Category: The Conversation – Global Perspectives

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Julia Henning, PhD Candidate in Feline Behaviour, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

While often miscast as mysterious or hard to understand, cats are actually excellent communicators. In fact, in free-ranging cat colonies, physical fights are kept to a minimum through clever use of body posturing, scent exchange and vocalisations.

Cats have also adapted their communication for humans. For instance, adult cats don’t usually meow at each other. But when around people, cats meow a lot, suggesting they have adapted this vocalisation for communicating with humans.

And it’s not just the meow. Cats have a wide vocal repertoire for conveying different meanings, even for specific people. Bonded cats and humans often develop their own communication repertoires, similar to having a unique dialect.

Cats can understand human communication too. Studies show cats know their own names and the names of their companions, and can recognise human emotions, even changing their own behaviour in response.

Despite all this, humans still routinely misunderstand cats. Our new study, published in Frontiers in Ethology, shows just how little people understand the cues cats give. Try the quiz below to see how well you speak cat.

What we did

We asked 368 Australian participants to watch videos of human–cat play interactions. But not all the videos were “play” for the cat. Only half of the cats were playing, while the other half were actually showing signs they didn’t want to play, or were feeling stressed by the interaction.

After each video, participants were asked if they thought the interaction was overall positive or negative for the cat, based only on the cat’s behaviour. They were then asked how they would interact with the cat in the video they had just seen.

How well do you speak cat?

Watch the short videos below and decide: is the cat feeling positive or negative about the interaction? Remember to base your answers only on the cat’s behaviour.

What did our study find?

Results showed that participants struggled to recognise negative cues indicating discomfort or stress in cats.

For videos of cats who weren’t playing and were showing subtle negative cues (such as sudden tension in the body or avoiding touch), participants only recognised the negative cues about as well as chance (48.7%).

Even when participants watched videos of cats showing overt negative cues like hissing, biting or trying to escape, they still incorrectly categorised these as positive 25% of the time.

Recognising when a cat is stressed is only the first step. We also need to know how to respond to these cues.

Even when participants did successfully recognise negative cues, they often chose to engage with the cat in ways that would cause more stress and increase the risk of human injury, such as stroking, belly rubbing and playing with hands.

Stress is unhealthy

Stress can have serious consequences. Cats who experience regular or prolonged stress (including from unwanted interactions like those in the negative videos) are at higher risk of heath issues such as bladder inflamation.

They’re also more likely to develop behaviours people find problematic, such as increased aggression or urinating outside of the litter tray. In turn, these behaviours increase risk of the cat being euthanised or rehomed.

Cat stress is bad for humans, too. If a person doesn’t heed early warning signs, the cat may bite or scratch, depositing bacteria and microorganisms deep into the skin. Rapid infection follows 30%–50% of cat bites. If not treated promptly, it can lead to serious complications including sepsis, chronic health issues and even death. Cat bites and scratches can also transmit zoonotic diseases such as cat scratch disease.

How to play safely with cats

Watch for early warning signs a cat isn’t enjoying themselves and stop if you notice any. By the time cues are obvious, cats are already experiencing distress.

Early warnings include turning away, dodging or blocking attempts to touch, flinching, body tension, ears back or to the side, lip/nose licking and tail thrashing, slapping or tucking.

Touch

Avoid sensitive areas such as the belly, paws or the base of the tail. Cats prefer to be touched on the head and neck.

Avoid using hands to play. It teaches cats that hands are toys, and increases the risk of accidental injury. Instead, use toys that keep your face and hands away, such as a wand toy with a long handle.

Tail

Tail movements aren’t always a negative sign – they just mean the cat is emotionally stimulated and that could be from stress or excitement. Cats also use their tails for balance. So it’s best to consider the tail in combination with the whole body and the context.

Changes in tail movements can also give important clues to the cat’s mood. Generally, the bigger the movement, the more intense the feeling. So, if the movements start to get bigger or faster during play, or if a tail goes from relaxed to swishing when you touch, that might be a sign to back off.

Ears

Cats’ ears are like antennas that swivel and adjust to pinpoint sound, but they can also give us a clue to how they are feeling. If the ears move for a moment and then return to a relaxed position, that usually means they’re listening to the world around them. If the ears remain flattened and back, that’s a sign of distress.

Vocalisations

Trilling and chirruping both suggest a playful cat, while hissing, growling and yowling all indicate stress. Purring might seem positive but may indicate a cat is stressed and trying to self soothe.

Let them be

When early warnings don’t work, cats may show overt signs such as hissing, growling, trembling, hiding and, ultimately, biting or scratching.

If you notice warning signs, give the cat plenty of space. When stressed, cats don’t like being touched or having people too close. If the cat comes back and re-initiates contact, that’s a good sign they’re comfortable, but keep watch for warning signs returning.

If you pay attention to your cat’s behaviour and give them space when they need it, with a bit of practice you might just become fluent in cat.

Julia Henning 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. Do you speak cat? Take this quiz to find out – https://theconversation.com/do-you-speak-cat-take-this-quiz-to-find-out-268217

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Simon Black, Associate Professor of Labour Studies, Brock University

Zohran Mamdani, the 34-year-old New York State Assembly member and democratic socialist, was elected New York City’s mayor on Nov. 4, 2025, after pledging to make the city more affordable through policies that include freezing rents, providing free public buses and a network of city-owned grocery stores.

During his campaign, Mamdani’s promises clearly resonated with New Yorkers struggling with the high cost of living.

Of all of Mamdani’s campaign commitments, free high-quality child care for every New Yorker from 6 weeks to 5 years old – while boosting child care workers’ wages to match that of the city’s public school teachers – could be the most transformative.

The cost of child care in New York City is expensive. More than 80% of families with young children cannot afford the average annual cost of US$26,000 for center-based care. A recent study found that families with young children are twice as likely to leave the city as those without children. The study identified housing and child care costs as key drivers of migration out of the city.

New York’s child care problem mirrors a nationwide system that is seen by many experts as broken. U.S. families spend between 8.9% and 16% of their median income on full-day care for one child. And prices have been rising: Between 1990 and 2024, the cost of day care and preschool rose 263%, much faster than overall inflation.

