zircons are evidence that the Hadean Eon cooled rapidly, and liquid water oceans were formed early on.

Other research on the Hadean zircons suggests that the Earth’s earliest crust was mafic (rich in magnesium and iron). Until recently, however, the existence of that crust remained to be confirmed.

In 2008, a study led by one of us — associate professor Jonathan O’Neil (then a McGill University doctoral student) — proposed that rocks of this ancient crust had been preserved in northern Québec and were the only known vestige of the Hadean.

Since then, the age of those rocks — found in the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt — has been controversial and the subject of ongoing scientific debate.

‘Big, old solid rock’

The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt is located in the northernmost region of Québec, in the Nunavik region above the 55th parallel. Most of the rocks there are metamorphosed volcanic rocks, rich in magnesium and iron. The most common rocks in the belt are called the Ujaraaluk rocks, meaning “big old solid rock” in Inuktitut.

The age of 4.3 billion years was proposed after variations in neodymium-142 were detected, an isotope produced exclusively during the Hadean through the radioactive decay of samarium-146. The relationship between samarium and neodymium isotope abundances had been previously used to date meteorites and lunar rocks, but before 2008 had never been applied to Earth rocks.

This interpretation, however, was challenged by several research groups, some of whom studied zircons within the belt and proposed a younger age of at most 3.78 billion years, placing the rocks in the Archean Eon instead.

Confirming the Hadean Age

In the summer of 2017, we returned to the Nuvvuagittuq belt to take a closer look at the ancient rocks. This time, we collected intrusive rocks — called metagabbros — that cut across the Ujaraaluk rock formation, hoping to obtain independent age constraints. The fact that these newly studied metagabbros are in intrusion in the Ujaraaluk rocks implies that the latter must be older.

The project was led by masters student Chris Sole at the University of Ottawa, who joined us in the field. Back in the laboratory, we collaborated with French geochronologist Jean-Louis Paquette. Additionally, two undergraduate students — David Benn (University of Ottawa) and Joeli Plakholm (Carleton University) participated to the project.

We combined our field observations with petrology, geochemistry, geochronology and applied two independent samarium-neodymium age dating methods, dating techniques used to assess the absolute ages of magmatic rocks, before they became metamorphic rocks. Both assessments yielded the same result: the intrusive rocks are 4.16 billion years old.

The oldest rocks

Since these metagabbros cut across the Ujaraaluk formation, the Ujaraaluk rocks must be even older, placing them firmly in the Hadean Eon.

Studying the Nuvvuagittuq rocks, the only preserved rocks from the Hadean, provides a unique opportunity to learn about the earliest history of our planet. They can help us understand how the first continents formed, and how and when Earth’s environment evolved to become habitable.

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

Jonathan O’Neil receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

– ref. The oldest rocks on Earth are more than four billion years old – https://theconversation.com/the-oldest-rocks-on-earth-are-more-than-four-billion-years-old-259657

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Daniel Atlin, Adjunct Professor, Gordon S. Lang School of Business, University of Guelph

Trying to navigate an environment where massive disruption and unprecedented change is the norm presents a challenge for business leaders everywhere.

Social-purpose, multi-stakeholder organizations like post-secondary institutions, hospitals, governments and NGOs are particularly affected.

The practice of “sense-making” — making sense of the situations people find themselves in, in the words of organizational theorist Karl Weick — offers an innovative and timely framework that can help social-purpose leaders address complexity.

Senior post-secondary leaders study

Management experts have described sense-making as the key skill needed in an age of disruption. This has been confirmed through my research while completing a master’s degree in change leadership.

I interviewed more than two dozen senior leaders in complex organizations in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand — the majority of whom were in the post-secondary sector. I found the leaders I interviewed were intuitively using elements from Weick’s organizational sense-making framework.

As one leader shared:

“The first thing you need to do is to recognize that it’s your role to help the rest of your community make sense of what’s happening around you. It’s something that I take very seriously.”

