Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dan Baumgardt, Senior Lecturer, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Bristol

The 2025 darts World Grand Prix is currently well underway. One of the favourites to win the title is Luke “The Nuke” Littler, who in January became the youngest World Champion in history at just 17-years-old.

Anyone who has beheld Littler’s stellar abilities on the darts circuit will have seen the exceptional talent he displays. But what does it actually take to become a professional darts player? Many may be wondering whether darts skills are simply innate in some people – or if Littler is just an exceptionally quick learner.

Elite technique requires a combination of both physical and mental athleticism. You need to have the skills to hit very small targets when stepping up to the oche, all while maintaining the mental strength needed to stay composed under pressure – knowing that even the smallest miss can have big consequences.

1. Coordination

There are lots of different ways in which coordination – one of the critical functions of our nervous system – lends itself to success in darts. Every single throw requires a smooth and accurate trajectory.

Coordination is controlled by the cerebellum, which is located at the back of the brain. This complex region, sometimes referred to as “the little brain,” helps regulate both fine muscle control and posture. It’s a key region when it comes to darts skills.

For instance, the cerebellum helps with hand-eye coordination. To hit a perfect 180, you’re aiming for that tiny treble 20 on the inner ring, three times over. It requires the player to set that target, judge the distance from the board and calculate an appropriate angle at which to throw. It’s also critical in the learning process of how to improve your aim over time.

Stance, posture and balance are paramount too, and also coordinated by the cerebellum. Even the slightest wobble can affect the trajectory of the dart on release.

2. Arm mechanics

A recipe for success also involves a honed and accurate throw.

The mechanics of a good throw include the transition between taking aim, the pullback move to gather energy, through to a smooth release and eliminating any jerks which might send the dart off course.

The chief muscle groups that allow for this are found in the
hand, wrist and forearm. They contain multiple smaller muscles which flex and extend the wrist and fingers. These are capable of working together to enable a wide variety of precise movements in gripping, aiming and releasing the dart.

It’s generally quite difficult to target these small muscles by working out in the gym, so this is where training through repetition is key to nailing the right throw.

The throw is also governed by rhythm: the target setting, the speed of the pullback stroke and the timing of the release.

Every professional dart player has their own throw technique. For instance, Phil Taylor demonstrated a fast, yet measured throw, while Luke Littler favours a relaxed, instinctive rhythm. But the individual rhythm all goes back to those intricate nerve pathways and the small muscles which coordinate it.

3. A ‘quiet eye’

Obviously vision is also fundamental to darts – but it’s not as simple as just regarding the board.

This is where the concept of a “quiet eye” comes in – where the eyes lock in upon the target just before a throw is made. A quiet eye ensures the gaze remains fixed upon the target, ensuring the throw is accurate.

A quiet eye is a technique important in many sports other than darts – including clay shooting, snooker and archery. A quiet eye lends important visual information to the motor system, which allows for maximum synchronisation between the brain and body.

Several studies have explored the effect the quiet eye phenomenon has on target sports and what underpins it. First, there’s evidence that shows expert players typically have a longer quiet eye phase than amateurs. Although this usually only amounts to half a second longer or so, this is still significant in coordinating between the brain and body, allowing the player to execute that perfect shot.

Second, the measured gaze of professional players appear to be more stable and unwavering – with no eye flicking or deviation from the target.

Through target fixation, critically timing their movements and repeating their shots, players can train their quiet eye.

4. The brain and body connection

The connection between brain and body appears to be key – and is exemplified by players who lost their ability in darts.

There’s actually a condition referred to as “dartitis,” which is defined by an inability to throw. Dartitis is often associated with stress, fatigue or burnout.

It can even affect top players – most notably multiple World Champion Eric Bristow, who had to retrain in order to play normally again after developing dartitis. This can involve going back to basics and rebuilding the throw – sometimes even switching to the other hand.

But if, like me, you’re completely devoid of any talent in darts, there are a few things you can do to give yourself a better chance of hitting a bullseye (instead of the wall or ceiling).

A few starting points for training involve establishing a good stance, grip and throw. Equipping yourself with the right kit is also essential. Then you can move onto blocking out all that external noise – mostly jeers from your mates at your feeble efforts.

Practice makes perfect. Both mental and physical training are needed to be a champion darts player.

Dan Baumgardt 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. Darts: the surprising amount of athletic skill it takes to hit a bullseye – https://theconversation.com/darts-the-surprising-amount-of-athletic-skill-it-takes-to-hit-a-bullseye-266730

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Damien Short, Director of the Human Rights Consortium and Reader in Human Rights, School of Advanced Study, University of London

Three environmental defenders – people who take action against the exploitation of natural resources – are murdered or disappeared somewhere in the world every week. The latest report by Global Witness, an NGO that investigates environmental and human rights abuses, has recorded more than 2,250 such cases since 2012.

The vast majority of the 146 land and environmental defenders killed in 2024, according to the report, were murdered in Latin America. Many were opposing large-scale mining, logging or agribusiness projects.

Colombia recorded the highest number of deaths, with 48 defenders killed across the country. But Guatemala proved the most dangerous country per capita, with 20 killings that year. Indigenous people and small-scale farmers in Latin America are particularly exposed. Their lives and livelihoods place them in direct conflict with extractive and criminal interests.

Afro-descendant communities there face the same elevated risk. Many, including Brazil’s Quilombola communities, hold collective ancestral territories and have safeguarded forests and rivers for generations. This custodianship makes them targets.

Women accounted for approximately 10% of victims in 2024, with cases concentrated in Mexico. And multiple attacks killed entire families, including children, suggesting systematic intimidation rather than isolated violence.

---

Wars and climate change are inextricably linked. Climate change can increase the likelihood of violent conflict by intensifying resource scarcity and displacement, while conflict itself accelerates environmental damage. This article is part of a series, War on climate, which explores the relationship between climate issues and global conflicts.

---

In a conflict-affected context, or a situation where information is tightly controlled, killings and disappearances are hard to document. Families and witnesses also often stay silent for fear of reprisals. Impunity compounds the problem.

The Global Witness report notes that in Colombia, where environmental defenders have been at risk for decades, only 5% of killings since 2002 have resulted in convictions. Without justice, deterrence is absent, and cycles of violence continue.