Despite high prices, child care workers are poorly paid: In 2024, the median pay for child care workers, who are mostly women and often women of color, was $15.41 an hour, or $32,050 a year. That’s nearly at the bottom of all occupations when ranked by annual pay. Additionally, child care programs face high turnover, and it’s difficult for them to recruit and retain qualified staff. Program quality suffers as a result.

As a feminist scholar who has written extensively about child care, I believe Mamdani’s promise of free universal child care, with decent pay for child care staff, could transform the politics and the reality of child care in New York and beyond.

An example to the nation

During the Great Depression, the Works Projects Administration, a New Deal agency created to combat unemployment, established 14 emergency nursery schools in New York. Opened between 1933 and 1934, these schools were primarily intended to offer employment opportunities to unemployed teachers, but they also became a form of de facto child care for parents employed on various work-relief projects.

With the onset of World War II, rising numbers of women took up jobs in the city’s war industries.

In 1941, the lack of adequate child care prompted the administration of Mayor Fiorello La Guardia to fund a handful of already existing nursery schools, including the New Deal nurseries whose federal funding had dried up. New York became the only U.S. city to provide publicly subsidized child care services.

New York provided an example to the nation, and between 1943 and 1945, wartime child care centers were established in hundreds of cities under the federal government’s Lanham Act of 1941. It’s the closest the U.S. has come to establishing a universal child care system.

While most wartime child care centers were shuttered at war’s end, in New York a citywide grassroots mobilization of parents forced the city to keep its centers operating. It marked the first peacetime allocation of municipal tax dollars for child care programs.

Building blocks

In the 1960s, under the liberal administration of Mayor John Lindsay, public child care in New York City was expanded, and in 1967 child care workers organized a union, AFSCME Local 205 Day Care Employees.

After a bitter three-week strike in 1969 to protest low wages and poor working conditions, child care workers won a contract that included a wage scale comparable to that of elementary school teachers in the city’s public school system. The contract also included a training program that allowed them to upgrade their skills and get credit for it.

When President Richard Nixon vetoed federal child care legislation in 1971 that would have provided federal funding for child care programs across the nation, New York’s child care movement took to the streets to demand universal child care, even if the federal government refused to fund it. Groups like the Day Care Forum and the Committee for Community Controlled Child Care staged demonstrations on the city’s Triborough Bridge – since renamed the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge – and set up a one-day “model day care center” on the lawn of City Hall.

Public child care services survived the city’s fiscal crisis of 1975, largely due to the activism of working-class communities who fought against day care closures.

Though far from universal, the child care system in New York today boasts the largest publicly supported system in the country, and can serve as the building blocks for Mamdani’s plan.

Transformative beyond New York

Mamdani’s campaign estimated that his universal child care plan would cost $6 billion annually. To fund his policies, Mamdani has proposed an increase of the state’s corporate tax rate and raising the city’s income tax by 2 percentage points on New Yorkers earning more than $1 million a year. While Mamdani will need the assistance of Gov. Kathy Hochul to raise taxes, Hochul supports universal child care, even if she disagrees on how to pay for it.

Universal child care has positive economic impacts, including more women in the workforce and more money in the pockets of parents to spend in the economy. Research from the liberal Center for American Progress concluded that the availability of affordable high-quality child care would lead 51% of stay-at-home parents to find work, and about a third of employed parents to work more hours.

In New York, the disposable income of families could increase by up to $1.9 billion due to the avoidance of child care costs.

One year from the U.S. midterms, Americans remain worried about the cost of basic needs. And majorities of both Democrat and Republican voters say the cost of child care is a major problem, and they want government to prioritize helping families pay for it.

If he can find the money to pay for it, with universal child care, Mamdani could blaze a trail that other policymakers follow.

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

– ref. Zohran Mamdani’s transformative child care plan builds on a history of NYC social innovations – https://theconversation.com/zohran-mamdanis-transformative-child-care-plan-builds-on-a-history-of-nyc-social-innovations-268462

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ken Chitwood, Affiliate Researcher, Religion and Civic Culture Center, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences; Bayreuth University

Bad Bunny, born Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio, is more than a global music phenomenon; he’s a bona fide symbol of Puerto Rico.

The church choir boy turned “King of Latin Trap” has songs, style and swagger that reflect the island’s mix of pride, pain and creative resilience. His music mixes reggaetón beats with the sounds of Puerto Rican history and everyday life, where devotion and defiance often live side by side.

Bad Bunny has been called one of Puerto Rico’s “loudest and proudest voices.” Songs like “El Apagón” – “The Blackout” – celebrate joy and protest together, honoring everyday acts of resistance to colonial rule and injustice in Puerto Rican life. Others, like “NUEVAYoL,” celebrate the sounds and vibrancy of its diaspora – especially in New York City. Some songs, like “RLNDT,” mention spiritual searching – featuring allusions to his own Catholic upbringing, sacred and secular divides, New Age astrology and Spiritism.

As a scholar of religion who recently wrote a book about Puerto Rican Muslims, I find echoes of that same strength and artistry in their stories. Although marginalized among Muslims, Puerto Ricans and other U.S. citizens, they find fresh ways to express their cultural heritage and practice their faith, creating new communities and connections along the way. Similar to Bad Bunny’s music, Puerto Rican Muslims’ lives challenge how we think about race, religion and belonging in the Americas.

Stories of struggle

There are no exact numbers, but before recent crises, Puerto Rico – an archipelago of 3.2. million people – had about 3,500 to 5,000 Muslims, many of them Palestinian. Economic hardship, natural disasters such as hurricanes Irma and Maria, and government neglect have since forced many to leave, however.

As of 2017, there were also an estimated 11,000 to 15,400 Puerto Rican Muslims among the nearly 6 million Puerto Ricans and nearly 4 million Muslims in the United States.

Like any Puerto Rican, these Muslims know the struggles of colonialism’s ongoing impact, from blackouts and economic inequality to racism. For example, in the viral 23-minute video for “El Apagón,” journalist Bianca Graulau outlines how tax incentives for external investors are displacing locals – a theme reinforced in Bad Bunny’s later song, “Lo Que Le Pasó a Hawaii.”

Converts to Islam also face unique challenges – and not just Islamophobia. Many are told they are “not real Puerto Ricans” because of their newfound faith. Some are treated as foreigners in their own families and friend groups, often asked whether they are abandoning their culture to “become Arab.”

To be a Puerto Rican Muslim, then, is to negotiate being and belonging at numerous intersections of diversity and difference.