Deborah Ancona, professor of management at MIT, says:

“Sense-making is most often needed when our understanding of the world becomes unintelligible in some way. This occurs when the environment is changing rapidly, presenting us with surprises for which we are unprepared or confronting us with adaptive, rather than technical problems to solve.”

Leading in ‘age of outrage’

Social-purpose organizations face common issues such as a lack of funding, system fragmentation, competing stakeholders, new entrants and the challenges of emerging technologies.

They are also at the centre of what business and public policy professor Karthik Ramana describes as “the age of outrage,” reflected in heightened polarization. Against this backdrop, it’s increasingly challenging to attract and retain leaders.

I heard from leaders who felt they didn’t have the proper training for the job or support once they started their roles. In part, this is because few of them, including those involved in their hiring, seem to realize the actual messiness inherent within their organizations.

This brings to mind the parable that writer David Foster Wallace used in his 2005 convocation speech at Kenyon College, in which two young fish are told by an older fish that they are swimming in water. One of the young fish then turns to the other in surprise and says: “What is water anyway?”

Lack of agency

I heard from various leaders who experienced an “aha” moment when they realized they were immersed within a fluid and dynamic organizational environment that they were expected to run like a traditional business. This realization gave them a framework to understand the lack of agency they often experienced.

The challenge with social-purpose organizations is that they’re complex adaptive systems in which individual interactions form an ever-changing array of networks generating emergent behaviours that are often unpredictable. Complex adaptive systems also tend to revert to the status quo when faced with change.

So how do social-purpose leaders navigate change and this challenging organizational context? They wrap their efforts around purpose. It’s an anchor point and unifying focus for leaders, teams and all stakeholders.

4 strategies

Based on my research, I’ve identified four main sense-making strategies that leaders use:

Exploration and map-making: These pursuits help leaders extract a steady flow of information and data from their interactions both inside and outside their organizations. This allows them to develop high-level, adaptive frameworks that are constantly in flux — similar to Google Maps, as it generates live snapshots of traffic flows and suggested routes.

Storytelling and narrative development: Leaders use storytelling and narrative development to project ideas, purposes and visions into the future. This allows them to connect emotionally and inspire people and communities. Recognizing their role as storyteller-in-chief can align disparate parts of an organization into a coherent and engaged whole.

Invention and improvisation: These are employed by leaders to test assumptions as they learn what works and what doesn’t. This approach allows them to respond in real time to the never-ending flow of new information. Without taking risks, leaders are at risk of being stuck in paralysis.

Adaptation and collaboration allows leaders to help their organizations remain relevant. Leaders spoke about the need to foster adaptation. They also stressed the need to attract new resources through collaboration across like-minded institutions, governments, funding partners and the private sector.

Embracing a sense-making mindset

Thinking that benefits the interests and perspectives of the total enterprise is a critical but challenging task for leaders in social- purpose organizations.

Time and energy — two scarce resources — are necessary to build aligned and high-performing teams and to break down silos. Team alignment cannot be achieved through the occasional team-building session, but requires an ongoing commitment and a well-articulated plan.

Social-purpose organizations need practices, frameworks and metrics that are tailored to organizations’ unique needs. Rather than spending resources, time and energy on strategic plans, some leaders are building more flexible strategic frameworks or using strategic foresight to guide an innovative vision for the future.

Leadership can be lonely

It’s also important to remember that leadership can be lonely. To survive and thrive, social-purpose leaders must remember to seek out their own coaches and build communities of practice to enhance their lived experience and activities.

Developing an outer shell to weather criticism also helps. While leaders can’t please everyone, sense-making leaders find strength and build endurance in the recognition that the roles they play are meaningful, satisfying and essential — not only within the organizations they serve but through the collective work their organizations accomplish in the world.

Leaders (and board members) must realize that hiring the same people with the same profile as the past won’t make an organization ready for change, but instead reinforces the status quo.