Violence against environmental defenders also persists because it works. Removing a community leader, for example, can disrupt resistance for months or years. For corporations, defending against a lawsuit that arises due to violence against environmental defenders costs less than losing a mining concession. And for governments dependent on resource revenues, silencing critics preserves foreign investment.

According to the Global Witness report, nearly one-third of the murders in 2024 were linked to criminal networks. State security forces were directly implicated in others. This dual threat of criminal violence and official complicity is enabled in part by a shrinking ability for people to participate freely in public life.

Civicus, an alliance of civil society organisations that works to strengthen citizen action and civil rights globally, rates more than half of the countries where defenders were killed as “repressed” or “closed”. This means the authorities actively restrict freedoms of association, assembly and expression.

Violence is predictable in such environments. Defenders face not only physical attacks but also criminalisation, harassment and strategic lawsuits designed to exhaust resources and silence dissent. Ecuador demonstrates how quickly this repression can escalate.

In September 2025, the government charged people protesting fuel subsidy cuts and mining expansion with terrorism and froze the bank accounts of dozens of environmental activists without warning. Efraín Fueres, an Indigenous land defender, was shot and killed by security forces during the protests.

The Ecuadorian government is also moving to rewrite the country’s constitution, the world’s only charter recognising nature’s intrinsic rights, ostensibly to combat drug trafficking. But defenders say the real aim is to eliminate legal barriers to extractive industries.

Regional protection

Regional protection mechanisms do exist. But they remain incomplete. The Escazú agreement, a binding treaty signed in 2018 covering Latin America and the Caribbean, requires that states guarantee public access to environmental information, ensure meaningful participation in decisions and actively protect defenders.

Eighteen of the region’s 33 states have ratified the agreement. In April 2024, parties also adopted an action plan that includes free legal aid for defenders, legal training and monitoring through to 2030.

Whether Escazú can reduce killings depends on implementation. Brazil and Guatemala, both high-risk countries where defenders face lethal threats, have not ratified the treaty. Without participation from the deadliest jurisdictions, regional frameworks offer limited protection.

Protection mechanisms frequently fail, not because they are poorly designed but because they operate within systems that structurally favour extractive industries. Police assigned to protect defenders may be drawn from the same units that secure mining sites or suppress protests.

Prosecutors tasked with investigating attacks often depend on governments whose economic prospects rely on the very projects defenders oppose. Judges hearing cases against corporations, for example, may face political pressure when ruling against major investors. Around half of judges in Latin America are political appointees.

Mining and logging companies also fund local employment, infrastructure and sometimes entire regional economies. This creates dependencies that make meaningful accountability nearly impossible. Even well-intentioned protection schemes cannot compensate for the fact that defending land often means obstructing projects that generate revenue for underfunded state institutions.

There is also a critical legal gap at the international level. When severe environmental destruction occurs during peacetime, existing law struggles to hold individuals accountable.

The International Court of Justice addresses state responsibility but cannot prosecute individuals. And while the International Criminal Court prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression, environmental harm outside armed conflict falls beyond its reach.

A growing coalition led by Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa is urging recognition of ecocide as a fifth international crime under the Rome Statute. The proposed definition, developed by an independent expert panel in 2021, would criminalise “unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge of a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment”.

This would create personal criminal liability for individuals in positions of authority whose decisions lead to mass environmental harm. The theory is that when individual decision-makers face prosecution risk, projects relying on violence and intimidation become personally dangerous to authorise.

Ecocide law would not replace existing regulation or regional treaties but would serve as a backstop when harm reaches catastrophic scale. For defenders, the promise is accountability that reaches beyond hired security to the individuals who profit from or politically enable destruction.

People will always stand up for the places that sustain them. If environmental defenders can operate without fear, everyone benefits. Protecting environmental defenders is not idealism, it is the most pragmatic investment a civilisation can make.

Damien Short is a member of the Green party in the UK.

– ref. Environmental defenders are being killed for protecting our future – the law needs to catch up – https://theconversation.com/environmental-defenders-are-being-killed-for-protecting-our-future-the-law-needs-to-catch-up-266396

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jacques Hartmann, Professor of International Law and Human Rights, University of Dundee

Withdrawing the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), once a fringe idea, has become a defining issue for political parties. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who previously opposed leaving, has now said the Conservatives will take the UK out of the convention if they win an election.

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has arguably made an ECHR exit central to its political identity. Even the Labour government has said it could reform the convention, or change how UK courts interpret the law.

The case for leaving is often framed as one of “sovereignty”, particularly in relation to immigration laws and deportation powers.

Politicians argue that the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights, which enforces the ECHR, overrides “the will of the British people” and that democratic legitimacy demands withdrawal.

But evidence shows that “the people” don’t actually want to leave.

We examined more than a dozen opinion polls conducted by polling agencies, such as YouGov, since 2013. The first, that year, found 48% in favour of withdrawal and 35% in favour of remaining in the ECHR. A year later, the public was evenly split (41% leave, 38% stay), and by 2016, following the Brexit referendum, 42% said Britain should stay in the ECHR while 35% wanted to leave. Since then, the balance has shifted steadily towards remain.

By 2023, half of respondents said the UK should remain a member, while only around a quarter favoured leaving the ECHR. A poll from June 2025 produced similar results: 51% in favour of staying, 27% for leaving and 22% unsure.

The most recent YouGov data, published October 8, found that 46% of the public are opposed to leaving the ECHR, and 29% say the UK should withdraw.

Even when polls tie the ECHR to issues such as deportations to Rwanda, support for withdrawal among the general public has not exceeded 38% since 2014.

Conversely, when respondents were given more nuanced options, support for withdrawal fell. In a 2024 survey, outright support for leaving was just 16% when respondents were offered alternatives such as “always abide by the ECHR even if that frustrates Parliament” or “remain committed to the ECHR but give Parliament the final word”. With such options, 66% supported some form of continued engagement with the ECHR.

What is also clear from the polling is that Conservative and Reform voters are much more in favour of leaving the ECHR than Labour and Liberal Democrats voters. In the June YouGov poll on this issue, 54% of Conservative voters and 72% of Reform voters were in favour of leaving the ECHR while 75% of Labour and Liberal Democrats voters were against leaving.

The general results from polling are reinforced by parliamentary petitions. Since 2023, at least seven petitions have called for withdrawal from the ECHR or a referendum on membership. None has come close to the 100,000 signatures required for debate.