Still, some connect their Muslim identity to moments in Puerto Rican history. In interviews, they told me how they identify with Muslims who came with Spanish conquistadors during colonial times. Others draw inspiration from enslaved Africans brought to the Caribbean. Many of them were Muslim and resisted their condition in ways large and small: fleeing to the forest to pray, for example, or living as “maroons” – people who escaped and formed their own communities.

Many ways to be Puerto Rican

Puerto Rican culture cannot be neatly mapped onto a single tradition. The archipelago’s religion, music and art blend together influences from Indigenous Taíno, African, Spanish and American cultures. Religious processions pass by cars blasting reggaetón. Shrines to Our Lady of Divine Providence stand beside U.S. chain restaurants and murals demanding independence.

Bad Bunny embodies this fusion. He is rebellious yet rooted, irreverent yet deeply Puerto Rican. His music blends contemporary sounds from reggaetón and Latin trap with traditional “bomba y plena.” It all adds up to something distinctly “Boricua,” a term for Puerto Ricans drawn from the Indigenous Taíno name for the island, “Borikén.”

Puerto Rican Muslims wrestle with what it means to be authentically Boricua, though. In particular, their lives reveal how religion is both a boundary and a bridge: defining belonging while creating new ways to imagine it.

Since Spanish colonization in the 1500s, most Puerto Ricans have been Roman Catholic. But over the past two centuries, many other Christian groups have arrived, including Seventh-day Adventists, Lutherans and Pentecostals. Today, more than half of Puerto Ricans identify as Catholic and about one-third as Protestant.

Alongside these traditions, Afro-Caribbean traditions such as Santería, Espiritismo and Santerismo – a mix of the two – remain active. There are also small communities of Jews, Rastafari and Muslims.

Even with this diversity, converts to Islam are sometimes accused of betraying their culture. One young man told me that when he became Muslim, his mother said he had not only betrayed Christ but also “our culture.”

Yet Puerto Rican Muslims point to Arabic influences in Spanish words. They celebrate traces of Islamic design in colonial and revival architecture that reflects Muslims’ multicentury presence in Spain, from the 700s until the fall of the last Muslim kingdom in Granada in 1492. They also cook up halal versions of classic Puerto Rican dishes.

Like Bad Bunny, these converts remix what it means to be Puerto Rican, showing how Puerto Rico’s sense of identity – or “puertorriqueñidad” – is not exclusively Christian, but complex and constantly evolving.

In solidarity

Many Puerto Rican converts frame their faith as a counternarrative, rejecting the Christianity imposed by Spanish colonizers. They also resist Islamophobia, racism and foreign domination, with some converts drawn to the religion as a way to oppose these forces. Similar to Bad Bunny’s music, which often critiques colonialism and social constraints, they push back against systems that try to define who they can be.

To that end, Puerto Rican Muslims also build connections with other groups facing injustice. In reggaetón terms, they form their own “corillos” – groups of friends – united by shared struggles.

They demonstrate on behalf of Palestinians, seeing them as another colonized people without a nation. The first Latino Muslim organization, Alianza Islámica – founded by Puerto Rican converts in 1987 – emerged out of the era’s push for minorities’ rights around the New York City metro area. And after the 2016 Pulse Nightclub shooting, where about half of the 49 victims killed were Puerto Rican, and the mosque attended by the shooter was intentionally set on fire, Boricua Muslims joined with LGBTQ+, Muslim and Latino communities to grieve and demand justice.

In these ways, Puerto Rican Muslims remind me that notions of community, identity or justice do not stand on their own. For many people, they are linked – parts of the same fight for dignity and freedom.

That is why, when I listen to songs like “NUEVAYoL” or “El Apagón,” I think of the Puerto Rican Muslims I know in places such as Puerto Rico, Florida, New Jersey, Texas and New York. Their stories, like Bad Bunny’s music, show how being Puerto Rican today means constantly negotiating who you are and where you belong. And that religion, like music, can carry the sound of struggle – but also the hope of one day overcoming the injustices and inequalities of everyday life.

Ken Chitwood received funding from the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, the Muslim Philanthropy Initiative, and the Spalding Trust to conduct research related to this article.

– ref. Bad Bunny and Puerto Rican Muslims: How both remix what it means to be Boricua – https://theconversation.com/bad-bunny-and-puerto-rican-muslims-how-both-remix-what-it-means-to-be-boricua-267164

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, Professor of International Law, La Trobe University

The Middle East has long been riddled by instability. This makes getting a sense of the broader, long-term trends in the aftermath of the Gaza war particularly challenging.

The significance of Trump’s 20-point peace deal that has (hopefully) brought an end to the Gaza war cannot be overstated.

However, this deal – and what comes next – will not change the Middle East. Rather, the wars of the past two years merely consolidated trends that were already under way. They didn’t serve as a radical break from the past.

The impact of October 7 on the region

Before October 2023, Israel’s place in the region seemed to be improving, despite the formidable “axis of resistance” Iran and its allies had built to counter it.

On top of its earlier peace agreements with Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994, Israel had normalised relations with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan under the Abraham Accords. It looked set to normalise relations with Saudi Arabia, too.

However, once Iran and Saudi Arabia reached a detente in their long-simmering rivalry in March 2023, the urgency of closer ties with Israel faded.

Then came October 7. One of Hamas’ apparent aims in launching the attack was to refocus the region’s attention on Palestinian liberation.

At the beginning, it looked like Hamas had partially succeeded. Among Arab states, only the UAE and Bahrain condemned the attack.

The remainder of the region either chose to join the fight against Israel (Iran, the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon) or maintain a duplicitous dance in between – not making the US angry by speaking out too forcefully against Israel, while placating (or repressing) their angry pro-Palestinian citizens at home.

Two years later, the “resistance” camp led by Iran and its proxies has been significantly weakened – an undeniable victory for Israel.

And while Arab popular opinion still largely supports armed Palestinian resistance to Israel, regional leaders do not. In a significant step in August, the Arab League officially condemned Hamas’ October 7 attacks and called for its disarmament.

Why Arab states are now backing Trump’s plan

Historically, even when the Palestinians have seemed at their weakest, they have had an outsize effect on the stability and legitimacy of Arab regimes in the Middle East.

A case in point is the wave of coups in the region that followed the Nakba in 1948, when around 750,000 Palestinians were either expelled or forced to flee during the war that created the state of Israel.