By recognizing the messiness of their organizations and using sense-making skills, leaders in social-purpose organizations have better odds of surviving the perils and challenges of massive disruption and unprecedented change.

Daniel Atlin 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. University leaders have to make sense of massive disruption — 4 ways they do it – https://theconversation.com/university-leaders-have-to-make-sense-of-massive-disruption-4-ways-they-do-it-257866

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hanika Rizo, Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

Earth formed about 4.6 billion years ago, during the geological eon known as the Hadean. The name “Hadean” comes from the Greek god of the underworld, reflecting the extreme heat that likely characterized the planet at the time.

By 4.35 billion years ago, the Earth might have cooled down enough for the first crust to form and life to emerge.

However, very little is known about this early chapter in Earth’s history, as rocks and minerals from that time are extremely rare. This lack of preserved geological records makes it difficult to reconstruct what the Earth looked like during the Hadean Eon, leaving many questions about its earliest evolution unanswered.

We are part of a research team that has confirmed the oldest known rocks on Earth are located in northern Québec. Dating back 4.3 billion years, these rocks provide a rare and invaluable glimpse into the origins of our planet.

Remains from the Hadean Eon

The Hadean Eon is the first period in the geological timescale, spanning from Earth’s formation 4.6 billion years ago and ending around 4.03 billion years ago.

The oldest terrestrial materials ever dated by scientists are extremely rare zircon minerals that were discovered in western Australia. These zircons were formed as early as 4.4 billion years ago, and while their host rock eroded away, the durability of zircons allowed them to be preserved for a long time.

Studies of these zircon minerals has given us clues about the Hadean environment, and the formation and evolution of Earth’s oldest crust. The zircons’ chemistry suggests that they formed in magmas produced by the melting of sediments deposited at the bottom of an ancient ocean. This suggests that the zircons are evidence that the Hadean Eon cooled rapidly, and liquid water oceans were formed early on.

Other research on the Hadean zircons suggests that the Earth’s earliest crust was mafic (rich in magnesium and iron). Until recently, however, the existence of that crust remained to be confirmed.

In 2008, a study led by associate professor Jonathan O’Neil (then a McGill University doctoral student) proposed that rocks of this ancient crust had been preserved in northern Québec and were the only known vestige of the Hadean.

Since then, the age of those rocks — found in the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt — has been controversial and the subject of ongoing scientific debate.

‘Big, old solid rock’

The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt is located in the northernmost region of Québec, in the Nunavik region above the 55th parallel. Most of the rocks there are metamorphosed volcanic rocks, rich in magnesium and iron. The most common rocks in the belt are called the Ujaraaluk rocks, meaning “big old solid rock” in Inuktitut.

The age of 4.3 billion years was proposed after variations in neodymium-142 were detected, an isotope produced exclusively during the Hadean through the radioactive decay of samarium-146. The relationship between samarium and neodymium isotope abundances had been previously used to date meteorites and lunar rocks, but before 2008 had never been applied to Earth rocks.

This interpretation, however, was challenged by several research groups, some of whom studied zircons within the belt and proposed a younger age of at most 3.78 billion years, placing the rocks in the Archean Eon instead.

Confirming the Hadean Age

In the summer of 2017, we returned to the Nuvvuagittuq belt to take a closer look at the ancient rocks. This time, we collected intrusive rocks — called metagabbros — that cut across the Ujaraaluk rock formation, hoping to obtain independent age constraints. The fact that these newly studied metagabbros are in intrusion in the Ujaraaluk rocks implies that the latter must be older.

The project was led by masters student Chris Sole at the University of Ottawa, who joined us in the field. Back in the laboratory, we collaborated with French geochronologist Jean-Louis Paquette. Additionally, two undergraduate students — David Benn (University of Ottawa) and Joeli Plakholm (Carleton University) participated to the project.