The most recent, which remains open until January 2026, had fewer than 19,000 signatures at the time of writing. By contrast, a petition against digital ID cards quickly amassed 2.8 million signatures.

The evidence is clear: withdrawal commands neither majority support nor political urgency.

The paradox of popular democracy

For its critics, the ECHR embodies foreign interference. Strasbourg judges are cast as overriding Westminster’s authority and undermining sovereignty. That framing is powerful in political campaigns, particularly when attached to emotive issues like asylum or terrorism.

But if democracy means following “the will of the people”, the evidence does not support the claim. At most, over the past decade, only a quarter of the electorate has supported leaving the ECHR.

And even if public opinion did shift, there is a deeper question: should such constitutional decisions rest on fluctuating majorities at all?

The ECHR was created after the second world war precisely to prevent democracy from collapsing into unchecked majority rule. Britain played a leading role in drafting it, ensuring that popular sovereignty would be balanced by entrenched rights.

---

Read more:
Treaties like the ECHR protect everyone in the UK, not just migrants

---

That is why human rights protections are deliberately counter-majoritarian, safeguarding individuals and minorities from the excesses of majority impulses.

Yet today’s political rhetoric often inverts that logic. By invoking the language of popular sovereignty to justify withdrawing from the ECHR – despite evidence that the public does not support it – politicians risk undermining the very stability those rights were designed to protect. This is an especially serious concern for the UK, which lacks the constitutional safeguards found in many other democracies.

A large share of respondents to the polls examined were “unsure” about withdrawal – ranging from 15 to 25% across the surveys. It’s therefore possible that true support for remaining in the ECHR may be higher than headline polls imply.

The latest YouGov survey asked respondents how much they know about the ECHR, and found just 5% of respondents claimed to know “a great deal” about the convention, while 49% said they do not know very much, and 15% said they know nothing at all.

Research shows that attitudes towards human rights grow more positive as knowledge of human rights increases. A Scottish Human Rights Commission study in 2018 found that indifference often masks confusion rather than hostility.

The Independent Review of the Human Rights Act in 2021 reached a similar conclusion, stressing that greater public understanding of human rights institutions strengthens support.

This is why it is important for people and politicians to understand that conventions like the ECHR are not just about migrants and asylum seekers. They protect the rights of everyone in matters that affect us all – from privacy at home and fair treatment in court, to freedom of speech, protection from discrimination and dignity in care.

The growing political momentum for withdrawal from the ECHR is not matched by popular demand. Instead, politicians are proposing to amend Britain’s constitutional order in the name of “the people” while ignoring what a majority of people actually want, undoing constitutional safeguards and democratic institutions in the process.

The lesson of postwar Europe is clear: constitutional safeguards against majority rule are not an obstacle to democracy, but one of its foundations. To abandon them would not only place the UK alongside Russia and Belarus – the only European states outside the ECHR – but also risk repeating the very errors the convention was created to prevent.

Jacques Hartmann has received external research funding from a range of government and charitable sources, including the European Commission (Horizon 2020), NordForsk, the British Academy, and private foundations such as Dreyer’s Trust and the Max Sørensen Foundation. None of these funders had any role in the conception, research, or writing of this article, which was undertaken independently and without specific project funding.

Dr Edzia Carvalho has received funding from the British Academy, the Scottish Government, the Carnegie Foundation, and FIDH. None of these funders had any role in the conception, research, or writing of this article, which was undertaken independently and without specific project funding.

Dr Samuel White has previously received funding from the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland and the Royal Society of Edinburgh. He represents the Law Society of Scotland on the Scottish Government’s Human Rights Incorporation and Implementation Oversight Board; this article is written in a personal capacity.

– ref. Do British people want to leave the ECHR? What a decade of polls reveals – https://theconversation.com/do-british-people-want-to-leave-the-echr-what-a-decade-of-polls-reveals-266682

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Asaf Siniver, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

When Donald Trump called Benjamin Netanyahu on October 4 to tell him that Hamas had agreed to at least some of his 20-point ceasefire plan, the Israeli prime minister’s equivocal response was he saw “nothing to celebrate, and that it doesn’t mean anything”. According to reports, the US president fired back: “I don’t know why you’re always so fucking negative. This is a win. Take it.”

Trump’s visceral response is less important than the fact that it became public only hours after this private conversation. By comparison, although Joe Biden’s frequent excoriations of Netanyahu were well documented, they were never made public immediately after he uttered them.

Trump’s scolding of the Israeli leader, on the other hand, was intentionally leaked to publicly paint Netanyahu as the intransigent party should negotiations over ending the war collapse. Unencumbered by nuance or subtlety, Trump’s “dead cat diplomacy” in recent weeks has proven to be his single most effective leverage in bringing Israel and Hamas to this agreement.

---

Read more:
Israel and Hamas agree ceasefire deal – what we know so far: expert Q&A

---

The practice of dead cat diplomacy was first articulated by former US secretary of state (1989-1992) James Baker, during his incessant diplomatic efforts to coax the Syrian, Israeli and Palestinian teams to attend the historic 1991 Madrid peace conference. Despite making eight trips to the region in as many months and drawing on seemingly every resource and skill in his diplomatic toolbox, Baker was repeatedly frustrated by each party’s objections to attending the conference.

Running out of options, Baker concluded that under such circumstances, the only leverage left at his disposal was to publicly lay the blame for killing the negotiations (the metaphorical dead cat) at the doorstep of an intransigent negotiator.

Soon, dead cats began appearing at the metaphorical doorsteps of the key negotiators. Palestinian negotiator Hanan Ashrawi recalled that Baker’s favourite expression to egg the Arab delegations on was “Don’t let the dead cat die on your doorstep!” After he told the Palestinians, “I am sick and tired of this. With you people, the souk [market] never closes. I’ve had it. Have a nice life”, they dropped their demands immediately.

Threatening to drop the dead cat at the doorstep of Syrian foreign minister Farouk al-Sharaa was equally effective. Baker shouted at Ashrawi over the phone, “You just tell Mr Sharaa that the whole thing is off. I’m going home. I’m taking the plane this evening and he can go back to Syria. As far as I’m concerned, it’s finished!”, after which he hung up abruptly. Ashrawi delivered Baker’s threat to the Arab group.

In her 1995 memoir, This Side of Peace, Ashrawi recalled that “everyone was convinced that Baker was serious, and we urged the Syrians to accept an Arab compromise”.