Today’s peace deal is no different. Israel’s neighbours are backing Trump’s 20-point plan because they have learned from history – rather than out of any sense of moral obligation.

For these states, the plan is not perfect. In fact, it makes a mockery of more robust peace proposals from the past, such as the 2002 Saudi-led Arab Peace Initiative to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Though Trump’s plan recognises the continued Palestinian presence in Gaza, it denies them political agency or accountability for alleged Israeli crimes. The plan only pays lip-service to the idea of a two-state solution. And given the facts on the ground and the prevailing political sensibilities in the US and Israel, Palestinian statehood seems highly unlikely.

Yet, regional states are aware that ongoing conflict is in no one’s interests, save for the Israeli far right.

Trump’s plan therefore represents a fig leaf for a region desperate to be seen to be ameliorating Palestinian suffering, while ensuring more robust US support. Such a concern became existential for the Gulf countries in the wake of Israel’s attacks on Hamas’ leadership in Qatar in September.

What comes next?

If the ceasefire holds and the peace plan proceeds, Trump sees an expanded Abraham Accords in the future, with other states lining up to normalise diplomatic relations with Israel (including possibly Saudi Arabia).

But other deals may get under way first. Israel and the United States are moving ahead with a series of initiatives. These include the India-Middle-East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) (a rail-sea link to transport goods between India, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Europe), and the Abraham shield plan (a proposed security and infrastructure partnership between the Gulf countries, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Israel).

Currently, it is unclear which land routes will be preferred for linking India and China with Europe. The Gulf states are prioritising Israel, while Turkey is positioning itself as an alternative northern route that extends China’s Belt and Road rail and road projects through Central Asia.

As the US has strengthened its military ties with Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, this will probably tilt the balance in favour of Israel and the Gulf countries, in spite of Turkey’s regional importance and NATO membership.

Given the huge public and private sums and geostrategic stakes involved, this is really where the region’s focus lies now.

So, even if the ceasefire falters and popular anger around the region intensifies, most Arab leaders will continue to expand and embrace Israeli cooperation.

Michelle Burgis-Kasthala has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. After 2 years of devastating war, will Arab countries now turn their backs on Israel? – https://theconversation.com/after-2-years-of-devastating-war-will-arab-countries-now-turn-their-backs-on-israel-267869

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Bruce Wolpe, Non-resident Senior Fellow, United States Study Centre, University of Sydney

One year and a day after Donald Trump won a second term as president – and on the 35th day of the US government shutdown, which has tied a record for the longest in history – the Democrats swept to victory in key races across the county.

Democratic candidates won the governorships in the states of Virginia and New Jersey, while Zohran Mamdani became New York City’s next mayor.

The Democrats may have just become the winners of the fight to reopen the government, too.

Trump’s ratings dropping sharply

Sixteen years ago, then-President Barack Obama was staggered by Republicans winning the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey in the 2009 elections.

The message was indelible: voters wanted to put a check on Obama and his wide-ranging agenda, from health care to global warming. Many Americans wanted him to cool his jets, including on what would become his signature achievement, Obamacare.

The following year, in the 2010 midterm elections, the Democrats lost more than 60 seats and their majority in the House. For the next six years, Republicans had a veto over whatever bills Obama wanted Congress to enact.

With Democrats now winning the governorships in those two states, Trump and his Republican allies in Congress have just been sent the same message: you need to be checked, too.

Going into Tuesday’s elections, Trump’s approval rating in one major poll was just above 40%, and his disapproval rating just under 60% – the highest it’s been since the January 6 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Independent voters, who swung Trump’s way in last year’s election, are now disapproving of his performance by a 69–30% margin.

Trump’s leadership of what he calls the “hottest country in the world” is falling short in voters’ eyes on a number of key issues: inflation, management of the economy, tariffs, crime, immigration, Ukraine and Gaza.

What’s at the heart of the continued stalemate?

The US government has also been shuttered since October 1. Government agencies have been closed to the public, and hundreds of thousands of government employees are going without paychecks, while thousands of others have been laid off.

Millions of Americans have been affected by flight delays or cancellations due to air traffic controller staffing issues. And food stamps to 42 million Americans have been suspended, with the Trump administration only relenting to provide partial payments in response to a court order.

Closing the government was not solely the doing of Trump and the Republicans in Congress. After nearly a year of laying prostrate and appearing pathetically ineffective in responding to Trump and his agenda, the Democrats finally got off the mat to fight back.

Of all the issues with Trump’s so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” – which contained huge tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, huge spending cuts for Medicaid, huge increases in spending to control immigration, more funding for fossil fuels and an increase in the debt ceiling – Democrats seized on one glaring omission from the legislation.

At the end of this year, subsidies are due to expire that more than 24 million Americans rely on to purchase health insurance under Obamacare. As a result, millions are projected to lose their health care coverage.

That is the cross Democrats chose to die on. They’ve told the Trump administration: you want to keep the government open? Keep the insurance subsidies flowing. Fix it now.

Republicans in Congress have had no interest in caving to Democratic demands. They’ve argued Democrats must agree to reopen the government before discussing the subsidies. Their calculation: voters will turn on the Democrats for the turmoil caused by the shutdown.

Trump wanted nothing to do with any such negotiations either. Two days before the elections, he said he “won’t be extorted”.

But a recent poll shows 52% of Americans blame Trump and the Republicans for the shutdown, compared to 42% who blame Democrats.

The wins in Virginia and New Jersey drove this message home. Yes, the Democrats triggered the current shutdown. But the president owns the economy. For better or worse, Trump will own the economy going into next year’s midterm elections, too.

What happens next?

How can the Democrats get out of the shutdown box with a win? With the leverage they just gained in the elections. Republican stonewalling after these election defeats will hurt them even more.

There are two routes forward.

First, Democrats could reach an agreement with the Republicans on a fix to the health insurance issue, with a vote in Congress by Christmas to get the subsidies restored. A bipartisan compromise appears now to be in the works.

Second, if such an agreement cannot be reached, the Democrats can introduce a bill to restore the subsidies on their own, with an up-or-down vote in both the House and Senate. If this was voted down, the Democrats would then have a winning issue to take to the midterm elections next November. The voters would know who to blame – and who to reward.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has prevented the House from meeting for more than six weeks, but it has to come back in session to vote to reopen the government at some point.