We combined our field observations with petrology, geochemistry, geochronology and applied two independent samarium-neodymium age dating methods, dating techniques used to assess the absolute ages of magmatic rocks, before these become metamorphic rocks. Both assessments yielded the same result: the intrusive rocks are 4.16 billion years old.

The oldest rocks

Since these metagabbros cut across the Ujaraaluk formation, the Ujaraaluk rocks must be even older, placing them firmly in the Hadean Eon.

Studying the Nuvvuagittuq rocks, the only preserved rocks from the Hadean, provides a unique opportunity to learn about the earliest history of our planet. They can help us understand how the first continents formed, and how and when Earth’s environment evolved to become habitable.

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

Jonathan O’Neil receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

– ref. The oldest rocks on Earth are 4.3 billion years old – https://theconversation.com/the-oldest-rocks-on-earth-are-4-3-billion-years-old-259657

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Yasemin Pacaci, Postdoctoral Fellow, Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Ontario

Mindfulness and self-compassion have become popular tools for improving mental health and well-being in the workplace. Mindfulness involves paying attention to thoughts, emotions and surroundings without judgment, much like watching clouds pass in the sky. This moment-to-moment awareness helps people respond skilfully rather than react automatically.

Self-compassion builds on mindfulness by encouraging people to meet difficult feelings and experiences with kindness instead of resistance. In other words, mindfulness helps people first recognize their suffering, while self-compassion helps people respond with kindness.

Both mindfulness and self-compassion can be practised formally through meditations like body scans, breath awareness or loving-kindness meditation, and informally by bringing mindful attention to mind, emotions and everyday activities.

Both practices have the potential to transform dysfunctional workplaces by improving the collective well-being and personal agency of employees.

Yet too often, these practices are introduced superficially to boost productivity and performance, rather than used to address the root causes of workplace stress. It’s a pattern I’ve witnessed repeatedly in my years as a mindfulness teacher and researcher.

This brings into question whether these practices can thrive in capitalist systems that prioritize profit over people. But rather than rejecting mindfulness and self-compassion as incompatible with capitalism, I argue we need a more thoughtful framework that stays true to their essence while tackling common misunderstandings and misuses.

How capitalism is co-opting mindfulness

Academic and practitioner critics have raised concerns about how mindfulness and self-compassion practices are being integrated into corporate life.

Some of these critics argue that companies are incorporating mindfulness and self-compassion practices not to fix systemic problems, but to boost their own productivity and shift the responsibility for stress onto employees.

In these cases, critics use the term “McMindfulness” to describe a commodified, diluted version of mindfulness that is stripped of its roots in Buddhist philosophy.

Some critics have gone further, claiming that mindfulness encourages contentment with the status quo and may make employees more vulnerable to exploitation.

While these critiques raise valid concerns, they often create more confusion and resistance than meaningful dialogue or practical solutions for implementing mindfulness and self-compassion in the workplace.

Empirical research offers a more nuanced perspective. Mindfulness and self-compassion, when practised consistently, can strengthen employees’ sense of agency, improve their self-confidence, support ethical decision-making and action for meaningful change.

Done right, mindfulness can help workers

Employees who develop mindfulness and self-compassion skills tend to respond in three main ways, according to research.

First, they become more aware of dysfunction in the workplace. This awareness can empower them to speak up and advocate for change if it’s within their control and in their own interest. It can also cause them to engage in more ethical practices, especially in toxic work environments.

Second, they are more likely to leave toxic work environments. When employees realize change is beyond their control, mindfulness and self-compassion can cause them to lose their motivation for work and, indirectly, might prompt them to leave toxic workplaces altogether.

Third, for employees who end up staying in their roles, they are better able to acknowledge and become less effected by stressors. However, this doesn’t mean they become more productive or blindly enthusiastic about their jobs. Mindfulness enhances motivation that stems from genuine interest, not from pressure or obligation.