Despite the US-Israel special relationship, Baker did not hesitate to lay equal blame for the stalled negotiations on the intransigent Israeli prime minister, Yitzhak Shamir, telling him: “I’m working my ass off, and I’m getting no cooperation from you. I’m finished … I’ve got to say I’m basically disinclined to come here again.” On the way to the airport, Baker told his aide Dennis Ross: “I’m going to leave this dead cat on his doorstep”.

The cumulative effect of Baker’s dead cat diplomacy was that no party wanted to appear publicly as opposing peace. As his aide Aaron David Miller recalled: “No one wanted to be in that position.”

As I wrote elsewhere, dead cat diplomacy is likely to be effective when three conditions are met. It must be perceived by the intransigent parties as a last-chance threat, it must be perceived as a credible move by the third party and there must be internal factors which limit the intransigent party’s capacity to ignore the threat.

Trump plays the blame game

Notwithstanding the considerable differences in diplomatic nous between Baker and Trump, it is clear that at least in his negotiating an end to the two-year war between Israel and Hamas, Trump’s laying of dead cats at the Israeli and Hamas doorsteps has been perceived by both parties as last-chance and credible threats, while capitalising on their increasingly untenable domestic standings.

Trump’s calling Netanyahu “always fucking negative” is but the latest dead cat laid on the Israeli leader’s doorstep. It was preceded a few days earlier by a humiliating and (public) strong-arming of Netanyahu to apologise to the Qatari prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, for Israel’s failed assassination attempt of Hamas negotiators in Doha on September 9.

As one Israeli pollster noted: “For the first time Netanyahu cannot disregard the wishes of an American president, because of the way Trump operates. Trump is unpredictable and will not fall in line with the Israeli position.”

This was perfectly illustrated by the image of Netanyahu reading out his apology from a script while Trump was resting the telephone on his lap in the Oval Office, which was a blunt – and public – rebuke of the Israeli leader: you are solely responsible for this chaos, and you’d better apologise, or else.

A few days later, Trump posted on his Truth Social account an image of the protests in Tel Aviv to end the war and against Netanyahu, showing a large banner that read: “It’s now or never.”

Such public amplifying of the voices of Netanyahu’s critics at home has left no illusions as to who Trump was blaming for the stalemate. “He was fine with it”, Trump briefed following his conversation with Netanyahu on Saturday. “He’s got to be fine with it. He has no choice. With me, you got to be fine.”

Trump has been equally expedient in laying dead cats at Hamas’s doorstep. First, by ironing out his peace plan with Israel while excluding Hamas from the process, and then by turning to his TruthSocial platform to single out Hamas as the remaining obstacle to ending the war, following his joint press conference with Netanyahu in the Oval Office.

Intentionally or otherwise, this Trumpian bludgeoning contained all the hallmarks of dead cat diplomacy. It emphasises that this is a last-chance opportunity and that the threat is credible, the US president having already shown his support for Israeli military action in Gaza. It also capitalises on Hamas’s increasingly isolated position, noting that it is the only party to not accept the plan and that the release of hostages held by Hamas was the difference between peace and hell in the Middle East.

Trump’s deployment of dead cat diplomacy may lack the finesse and strategic patience of Baker’s approach, but its raw, theatrical force has nonetheless reshaped the negotiating landscape. By publicly blaming Netanyahu and Hamas, isolating them diplomatically, and making clear that one of them will be remembered as the obstacle to peace, Trump has created precisely the kind of last-chance, credibility-laden pressure that dead cat diplomacy relies on to succeed.

Whether this results in a lasting peace remains uncertain. But what is clear is that Trump’s willingness to weaponise public humiliation and blame has, at least for now, jolted two entrenched adversaries closer to compromise than years of cautious mediation ever did. Dead cat diplomacy may yet earn Trump his coveted Nobel peace prize.

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

– ref. How Donald Trump’s ‘dead cat diplomacy’ may have changed the course of the Gaza war – https://theconversation.com/how-donald-trumps-dead-cat-diplomacy-may-have-changed-the-course-of-the-gaza-war-266701

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Claire Oakley, Researcher and Lecturer in Psychology, University of Essex

Teachers use their voices in the classroom to build enthusiasm, convey knowledge and defuse tensions.

A warm, encouraging voice boosts pupils’ motivation, reduces anxiety and improves connections with teachers and classroom dynamics. Controlling or harsh tones can unknowingly create stress for pupils, erode trust and lead to disengagement.

But teachers are also stressed, and stress can affect the way we speak. Being stressed affects the control we have over our speech. We tend to speak at a higher pitch with more variation, which can induce vocal strain.

Further, listeners can perceive the speaker’s stress from their speech. That perceived stress has the potential to influence the emotions of the listener, too, which in a school can negatively shape a classroom’s atmosphere.

Few teachers are trained in how to use their voice effectively. Neither are teachers trained in how to protect their voice to ensure career longevity and prevent voice-related illness. Providing voice awareness training for teachers could help reduce the impact of stress and overuse on teachers’ voices and transform communication within the classroom.

Supportive classrooms

It has long been known that children learn more and participate better in supportive and engaging classroom atmospheres. The way teachers speak can affect their pupils’ wellbeing, engagement and self-esteem.

Teachers can create these environments by using a tone or style of voice that demonstrates their interest in their pupils. Vocal delivery affects cooperation, and emerging evidence suggests that it has an influence on how pupils learn.

Pupils are less likely to engage in thinking about concepts and problem solving after hearing a harsh-sounding voice. Instead, they rely more on simple repetition, which is less effective for long-term learning. Together, these studies suggest that teachers can create supportive, optimal learning environments through a nuanced use of voice in the classroom.

After hearing harsh, controlling-sounding voices, pupils have reported heightened negative emotions and feeling disconnected from teachers. Listeners take less than a quarter of a second to detect harsh voices, suggesting specialised brain mechanisms for processing threat-inducing voices.

Listening to supportive-sounding voices, which are often soft, warm and slower-paced, enhances wellbeing, increasing feelings of self-esteem and competence.

Research has found that showing an interest in others through voice cues changes the way listeners disclose information. This means that teachers using a supportive tone of voice could help pupils talk to them about important or difficult issues, such as bullying.