Trump is also insisting the Senate change its rules to allow a simple majority to be able to reopen the government – without any compromises on health insurance subsidies. But this is not a viable political option after these election results.

Two other Democrats take centre stage

There were two other big Democratic winners on Tuesday. California voters approved a redistricting plan intended to partially offset Republicans’ gerrymandering of congressional electorates across the country for the midterm elections.

It was a high-risk strategy by California Governor Gavin Newsom, and it paid off handsomely: Newsom is now considered the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028.

And Mamdani, a Muslim socialist, was elected the Democratic mayor of New York City. Trump will no doubt continue to rubbish him as a communist radical extremist and follow through on his threats to cut federal funding for the largest city in the US.

Mamdani’s victory also places him on the national stage, but not centre stage. The Sinatra doctrine from his hit song New York, New York — “If I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere” — does not quite apply in this situation.

To take back Congress next year and the White House in 2028, the Democrats will need all kinds of flowers to bloom — not just Mamdani’s bouquet. In 2028, the party is going to have to shop in a bigger greenhouse.

Bruce Wolpe has served on the staffs of Democrats in Congress and former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

– ref. Democratic election wins send Trump – and Republicans – a message: Americans blame them for government shutdown – https://theconversation.com/democratic-election-wins-send-trump-and-republicans-a-message-americans-blame-them-for-government-shutdown-269094

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Shaoyu Yuan, Adjunct Professor, New York University; Rutgers University

Every few years since 1953, the Chinese government has unveiled a new master strategy for its economy: the all-important five-year plan.

For the most part, these blueprints have been geared at spurring growth and unity as the nation transformed from a rural, agrarian economy to an urbanized, developed powerhouse.

The task that faced China’s leaders as they met in early October 2025 to map out their 15th such plan was, however, complicated by two main factors: sluggish domestic growth and intensifying geopolitical rivalry.

Their solution? More of the same. In pledging to deliver “high-quality development” through technological self-reliance, industrial modernization and expanded domestic demand, Beijing is doubling down on a state-led model that has powered its rise in recent years. President Xi Jinping and others who ironed out the 2026-2030 plan are betting that innovation-driven industrial growth might secure China’s future, even as questions loom about underpowered consumer spending and mounting economic risks.

As an expert on China’s political economy, I view China’s new five-year plan as being as much about power as it is about economics. Indeed, it is primarily a blueprint for navigating a new era of competition. As such, it risks failing to address the widening gap between surging industrial capacity and tepid domestic demand.

High-tech dreams

At the heart of the new plan are recommendations that put advanced manufacturing and tech innovation front and center. In practice, this means upgrading old-line factories, automating and “greening” heavy industry and fostering “emerging and future industries” such as aerospace, renewable energy and quantum computing.

By moving the economy up the value chain, Beijing hopes to escape the middle-income trap and cement its status as a self-reliant tech superpower.

To insulate China from export controls put in place by other countries to slow China’s ascent, Beijing is doubling down on efforts to “indigenize” critical technologies by pumping money into domestic companies while reducing dependence on foreign suppliers.

This quest for self-reliance is not just about economics but explicitly tied to national security.

Under Xi, China has aggressively pursued what the Chinese Communist Party calls “military-civil fusion” – that is, the integration of civilian innovation with military needs.

The new five-year plan is poised to institutionalize this fusion as the primary mechanism for defense modernization, ensuring that any breakthroughs in civilian artificial intelligence or supercomputing automatically benefit the People’s Liberation Army.

Reshaping global trade

China’s state-led push in high-tech industries is already yielding dividends that the new five-year plan seeks to extend. In the past decade, China has surged to global leadership in green technologies such as solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles thanks to hefty government support. Now, Beijing intends to replicate that success in semiconductors, advanced machinery, biotechnology and quantum computing.

Such ambition, if realized, could reshape global supply chains and standards.

But it also raises the stakes in China’s economic rivalry with advanced economies. Chinese prowess in building entire supply chains has spurred the United States and Europe to talk of reindustrialization to avoid any overreliance on Beijing.

By pledging to build “a modern industrial system with advanced manufacturing as the backbone” and to accelerate “high-level scientific and technological self-reliance,” the new plan telegraphs that China will not back down from its bid for tech dominance.

An elusive rebalancing

What the plan gives comparatively modest attention, however, is the lack of strong domestic demand.

Boosting consumer spending and livelihoods gets little more than lip service in the communiqué that followed the plenum at which the five-year plan was mapped out.

Chinese leaders did promise efforts to “vigorously boost consumption” and build a “strong domestic market,” alongside improvements to education, health care and social security. But these goals were listed only after the calls for industrial upgrading and tech self-sufficiency – suggesting old priorities still prevail.

And this will disappoint economists who have long urged Beijing to shift from an overt, export-led model and toward a growth model driven more by household consumption.

Household consumption still accounts for only about 40% of gross domestic product, far below advanced-economy norms. The reality is that Chinese households are still reeling from a series of recent economic blows: the COVID-19 lockdowns that shattered consumer confidence, a property market collapse that wiped out trillions in wealth, and rising youth unemployment that hit a record high before officials halted the publication of that data.

With local governments mired in debt and facing fiscal strain, there is skepticism that bold social spending or pro-consumption reforms will materialize anytime soon.

With Beijing reinforcing manufacturing even as domestic demand stays weak, the likelihood is extra output will be pushed abroad – especially when it comes to EVs, batteries and solar technologies – rather than be absorbed at home.

The new plan is cognizant of the need to maintain a strong manufacturing base, particularly among beleaguered industrial farms and other older industries struggling to stay afloat. As such, this approach may prevent painful downsizing in the short run, but it delays the rebalancing toward services and consumption that many economists argue China needs.

Ripple effects

Beijing has traditionally portrayed its five-year plans as a boon not only for China but for the world. The official narrative, echoed by state media, emphasizes that a stable, growing China remains an “engine” of global growth and a “stabilizer” amid worldwide uncertainty.

Notably, the new plan calls for “high-level opening-up,” aligning with international trade rules, expanding free-trade zones and encouraging inbound investment – even as it pursues self-reliance.