It’s important to note that mindfulness doesn’t mean these employees condone poor conditions or toxic practices. Rather, it helps them see reality more clearly, without denial or avoidance.

And for employers hoping mindfulness will instantly boost engagement or drive performance, research shows employees may actually become more critical of their work and less willing to perform mundane tasks.

Towards true workplace transformation

Mindfulness alone cannot fix a toxic workplace. When organizations introduce mindfulness programs without first addressing the underlying causes of stress or toxicity, they’re unlikely to see the results they expect.

If organizations want to reap the full benefits of mindfulness and self-compassion, they need to take a more deliberate, structured approach. Psychologist Kurt Lewin’s three-step change management model offers a useful guide:

Step 1. Unfreeze: Address the root causes of workplace stress

• Address systemic stressors. Before introducing any well-being initiative, organizations must confront actual sources of stress such as excessive workloads, toxic leadership and job insecurity.
• Correct misunderstandings. Clarify what mindfulness and self-compassion actually is to reduce scepticism and confusion.
• Avoid mandatory participation. Giving employees the freedom to opt in fosters authentic engagement and sustains interest.

Step 2. Change: Implement practices ethically and intentionally

• Lead by example at the top. Instead of only offering these programs to employees, leaders should engage with mindfulness and self-compassion practices themselves. When senior figures lead by example, these programs gain legitimacy and workplaces foster more ethical, people-centered leadership that goes beyond performance and productivity.
• Ensure cultural sensitivity. Small cultural adaptations can improve the inclusion of mindfulness and self-compassion sessions. For instance, research has found that in Hispanic communities, using familiar stories or proverbs can make mindfulness sessions more relatable and improve engagement.
• Preserve ethical foundations. Present mindfulness and self-compassion as universal practices, not tied to any one religion. This preserves their ethical underpinnings while ensuring they remain universal and accessible to all.

Step 3. Freeze: Embed mindfulness and self-compassion into workplace culture

• Encourage small, daily practices. Offer simple tools like journaling or mindful breathing breaks that employees can tailor to their own needs and schedules.
• Provide ongoing support. Create time and space for continued practice, such as guided meditations, mindfulness moments in meetings or gratitude boards so new habits take root.
• Measure impact holistically. Consider hiring qualified professionals to evaluate program effectiveness, address emerging needs and keep the organization moving forward.

Moving beyond wellness window-dressing

Mindfulness and self-compassion are not magic bullets, but they can still be powerful catalysts for change.

When introduced with a deliberate and thoughtful approach, mindfulness and self-compassion can help workplaces move beyond shallow wellness “hacks” toward truly transformative practices, even in high-pressure, profit-driven environments.

Far from serving as a quick fix or a mere productivity tool, these practices encourage employees to challenge the status quo, take meaningful action, build healthier relationships and make more ethical decisions. They can help individual employees flourish within and beyond their workplaces.

The true value of mindfulness and self-compassion practices lies not in short-term outcomes or surface-level improvements, but in helping individuals be more aware of themselves, their surroundings and the choices they make, which is beyond any outcome or context.

Yasemin Pacaci 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. Workplaces have embraced mindfulness and self-compassion — but did capitalism hijack their true purpose? – https://theconversation.com/workplaces-have-embraced-mindfulness-and-self-compassion-but-did-capitalism-hijack-their-true-purpose-258043

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sara M. Grimes, Wolfe Chair in Scientific and Technological Literacy and Professor, McGill University

Parenting in the digital age can be stressful and demands a lot from parents.

The Family Online Safety Institute (FOSI) recently released its annual Online Safety Survey that discovered almost 50 per cent of parents surveyed aren’t using parental controls to manage their children’s devices. These are tools that would ostensibly help parents filter out inappropriate content or unwanted interactions on their children’s devices.

The FOSI authors conclude the reason parents aren’t using the tools is because they feel “overwhelmed” and recommend parents educate themselves as a good first step toward broader use.