Vocal training

One of us (Silke Paulmann) has carried out research to evaluate the vocal awareness training offered by a teacher training organisation. After training, the teachers spoke in a less monotone voice, increasing their pitch and volume range, and at a slower pace. They used softer ways of speaking, demonstrating that vocal awareness training can alter teachers’ speech patterns.

Teachers are also at risk of voice problems. In a 2018 study, 30% of teachers surveyed reported voice problems, such as hoarseness, a sign of vocal strain or fatigue, or voice loss. In general, teachers are more likely to develop voice disorders compared with the general population.

However, unlike actors or singers, who also rely extensively on their voices, teachers do not typically receive vocal training. Voice training helps prevent long-term voice damage or strain. Proactively addressing teacher voice health could reduce missed work days due to voice-related issues and help improve teacher wellbeing, as they often occur together.

The vocal training we evaluated included techniques to help the trainee teachers master vocal delivery, as well as tips and tricks around voice health. The training emphasised how harsh and sharp-sounding voices can negatively affect students’ wellbeing.

It focused on how classroom communications benefit from soft, warm-sounding tones, creating a supportive and motivating classroom environment. Comparisons of the teachers’ voices before and after training indicated that their vocal quality improved.

Incorporating even short voice awareness training into teacher education and professional development could better equip educators to create supportive, engaging learning environments, protect their vocal health and support their wellbeing. Currently, though, the availability of voice awareness training for teachers is sparse.

Vocal awareness training can improve teachers’ vocal delivery, enhancing classroom communication and engagement. As education systems focus on both teacher and student wellbeing, incorporating such training into teacher development programmes is a crucial step forward.

In future work, Claire Oakley will collaborate with Mario Education (https://marioeducation.com/) as part of an evaluation project.

Silke Paulmann receives funding from the University of Essex Impact Fund and work on motivational prosody has previously been funded by the Leverhulme Trust. She collaborates with Mario Education (https://marioeducation.com) and 5Voices (https://the5voices.com) on projects related to teacher voice use.

– ref. How voice training can help teachers improve wellbeing in the classroom – https://theconversation.com/how-voice-training-can-help-teachers-improve-wellbeing-in-the-classroom-249771

Source: The Conversation – UK – By John Curtice, Professor of Politics, University of Strathclyde and Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Social Research

When the Labour government established the Scottish parliament in 1999, it hoped the new institution would demonstrate that Scotland’s distinctive needs and aspirations could be addressed within the framework of the UK. Consequently, the theory went, support for independence would melt away.

However, the project was not without its risks. As a symbol of Scotland’s distinctiveness, the parliament might foster people’s sense of Scottish identity rather than the British identity that helps bind the four parts of the UK together.

And by creating a space in which policy issues are discussed separately from Westminster – and sometimes different solutions implemented – the balance of public opinion north of the border might diverge from that in the rest of the UK, making it more difficult to keep the union together.

Ever since the parliament first met on July 1 1999, the Scottish Social Attitudes (SSA) survey has been charting the evolution of public opinion north of the border. Together with the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey, it also provides a means of comparing the trend of public opinion on the two sides of the border.

A report published on October 9 by the Scottish Centre for Social Research and based on the 25 years of data collected by SSA shows that public opinion and identities in Scotland have not diverged from those elsewhere in the UK. Nevertheless, support for independence is higher now than 25 years ago. This is because some of the features of the country’s attitudinal landscape that were already distinctive to Scotland have come to be more closely aligned with whether people are for or against independence.

Consider national identity, for example. Acknowledgement of a British identity has always tended to play second fiddle to feeling Scottish. In 1999, two-thirds of SSA respondents said they were either “Scottish, not British” or “more Scottish than British”. Just 22% indicated they were “equally Scottish and British”, while only 7% stated they were either “British, not Scottish” or “more British than Scottish”.

The figures are little different in the latest survey conducted last autumn. Nearly three in five (59%) said they were wholly or predominantly Scottish, 22% (again) stated they were equally Scottish and British, while only one in ten (10%) claimed to be wholly or predominantly British.

It is often claimed that public opinion in Scotland is more leftwing than in England. The social attitudes data confirm this – though the gap is small and has not widened.

Both the Scottish and British surveys have regularly asked a suite of questions designed to ascertain people’s attitudes towards inequality and what the government should do about it. This produces a scale from 0 to 100, in which the higher the score, the more tolerant of inequality – and therefore more rightwing – somebody appears to be.

In 2000, the average score in Scotland was, at 34, just four points less than the equivalent figure for England (38). In our latest survey, the scores are 33 and 35 respectively.

Similar analysis of attitudes towards tax and spend shows that, while in any particular year, people in Scotland have usually been a little more likely to back more government spending and the taxes needed to fund it, the gap has not widened. Rather, attitudes have moved in parallel. When people in England have shifted away from tax and spend (or vice-versa), typically much the same shift has occurred north of the border.

Why the rise in support for independence?

Yet despite the absence of divergence in identity and policy preferences, support for Scottish independence is markedly higher now than when the Scottish Parliament was created. In 1999, just 27% said Scotland should become independent. As many as 59% backed having a devolved parliament, while just one in ten (10%) thought Scotland should not have any kind of parliament of its own.

Now, support for independence stands at 47%, while 41% back the devolved parliament and 9% do not want any kind of separate institution. Despite the 2014 vote against independence, the period before and after that ballot witnessed a sharp increase in support that has subsequently largely been sustained.

How has it been possible for independence to be more popular now even though the attitudes and identities of people in Scotland are no more distinctive now than in 1999? The answer lies in how some of the ways in which Scots’ attitudes and identities were already distinctive have become more closely aligned with their constitutional preferences.

People’s views on how Scotland should be governed have always reflected to some degree whether they feel Scottish or British. In 1999, only 6% of those who felt wholly or predominantly British said Scotland should become independent. In contrast, 44% of those who said they were “Scottish, not British” wanted Scotland to leave the UK.

Now, however, the link between people’s sense of national identity and their constitutional preference is much stronger. Support for independence among those who feel wholly or predominantly British is, at 14%, only eight points higher now than 25 years ago. In contrast, among those who say they are “Scottish, not British”, 74% now support independence, an increase of 30 points.

In 2000, those on the left on our scale (38%) were 15 points more likely than those on the right (23%) to say they supported independence. Now the gap is 34 points; 64% of those on the left are in favour, but only 30% of those on the right.