Yet China’s drive to climb the technological ladder and support its industries will likely intensify competition in global markets – potentially at the expense of other countries’ manufacturers. In recent years, China’s exports have surged to record levels. This flood of cheap Chinese goods has squeezed manufacturers among trading partners from Mexico to Europe, which have begun contemplating protective measures. If Beijing now doubles down on subsidizing both cutting-edge and traditional industries, the result could be an even greater glut of Chinese products globally, exacerbating trade frictions.

In other words, the world may feel more of China’s industrial might but not enough of its buying power – a combination that could strain international economic relations.

A high-stakes bet on the future

With China’s 15th five-year plan, Xi Jinping is making a strategic bet on his long-term vision. There is no doubt that the plan is ambitious and comprehensive. And if successful, it could guide China to technological heights and bolster its claim to great-power status.

But the plan also reveals Beijing’s reluctance to depart from a formula that has yielded growth at the cost of imbalances that have hurt many households across the vast country.

Rather than fundamentally shift course, China is trying to have it all ways: pursuing self-reliance and global integration, professing openness while fortifying itself, and promising prosperity for the people while pouring resources into industry and defense.

But Chinese citizens, whose welfare is ostensibly the plan’s focus, will ultimately judge its success by whether their incomes rise and lives improve by 2030. And that bet faces long odds.

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

– ref. China’s new 5-year plan: A high-stakes bet on self-reliance that won’t fix an unbalanced economy – https://theconversation.com/chinas-new-5-year-plan-a-high-stakes-bet-on-self-reliance-that-wont-fix-an-unbalanced-economy-268699

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Steve Lorteau, Long-Term Appointment Law Professor, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

Interactions between different users on roads are often a source of frustration, the most prominent being those between motorists and cyclists.

For example, many motorists are frustrated when they see bicycles cross an intersection without coming to a complete stop, which drivers are required to do.

Many motorists consider this behaviour a sign of cyclists’ lack of discipline or even a double standard. In fact, cyclists don’t seem to run any real risk just slowing down at stop signs instead of making a complete stop.

By comparison, motorists risk a hefty fine for dangerous driving if they run a stop sign.

So should cyclists be required to follow the same traffic rules as motorists, or should we recognize that these rules do not always reflect the reality of cycling in a city?

As a professor of law at the University of Ottawa who specializes in urban law issues, I have studied various regulatory approaches that have been adopted around the world, each with different advantages and disadvantages.

---

This article is part of La Conversation’s series Our Cities: From yesterday to tomorrow. Urban life is going through many transformations, each with cultural, economic, social implications. To shed light on these diverse issues, La Conversation is inviting researchers to discuss the current state of our cities.

---

Strict equality between cyclists and drivers

In Québec, as in many other jurisdictions, traffic laws apply to all users, whether they are motorists or cyclists.

For example, all users must come to a complete stop at stop signs and red lights. If cyclists break these rules, they have the “same rights and duties as a driver of a vehicle,” in the words of the Supreme Court of Canada.

In other words, regardless of the differences between a car and a bicycle, the law treats them equally. Of course, this equality often remains theoretical, as the application of the rules can vary depending on context and behaviour.

---

À lire aussi :
À Montréal, même en doublant les pistes cyclables, les voitures conserveraient 90 % de la chaussée

---

Deceptive equality

The uniform application of traffic rules may seem fair, but in reality, it can create a false sense of equality.

On the one hand, the risks associated with different modes of transport are incommensurate. A car that runs a red light can cause serious or even fatal injuries. A cyclist, on the other hand, is unlikely to cause the same degree of damage.

Furthermore, the efficiency of cycling depends on maintaining speed. Having to stop completely over and over discourages people from cycling, despite its many benefits for health, the environment and traffic flow.

Treating two such different modes of transport the same way, therefore, amounts to implicitly favouring cars, something akin to imposing the same speed limit on pedestrians and trucks.

The Idaho stop rule

Rather than treating bicycles and cars as equals, some jurisdictions have opted for a different approach. The state of Idaho is one good example.

Since 1982, cyclists in Idaho have been able to treat a stop sign as a yield sign and a red light as a stop sign. Several American states (such as Arkansas, Colorado, and Oregon) and countries, such as France and Belgium, have adopted similar regulations.

In Canada and Québec, discussions are underway to adopt such regulations.

---

À lire aussi :
Moins de cyclistes… ou répartis autrement ? Le Réseau Express Vélo (REV) à l’épreuve des données

---

It’s important to note that the goal of the Idaho stop rule is not to legalize chaos on the roads. Cyclists must still yield to cars ahead of them at stop signs, as well as to pedestrians at all times, and may only enter the intersection when it is clear.

The Idaho stop has three main advantages.

First, the rule recognizes that the dynamics of cycling are fundamentally different than those of driving, and therefore cannot be treated equally.

Second, the Idaho stop rule takes the burden of issuing fines off the courts and police.

Third, the efficiency of cycling depends on maintaining momentum. Coming to a complete stop over and over again discourages cycling, despite its many benefits for health, the environment and traffic flow.

The effects of the reform

Faced with these two very different approaches for bicycles, one may wonder which is the most appropriate.

Several empirical studies show that adopting the Idaho stop rule does not lead to an increase in road collisions.

Some studies even suggest a modest decrease in collisions with the Idaho stop regulation. This is because cyclists clear intersections more quickly, reducing their exposure to cars. In addition, motorists become more attentive to cyclists’ movements.

In fact, the majority of road users, both motorists and cyclists, often do not strictly obey stop signs. According to a study conducted by the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ), only 35 per cent of motorists stop correctly. Also according to the SAAQ, only 27 per cent of cyclists report coming to a complete stop at mandatory stop signs.

In short, adopting the Idaho stop rule would not create chaos, but would regulate an already common practice without compromising public safety, contrary to some concerns. Cyclists who rarely come to a complete stop when there is no traffic generally slow down before crossing because they are aware of their vulnerability.

A cultural shift

Furthermore, the question of introducing the Idaho stop rule in Québec invites broader reflection.

For decades, our laws and road infrastructure have been designed primarily for cars. Many motorists still consider cyclists to be dangerous and engage in reckless behaviour.

---

À lire aussi :
À Montréal, même en doublant les pistes cyclables, les voitures conserveraient 90 % de la chaussée

---

However, it’s important to remember that cars are the main structural hazard on our roads and that cyclists are in fact vulnerable. This structural danger has increased with the growth of sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and pick-up trucks, which increases the risks for pedestrians and cyclists.