While overwhelm is a real thing, we suggest a bigger problem with parental controls is how they are designed. This includes how little attention is given to supporting open communication between parents and children.

Once a year for the past three years, we’ve asked the same 33 children (initially aged six to 12) what they think about content ratings, online safety, game monetization and privacy.
Our team’s combined expertise in communication, education, policy and game studies analyzed their answers.

We also asked their parents how they mediated their kids’ gaming. Nearly half of them don’t use parental controls either. They say parental controls don’t always work as promised, offer little context about how settings affect gameplay and force binary choices that don’t align with household rules or with children’s maturity levels.

The parents we asked said they aren’t avoiding parental controls because they feel overwhelmed by them. It’s that the tools are poorly designed.

Parent controls can introduce more problems

At the same time, many of the parents described themselves as highly engaged in their child’s gameplay; talking with their children regularly or encouraging play in shared, supervised spaces. Several said they choose to trust their child rather than set top-down limits.

Our findings align with previous research on digital parenting. In one British study, parents said they felt some controls were valuable supplements to mediation, while other controls were poorly designed, introducing more problems than solutions.

The use of parental controls doesn’t necessarily translate to increased child safety. In fact, using parental controls can create a disconnect between parents and children on key safety issues.

Awareness of risks

Six children we interviewed were not aware their parents were using controls, and at least two children revealed they didn’t even know why a parent would use parental controls in the first place. In this context, parents’ efforts to protect their children had the unintended side effect of obscuring vital knowledge, leaving the children unaware of some of the key risks associated with playing online. Parental controls can remove opportunities to teach kids about safety if they aren’t part of the conversation.

We believe that the behind-the-scenes protections enabled by (some) parental controls can be detrimental to parent-child communication about online safety. What are the risks? How can children avoid the riskiest behaviour? What should they do when or if they’ve encountered danger?

Meanwhile, parents aren’t always familiar with the features and activities they are asked to restrict or allow. Very few parental controls contain information about how gameplay will be impacted by their settings. Many contain terms only someone familiar with the game would understand, while others are hard to navigate.

All of this can lead to misinterpretations and parent-child conflicts, making the tools even harder to use.

Power of communication

Open communication between parents and children on safety topics fosters trust, which increases the likelihood kids will turn to their parents for help when something dangerous happens.

It enables children to build resiliency, which in turn reduces the risk they’ll be harmed by negative online encounters.

Research also suggests that parent-child communication may be more effective at helping to avoid harm than embedded restrictions enabled by parental controls.

The importance of open communication is also emphasized in the FOSI report. In households where conversations about online safety happened regularly (six times or more a year), parents and children were both more likely to view parental controls as a useful and valuable tool for online safety.

This, the authors conclude, “supports the view of online safety as a collaborative effort as opposed to a priority imposed by parents on their children.”

On this point, we couldn’t agree more. Families would benefit from making parental controls and safety settings a family affair. Kids and parents have a lot to learn from each other about the digital world, and reviewing these systems together can provide a much-needed opening for crucial conversations about risk, safety and what kids find meaningful about digital play.

Rethinking safety tools

Let’s not pretend parental controls are a panacea for child safety.

Many parental controls contain serious design flaws and limitations. Very few comprehensively address the needs and concerns of either children or their parents.

Now that lawmakers are starting to make parental controls a mandatory part of new child safety legislation, we urgently need to start taking a closer and more critical look at what they can and can’t do.

Parental controls can be a useful tool when they are designed well, applied with transparency, and provide families with ample options so they can be tailored to not only fit with but foster household rules and open communication.

There’s a lot of work to be done before this is the standard. But also a growing impetus for game and other tech companies to make it happen.

Sara M. Grimes receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada,

Riley McNair 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. Parental controls on children’s tech devices are out of touch with child’s play – https://theconversation.com/parental-controls-on-childrens-tech-devices-are-out-of-touch-with-childs-play-257874