Public opinion and national identity in Scotland have not significantly diverged from the rest of the UK during the devolution years. Nevertheless, within Scotland, the constitutional debate has become more polarised.

No longer is it simply about how much sovereignty the country should have. Rather, it has become more strongly embedded in differences of identity and disagreements about the proper direction of public policy. That polarisation seems unlikely to make it any easier to find a lasting settlement to Scotland’s continuing constitutional debate any time soon.

John Curtice is currently in receipt of funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and has previously received funding from a range of government and charitable sources. The Scottish Social Attitudes survey is funded each year on a modular basis. This has included funding from both the Scottish and the UK governments, while the survey is currently in receipt of funding from the ESRC.

– ref. Twenty-five years of data shows how link between identity and views on Scottish independence has grown stronger – https://theconversation.com/twenty-five-years-of-data-shows-how-link-between-identity-and-views-on-scottish-independence-has-grown-stronger-266963

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Taylor, Professor of Anatomy, Lancaster University

Exercise is good for the body and the mind. A good workout can leave you feeling energised, recharged and ready to take on the rest of the day.

But for some, the aftereffects of a good workout can be slightly more bizarre. From bloody noses to “coregasms”, here are some of the strangest things that can happen to your body as a result of exercise:

1. Metallic taste

Some people find that when exercising, they get a metallic taste in their mouth.

This is caused by the increases in heart rate and blood pressure that occur when we exercise. Over prolonged periods, this increased pressure can cause the small, delicate blood vessels in our nose to rupture.

This can either result in a nosebleed, or it can run backwards into your throat, where you’ll taste the blood. The iron in blood is what causes the metallic taste.

Some evidence suggests that this metallic taste can also result from small blood vessels in the lungs rupturing. This phenomenon is most commonly seen in elite cyclists and ultra-marathon runners, likely due to lengthy strain their lungs are placed under.

2. Bleeding from the anus and nipples

Exercise can also cause bleeding from other unexpected places.

For instance, long-distance running can induce bleeding from the anus. This is caused by changes to how blood flow is distributed in the body during exercise.

At rest, the gastrointestinal tract receives about 25% of blood from the heart. But during exercise this drops by about 80% as more blood is delivered to the muscles, heart and lungs. This causes a short-term lack of oxygen to the gastrointestinal tissues.

But when blood flow returns to normal after a run, the increased flow can damage the gastrointestinal tract’s tiny blood vessels. This causes bleeding from the anus – which, in some cases, it can be life-threatening.

Nipples are another sore spot that can bleed after a run due to chafing from clothes. The more you run per week, the more likely you are to experience this. Almost 40% of people who run more than 65km a week report having had “jogger’s nipple.”

Cold weather will make this worse as the nipples become erect, causing greater irritation and a focused point of contact. Sweat can worsen it, too, as it reduces the protective barrier on the skin’s surface.

Luckily, this can easily be prevented. A bit of petroleum jelly, for instance, can help you avoid irritation on your runs.

3. Rashes

When we exercise, we sweat. This is our body’s natural way of cooling off.

But dead skin cells, dirt and microbes can all cause this sweat to become trapped in the pores beneath the skin’s surface. This can lead to heat rash – an itchy, prickly or stinging sensation in the skin.

This rash typically disappears on its own. It can be prevented by wearing looser clothing during workouts, exercising in a cooler environment or applying cool compresses to the skin after a workout.

Urticaria is another rash that may appear – also triggered by heat or exercise. Urticaria is typically more painful and itchy than a heat rash and often requires antihistamines to reduce the symptoms. It’s caused by the release of histamine (an immune chemical) when the body is exposed to the trigger.

4. Blackened toenails

Although this condition is commonly called “runner’s toenail”, it isn’t exclusive to these athletes. Any sport – including tennis and dancing – where there’s repetitive impact and pressure on the toes can cause toenails to blacken and even fall off.

Wearing proper fitting footwear that prevents the toes from rubbing and being squished in the shoe will reduce risk of this.

5. Runny nose

The rapid breathing we do during a workout can increase the number of irritants, debris and microbes that enter the body through the nose.

In response, the body begins producing more nasal fluids to wash them out – and prevent drying out. This results in a runny nose – a sign the body’s protective mechanisms are on the offensive.

Exercise-induced rhinitis is extremely common in swimmers and those who exercise in cold air – such as cross-country skiers. This is because these environments are very punishing on the mucous membranes.

6. Red eyes

Heavy lifting or straining during a workout can potentially cause structural damage to the eyes.

When we strain, it spikes our blood pressure – and this pressure can cause the small vessels in the white of the eyes to rupture. This is called a subconjunctival haemorrhage,

The result is a small spot of blood on the white of the eye. Thankfully, the condition is not painful and typically does not affect vision. It usually heals in a couple of weeks.

7. Coregasms

For some people, exercise can induce sexual pleasure – an exercise-induced orgasm or “coregasm.” While abdominal and core muscle exercises are common triggers, they aren’t the only exercises that can induce one. Some people have reported experiencing them while cycling, weight lifting, running, doing yoga or even walking.

Women tend to experience them more than men, but it isn’t known how much more common it is as studies are limited.

A person’s unique anatomy, as well as their physical, physiological and mental state, all likely play a role in whether or not a coregasm occurs. The feel-good neurotransmitters released by exercise (such as endorphins) are also recognised to be “orgasm accelerators”“, so these probably also play a role.

Thankfully most of these exercise-induced ailments are short lived and can easily be remedied at home during your next rest day. Any that don’t should be checked by a doctor or nurse.

Adam Taylor 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. Runny noses, black toenails and ‘coregasms’: here are seven weird ailments that exercise can trigger – https://theconversation.com/runny-noses-black-toenails-and-coregasms-here-are-seven-weird-ailments-that-exercise-can-trigger-265694

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Samira Homerang Saunders, Researcher, Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice, Queen Mary University of London

UK banks, energy giants and arms exporters are at the heart of one of the world’s least-known human rights and environmental crises, our research has revealed.

West Papua – the Indonesian-administered western half of the island also known as New Guinea – hosts much of the world’s third-largest rainforest after the Amazon and Congo basins.

Very few people outside of this region know about the decades of disappearances, torture and mass evictions of people from their land or of the independence struggle led by indigenous people. Even fewer know that the UK government and British companies are remain deeply entangled in the industries driving this destruction.