Adopting the Idaho stop rule would not give cyclists a free pass, but it would recognize their realities and legitimize cycling as a mode of transport, with traffic regulations adapted to its risks and benefits. This modest but symbolic reform could be part of a broader set of changes that would offer citizens true freedom and safety when travelling.

Steve Lorteau has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canadian Bar Association, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

– ref. Cyclists may be right to run stop signs and red lights. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/cyclists-may-be-right-to-run-stop-signs-and-red-lights-heres-why-268724

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Pintu Kumar Mahla, Research Associate at the Water Resources Research Center, University of Arizona

When Bangladesh became the first country in South Asia to join the U.N.’s Water Convention earlier this year, it was presented as a win-win.

Signing up to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes would help Bangladesh safeguard and manage waterways that represent a “lifeline to peace and prosperity,” according to the United Nations. At the same time, it was hoped that the South Asian nation’s addition might encourage better cross-border cooperation in a region where shared rivers are often fought over.

As a scholar who works on issues of water security and grew up in South Asia, I understand the drivers behind Bangladesh’s decision to join the convention – recent hydro-political events have raised water security risks for the country of around 174 million.

But contrary to the intention of the convention, I believe Bangladesh joining could actually heighten tensions in South Asia, especially with India.

The need for water security

Bangladesh’s hydro challenges are multifaceted. Half of Bangladeshis live in areas that suffer severe drought. Around 60% of the population is vulnerable to high flood risks. And on average, floods inundate 20% to 25% of the country’s land each year. Moreover, more than 65 million residents still lack access to safe and properly managed sanitation facilities. These overlapping vulnerabilities show why water governance is such a key issue for security, diplomacy and development.

Additionally, the country’s rising population along with the effects of climate change add to this domestic water stress. At least 81 of the 1,415 rivers that flow through Bangladesh have either perished or are on the brink of extinction, according to a recent report.

At the same time, Bangladesh relies almost exclusively on rivers that cross borders. With India and China, it shares one of the world’s most complicated transboundary water systems: the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna Basin.

Joining the UN Water Convention

A number of recent developments underscore the reasons Bangladesh sought greater legal and international protection.

In July 2025, China announced what is expected to be the world’s largest hydropower dam, the Motuo Hydropower Station in the Tibet Autonomous Region in southwestern China.

The Chinese government is promoting the dam as a clean energy project that will help the area’s economy grow, even though it will cost 1.2 trillion yuan (about US$167 billion) to build.

But countries close by are worried about how the dam will affect the region’s environment and politics.

Both Bangladesh and India have complained that the project could make the region less stable. The Yarlung Tsangpo River on which the dam is built runs into India’s Arunachal Pradesh state, which has long been a flashpoint in China-India relations. China claims the region as its own and calls it Zangnan.

Because of where it is situated, the dam could allow China to control or limit the flow of water into India. Similarly, Bangladesh, a downstream country, is concerned that Chinese upstream intervention could hurt its agriculture and make it harder to get water.

Already, the government of Bangladesh has limited control over the country’s water supply because only about 7% of the watershed area of the Brahmaputra, Meghna and Ganges – the three main rivers that flow into the country – are within Bangladesh. Moreover, the amount of water that ultimately reaches Bangladesh is significantly reduced because dam activities by China and India have limited the flow.

Climate change has made the situation worse by changing the way water flows across the Himalayas and the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin. For instance, the Bangladesh delta, one of the most fertile and densely populated areas in the world, is already experiencing problems, including salinity intrusion, rising sea levels and the loss of arable land.

In 2019, the Bangladesh High Court ruled that the country’s rivers had the same status as a “legal person” in a bid to award them further protection. This was then followed by a decision by Bangladesh to join the U.N. Water Convention.

Created in 1996, the convention seeks to promote cooperation and sustainable management of shared water resources. At first, it was intended only for European and Central Asian countries. But in 2016, it became available to all U.N. member countries.

Bangladesh had initially delayed signing due to a mix of diplomatic, regional and institutional reasons and out of a concern over how it would affect relations with its powerful neighbor, India.

Implications for India

India has traditionally preferred bilateral agreements to resolve cross-border water issues, such as the Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan and the 1996 Ganges water-sharing treaty with Bangladesh.

However, India’s bilateral strategy is fraying. The Indus Waters Treaty has been temporarily suspended following fighting between Pakistan and India.

Similarly, New Delhi’s water cooperation with Bangladesh is being tested. The sharing of water from the Teesta, a major tributary of the Brahmaputra, has long been a source of conflict between the two countries, with Bangladesh pushing for what it sees as a fairer distribution.

Bangladesh has also opposed Indian dams, such as the Tipaimukh on the Barak, over concerns about how they will affect the environment and people’s lives. For similar reasons, Bangladesh has objected to India’s plans to connect 30 rivers as part of a massive irrigation project.

The ripple effect

While India’s government has issued no official comment on Bangladesh’s joining the U.N. Water Convention, there are fears in New Delhi that it could undermine India’s negotiating power in future water disputes and when the Ganges River Treaty is due for renewal in 2026.

The original 1996 agreement sets out that India and Bangladesh would each get a guaranteed share of 35,000 cubic feet per second of water. The concern in New Delhi is that Bangladesh may ask for more water than originally specified and that being part of the U.N. Water Convention gives the Bangladesh government a more powerful negotiation platform. As such, Bangladesh’s proposition in September 2025 to create a new institutional framework to manage water-sharing agreements with India for 14 transboundary rivers was viewed with suspicion in India.

Renewing the Ganges River Treaty with a framework that gives Bangladesh more water may put more stress on eastern India, an area already experiencing water scarcity, and test India’s water storage capacity, especially during dry seasons.

Shifting political currents

A further concern for India is that Bangladesh signing onto the U.N. Waters Treaty may set a precedent for other countries in the region, such as Nepal and Bhutan.

Meanwhile, Bangladesh has mulled the idea of forming a trilateral hydro-cooperation with China and Pakistan – two of India’s biggest rivals. A day before signing the U.N. convention, Bangladesh joined China and Pakistan in announcing a ‘trilateral cooperation’ on the economy, climate and social development.

For Bangladesh, the potential catastrophe of not tackling cascading environmental challenges justifies the risk of alienating its far more powerful neighbor. But where does this leave India? Ultimately, New Delhi must make a strategic choice: Either stick with bilateralism or adopt new multilateral norms to safeguard its water security and regional power.