Our new audit documents, for the first time, how the UK supplies arms and jungle warfare training to Indonesia, while major British corporations – from BP to Unilever – and financial institutions profit from mining, palm oil, gas or logging in the territory, in spite of strong opposition from many people who live there. (BP did not respond to a request for comment; Unilever did not respond on record).

These investments continue a legacy that began with Britain’s brief colonial presence in the 18th century and today links UK companies to an area that has seen mass deforestation, widespread displacement and allegations of torture and extrajudicial killing.

The environmental cost

West Papua has vast deposits of gold, copper and other metals, and major reserves of liquid petroleum gas. The region is home to the Grasberg mine, the world’s largest gold mine and second-largest copper mine.

A 2022 report by local activists estimated that, each day, around 300,000 tonnes of toxic mining waste are dumped into the Ajkwa river system. Fish stocks have been devastated and contaminated mining waste has piled up in and around the river, making it no longer navigable using traditional boats.

Our audit also documents how gold extracted from Grasberg is sold through the London Bullion Market Association and how the London Metal Exchange brands and sells copper from the Grasberg mine. (The LBMA has previously pointed to its responsible sourcing standards, while the LME has previously said it “takes its regulatory obligations seriously, and has appropriate measures in place to comply with such obligations, including in respect of [potentially criminal waste disposal]”).

Palm oil is another key driver of deforestation, and West Papua is the site of a rapid expansion of industrial agriculture which includes the world’s largest deforestation project. Our audit identifies 14 major British investors in West Papuan palm oil plantations, including HSBC. (HSBC did not respond to a request for comment). British firm Unilever sources palm oil from two mills in the region. (Unilever did not respond on the record).

British energy giant BP operates the Tangguh liquefied natural gas facility in West Papua. The project sits in the middle of one of the world’s largest contiguous mangrove forests and occupies 3,200 hectares of land, most of which is designated a “green zone” with extra environmental protections. Our audit estimates the project will ultimately release 1.5 billion tonnes of carbon by the time it is all processed and burned – equivalent to the EU’s entire emissions reductions between 2015 and 2030.

Since production began, BP has faced criticism over alleged ties with Indonesian security, particularly in the forced relocation of ten villages which severed local people from their ancestral fishing grounds (BP did not respond to a request for comment on each of these matters).

A legacy of colonialism – and the cold war

Britain’s role in West Papua began in 1793, when a British naval expedition briefly claimed the territory as “New Albion”. Within a few years the British were gone, and New Guinea soon became a Dutch colony.

But UK interest resurfaced during the cold war, when the west wanted to ensure that West Papua and its huge mineral resources were kept within the US sphere of influence. Through a UN-backed vote called the “Act of Free Choice” – widely criticised as a sham referendum and commonly referred to as the “Act of No Choice” – West Papua was incorporated into Indonesia rather than gaining independence.

This paved the way for the current model of industrial development, in which foreign-backed projects extract enormous wealth while local people miss out or are displaced.

In 2022, the UN’s refugee agency estimated that between 60,000 and 100,000 Papuans had been displaced in the previous four years. Today, the number may be even higher. Human rights defenders we have worked with in the region estimate there are more than 100,000 displaced.

This mass displacement is a direct consequence of large-scale industrial projects led or underpinned by foreign investors. Allegations of systemic torture, state killings and forced evictions continue, while UK companies and investors profit from the industries driving the crisis.

Until the people of West Papua – rather than foreign investors – are given control over their own resources, there is little prospect of an end to repression, mass displacement and poverty.

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. The alleged British links to mass deforestation and displacement in a conflict few have even heard of – https://theconversation.com/the-alleged-british-links-to-mass-deforestation-and-displacement-in-a-conflict-few-have-even-heard-of-265212

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jamie Torrance, Lecturer and Researcher in Psychology, Swansea University

Every night, millions of people across the world tune in to watch influencers spin slot machines, chase jackpots and ride emotional rollercoasters of wins and losses. Online viewers erupt with cheers, emojis and pleas for “one more spin”.

But behind the flashy graphics and charismatic streamers, lies a complex web of psychological triggers, parasocial relationships where fans feel like friends with creators who don’t know they exist, and normalised risk-taking.

New research by my colleagues and I into gambling livestreams reveals how these broadcasts are reshaping the landscape of online betting, and blurring the lines between entertainment and gambling advertising in ways that traditional media never could.

Gambling livestreams have exploded in popularity over the past few years. These are live broadcasts where content creators, including well known celebrities such as the musician, Drake, gamble in real time, often with slots, casino-style games such as roulette and sports betting, while thousands watch online and participate through chat.

Platforms like Twitch once hosted vast amounts of this content until implementing partial restrictions in 2022. But the streams didn’t disappear. Instead, they migrated to newer, less regulated platforms like Kick which has become popular for gambling content.

Young adults are particularly drawn to these streams. On Kick alone, for example, viewers aged 18 to 34 make up the largest demographic, representing approximately 60% of the platform’s global audience. Many of these viewers are of legal gambling age, creating a perfect storm of accessibility and influence.

The business model can be very lucrative. Top streamers are often paid by gambling operators to broadcast themselves betting, sometimes with company money rather than their own. They may earn additional revenue through affiliate links that direct viewers to betting sites. It’s advertising dressed up as entertainment, but far more powerful.

What we discovered

No empirical research had been conducted on this topic in the UK. So, we interviewed 15 young adults who watched gambling livestreams regularly, as part of a wider study. Our questioning focused on the psychological pull of gambling livestreams, what features viewers encounter and the self-reported harms they have experienced. What emerged was a portrait of sophisticated manipulation meeting genuine entertainment value.

Participants described forming deep connections with streamers, following their favourite personalities across multiple platforms like they would a friend. This pathway often started via streams unrelated to gambling, such as video game livestreams. However, when streamers then migrated to producing gambling content, many viewers followed.

What seemed to fascinate the majority of our participants were the eye-watering amounts of money staked, won and lost by streamers. In some instances, more money was lost by streamers in one evening than a single viewer would make in a year.

Collectively spectating these intense gambling sessions provided participants with a shared sense of community, with viewers either rooting for a big win or the chance to witness a crippling loss.

The casino-style features embedded into the streaming platform were also described in detail. Viewers earn “channel points” for watching streams, creating progression systems that mirror slot machine reward schedules.