Pintu Kumar Mahla is affiliated with the Water Resources Research Center, the University of Arizona.

He is also a member of the International Association of Water Law (AIDA).

Pintu Kumar Mahla has not received funding related to this article. The perspectives presented in this article reflect the personal positions of the author alone.

– ref. Bangladesh’s accession to the UN Water Convention has a ripple effect that could cause problems with India – https://theconversation.com/bangladeshs-accession-to-the-un-water-convention-has-a-ripple-effect-that-could-cause-problems-with-india-264969

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Roger S. Seymour, Professor Emeritus of Physiology, University of Adelaide

If you’ve ever wondered why the giraffe has such a long neck, the answer seems clear: it lets them reach succulent leaves atop tall acacia trees in Africa.

Only giraffes have direct access to those leaves, while smaller mammals must compete with one another near the ground. This exclusive food source appears to allow the giraffe to breed throughout the year and to survive droughts better than shorter species.

But the long neck comes at a high cost. The giraffe’s heart must produce enough pressure to pump its blood a couple of metres up to its head. The blood pressure of an adult giraffe is typically over 200mm Hg – more than twice that of most mammals.

As a result, the heart of a resting giraffe uses more energy than the entire body of a resting human, and indeed more energy than the heart of any other mammal of comparable size. However, as we show in a new study published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, the giraffe’s heart has some unrecognised helpers in its battle against gravity: the animal’s long, long legs.

Meet the ‘elaffe’

In our new study, we quantified the energy cost of pumping blood for a typical adult giraffe and compared it to what it would be in an imaginary animal with short legs but a longer neck to reach the same treetop height.

This beast was a Frankenstein-style combination of the body of a common African eland and the neck of a giraffe. We called it an “elaffe”.

We found the animal would spend a whopping 21% of its total energy budget on powering its heart, compared with 16% in the giraffe and 6.7% in humans.

By raising its heart closer to its head by means of long legs, the giraffe “saves” a net 5% of the energy it takes in from food. Over the course of a year, this energy saving would add up to more than 1.5 tonnes of food – which could make the difference between life and death on the African savannah.

How giraffes work

In his book How Giraffes Work, zoologist Graham Mitchell reveals that the ancestors of giraffes had long legs before they evolved long necks.

This makes sense from an energy point of view. Long legs make the heart’s job easier, while long necks make it work harder.

However, the evolution of long legs came with a price of its own. Giraffes are forced to splay their forelegs while drinking, which makes them slow and awkward to rise and escape if a predator should appear.

Statistics show giraffes are the most likely of all prey mammals to leave a water hole without getting a drink.

How long can a neck be?

The energy cost of the heart increases in direct proportion to the height of the neck, so there must be a limit. A sauropod dinosaur, the Giraffatitan, towers 13 metres above the floor of the Berlin Natural History Museum.

Its neck is 8.5m high, which would require a blood pressure of about 770mm Hg if it were to get blood to its head – almost eight times what we see in the average mammal. This is implausible because the heart’s energy cost to pump that blood would have exceeded the energy cost of the entire rest of the body.

Sauropod dinosaurs could not lift their heads that high without passing out. In fact, it is unlikely that any land animal in history could exceed the height of an adult male giraffe.

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. Why do giraffes have such long legs? Animal simulations reveal a surprising answer – https://theconversation.com/why-do-giraffes-have-such-long-legs-animal-simulations-reveal-a-surprising-answer-266230

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Roger S. Seymour, Professor Emeritus of Physiology, University of Adelaide

If you’ve ever wondered why the giraffe has such a long neck, the answer seems clear: it lets them reach succulent leaves atop tall acacia trees in Africa.

Only giraffes have direct access to those leaves, while smaller mammals must compete with one another near the ground. This exclusive food source appears to allow the giraffe to breed throughout the year and to survive droughts better than shorter species.

But the long neck comes at a high cost. The giraffe’s heart must produce enough pressure to pump its blood a couple of metres up to its head. The blood pressure of an adult giraffe is typically over 200mm Hg – more than twice that of most mammals.

As a result, the heart of a resting giraffe uses more energy than the entire body of a resting human, and indeed more energy than the heart of any other mammal of comparable size. However, as we show in a new study published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, the giraffe’s heart has some unrecognised helpers in its battle against gravity: the animal’s long, long legs.

Meet the ‘elaffe’

In our new study, we quantified the energy cost of pumping blood for a typical adult giraffe and compared it to what it would be in an imaginary animal with short legs but a longer neck to reach the same treetop height.

This beast was a Frankenstein-style combination of the body of a common African eland and the neck of a giraffe. We called it an “elaffe”.

We found the animal would spend a whopping 21% of its total energy budget on powering its heart, compared with 16% in the giraffe and 6.7% in humans.

By raising its heart closer to its head by means of long legs, the giraffe “saves” a net 5% of the energy it takes in from food. Over the course of a year, this energy saving would add up to more than 1.5 tonnes of food – which could make the difference between life and death on the African savannah.

How giraffes work

In his book How Giraffes Work, zoologist Graham Mitchell reveals that the ancestors of giraffes had long legs before they evolved long necks.

This makes sense from an energy point of view. Long legs make the heart’s job easier, while long necks make it work harder.

However, the evolution of long legs came with a price of its own. Giraffes are forced to splay their forelegs while drinking, which makes them slow and awkward to rise and escape if a predator should appear.

Statistics show giraffes are the most likely of all prey mammals to leave a water hole without getting a drink.

How long can a neck be?

The energy cost of the heart increases in direct proportion to the height of the neck, so there must be a limit. A sauropod dinosaur, the Giraffatitan, towers 13 metres above the floor of the Berlin Natural History Museum.

Its neck is 8.5m high, which would require a blood pressure of about 770mm Hg if it were to get blood to its head – almost eight times what we see in the average mammal. This is implausible because the heart’s energy cost to pump that blood would have exceeded the energy cost of the entire rest of the body.

Sauropod dinosaurs could not lift their heads that high without passing out. In fact, it is unlikely that any land animal in history could exceed the height of an adult male giraffe.

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. Why do giraffes have such long legs? Animal simulations reveal a suprising answer – https://theconversation.com/why-do-giraffes-have-such-long-legs-animal-simulations-reveal-a-suprising-answer-266230