They can bet these points on stream outcomes, essentially gambling on gambling. These points can then be redeemed for custom rewards, such as a shout-out from the streamer.

Most troubling was how participants told us they initially watched streams as a safer alternative to gambling themselves, hoping to satisfy their gambling urges vicariously. Instead, the opposite occurred. They reported intensified cravings and increased real-money gambling as a result of viewership. This phenomenon is known as the “urge paradox”.

Why this matters

Hundreds of thousands struggle with gambling harm in the UK, with young adults representing a particularly vulnerable group.

Traditional gambling advertising faces strict regulations. But livestreams exist in a regulatory vacuum. They aren’t 30-second TV spots, but multi-hour immersive experiences that build relationships, create community and normalise high-risk behaviour.

The combination is uniquely potent. Viewers aren’t just seeing ads but forming parasocial bonds with trusted figures who model gambling behaviour in real time. They’re participating through gamified features that mirror gambling mechanics. They’re watching unedited emotional reactions that feel authentic, even when the financial risk for streamers can be artificial.

Participants in our study recognised the manipulation. They knew streamers often used operator money and received revenue shares for sharing affiliate links. Yet this awareness didn’t deter them. The content remained influential regardless.

Age verification on livestreaming platforms can be particularly poor. Multiple participants noted seeing children in stream chats and described sign-up processes as requiring little more than “clicking to confirm that you’re 18 plus”.

Policymakers must treat livestreams as the powerful advertising vehicles they are, requiring mandatory disclosure of financial relationships, robust age verification and cross-border enforcement mechanisms.

Some countries are leading the way. Germany banned gambling advertising via streamers entirely in 2024, while the UK has restricted influencer marketing to minors. However, enforcement remains patchy as content simply migrates to less regulated platforms.

As these platforms multiply, comprehensive regulation that reflects the sophistication – and potential harm – of this digital gambling landscape is urgently needed. Without it, the line between entertainment and exploitation will only continue to blur.

Jamie Torrance has received funding from Gambling Research Exchange Ontario, the Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG), the International Centre for Responsible Gambling and the Economic and Social Research Council.

– ref. Why people are watching livestreams of influencers gambling – and how it could be fuelling addiction – https://theconversation.com/why-people-are-watching-livestreams-of-influencers-gambling-and-how-it-could-be-fuelling-addiction-266532

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Lala Rukh, PhD Candidate, Energy, University of Galway

After comparing electricity tariffs on a spreadsheet, I can confirm that deciphering the plans feels a bit like learning ancient Greek.

As part of my doctoral research, I decided to explore smarter electricity plans (those that use smart meters and offer fluctuating prices) from different providers. That’s when I realised the standing charges – those fixed costs all customers must pay regardless of usage – took up such a large proportion of my bill that other changes might not make much difference.

Three spreadsheets and two mugs of coffee later, it was clear that choosing the “smarter” electricity plan is more of a labyrinth than a lightbulb moment. If a researcher in sustainability gets tangled in opaque pricing structures, what hope is there for the rest of the population?

In the UK, as well as in Ireland, energy standing charges are regulated, fixed daily fees. All suppliers levy these fees (as well as what’s known as a “public service obligation levy” in Ireland) regardless of how much electricity the customer uses. The charges cover upkeep of the network, meter servicing, billing and customer support.

My PhD focuses on energy performance in homes and sustainability behaviour. As part of my ongoing research, I asked people if they had ever thought about switching their energy plan or provider. Typically, they would shrug and say that they thought they were on the best one.

Many don’t know (or don’t care) about green tariff options. And many are not willing to endure the paperwork or the headache of changing plans. This tends to be the case even if it means they are stuck with something that is far from ideal.

Why is it so complex? First, there are about 20 providers in the UK and a dozen in Ireland. And then there are standard or smart meters to decide on, and 24-hour flat rates or peak/off-peak bands. This is before consumers even get to the “green premium” that pushes up the price they will pay per kWh slightly.

Once consumers have weighed all this up, some still have to consider things like direct-debit discounts, export credits if they have solar panels, and rates for charging electric vehicles. They could be forgiven for wondering if doing the right thing by the planet was meant to be this hard.

The puzzle behind ‘green’ plans

Beyond money and frustration, I found that there is an emotional toll for people in feeling like they have done something meaningful only to hit another barrier further down the line. That disillusionment can lead to “sustainability fatigue”, where the urge to give up outweighs the urge to improve.

In both the UK and Ireland, providers are also required to give consumers an estimated annual energy bill. This figure is generic (it is based on the national average of a three- or four-bedroom house) and as such it doesn’t help households greatly.

From my research, I have found that houses (and especially apartments) of very similar build type vary significantly in terms of energy use. After all, people clearly consume energy differently.

Smart meters could help hugely because they give households an insight into their energy use moment by moment. For instance, the energy expert Hannah E. Daly discovered that an old water pump in her home was silently consuming at least 800 watts of power.

This is the strength of smart meters – they make the invisible visible. When people can see which appliances are driving up their energy use, they are more motivated to change their behaviour or upgrade inefficient devices. They could also shift consumption to cheaper or cleaner times of day – the hours when energy use is best suited to the grid and often cheapest for the consumer (for example, 2am until 5am).

Leaders, brands and marketers often urge consumers to live more sustainably and switch to renewable energy and recyclables where possible. Yet the fine print can feel like it’s designed to trip people up. Sustainability should be baked into every product and service as standard.

For example, the EU-mandated energy label makes it easier for consumers to choose more energy-efficient appliances. In a similar way, all products and services should have a standardised sustainability rating — gold, silver or bronze could work well for this — to help customers understand how sustainable each option is.

Energy suppliers force the work on to consumers, making them jump through hoops just to be a bit greener. If going sustainable is truly the future, it probably shouldn’t feel like a luxury.

Lala Rukh receives funding from the Research Ireland for the ERBE Centre for Doctoral Training under grant agreement No 18/EPSRC-CDT/3586. She is affiliated with the University of Galway, Ireland and MaREI, the Research Ireland Centre for Energy, Climate and Marine research and innovation.

– ref. Green electricity deals are too complex – even as a researcher in sustainability I’ve been confused – https://theconversation.com/green-electricity-deals-are-too-complex-even-as-a-researcher-in-sustainability-ive-been-confused-265825