Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Lynn Dicks, Professor of Ecology, University of Cambridge

An innovative sustainable farming method which avoids fertilisers and pesticides in favour of natural soil regeneration has helped farmers in India increase profits while also benefiting wild birds. Our new research shows how “zero budget natural farming” has more than doubled farmer profits.

Ecologists like us evaluate low-tech agroecological approaches that harness the power of nature and people to produce food with skilled labour, knowledge and active management of ecological functions like pollination and soil nutrient cycling.

We’ve been studying two promising agroecological systems, both devised by farming communities to address the soil degradation that threatens the long-term future of food.

Zero budget natural farming is a sustainable farming system that is being heavily incentivised by the government of Andhra Pradesh, a state on the east coast of southern India. Zero budget natural farming is generating considerable interest from other countries, including Brazil, Mexico, Zambia and Indonesia.

The other farming system we’ve been examining is “regenerative farming”, increasingly popular in the UK, US and Europe. While similar, these two farming systems have very different cultural framings.

Regenerative farming is a set of principles that aims to regenerate rather than degrade soil. Farmers are encouraged to monitor their own outcomes and adaptively manage their soils.

Zero budget natural farming aims to boost crop yields and reduce costs by ending the use of synthetics (fertilisers and pesticides) and regenerating natural ecological functions. Farmers are encouraged to work together and share resources such as straw, manures and soil treatments at village level.

To understand whether these two systems could really be scalable, we measured their outcomes for nature, food production and profitability on real working farms. We focused on these key aspects because there is often a direct trade-off between them. Having more nature locally can mean that less food is produced on farmed land.

Nature-friendly farming can lower overall food production or profits, especially at scales larger than individual fields and farms, because land is taken out of production for wildlife-friendly strips around fields, for example.

If there is no change in overall food demand, this creates a risk of driving even greater nature loss and greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, as agriculture continues to expand into natural habitats.

For agroecological systems to be a solution, they must be highly productive, minimising the footprint (total area) of agriculture on Earth, while supporting enough wild nature to maintain ecological functions such as soil nutrient cycling and pollination.

Our research shows that the shift to zero budget natural farming more than doubles farmer profits and does not reduce food production relative to chemical farming. These farms also support more wild birds, especially those that help control pests by eating insects and other invertebrates, such as drongos, pipits and warblers. For the rice-dominated small farms we studied in south India, zero budget natural farming avoids the direct trade-off between nature and food production.

But this agroecological farmland is no substitute for natural forest in terms of bird conservation. Forests are vital for birds threatened with extinction, many of which cannot thrive on farmland of any kind, such as the Malabar pied hornbill.

---

Read more:
Regeneratively farmed is the new buzz label on supermarket shelves – but what does it actually mean?

---

The situation is different for the arable farmers we’re working with in eastern and southern England, who are farming regeneratively. This approach is challenging to define so we calculated a “regenerative score” for each farm based on the consistency with which farmers adhered to the five principles of regenerative farming. Those principles include keeping the soil covered to reduce erosion and increase its organic content, and increasing crop diversity.

Becoming more regenerative on this scale has clear benefits for some indicators of healthy soils such as earthworm numbers. But our initial data indicated some declines in yield at field scale. This is likely to be larger when scaled up to landscapes, because of crop choices. The regenerative system in these arable farms is more sustainable by many measures, but not quite as productive, in terms of food output, as intensive chemical farms.

The future of farming

Things might look different in the future, as accelerating climate change makes the soil’s abilities to absorb and retain water much more important. Regenerative farming potentially offers resilience to climate change, through better soils and higher diversity, but this is challenging to demonstrate empirically. For now, regenerative farming in the English farms where we work is not a straightforward solution that delivers high food production and better nature, like zero budget natural farming in India.

One reason for the difference might be that UK arable farms are largely constrained to working with crop varieties engineered to thrive in very intensive systems with high chemical inputs. These varieties have weaker roots and potentially lower disease resistance than more traditional crop varieties. Part of the solution here is to breed crop varieties that thrive in agroecological systems without heavy chemical fertiliser use (so-called “lower input systems”). For industrial agriculture systems, this will involve the plant breeding industry.

Zero budget natural farmers are encouraged to use traditional crop varieties, and are more likely to re-use their own seeds, rather than buying them in every year. Perhaps this means their crops are better adapted to lower input conditions, with stronger roots or better positive associations with soil microbes. To cement its future, those who live and work in the region are calling for zero budget natural farming to be recognised by buyers, so farmers can access new markets for sustainable produce and take advantage of higher retail prices.

In both cases, the key to long term success may be economic, rather than purely scientific, with changes in the crop breeding industry, markets and value chains as important as how farms themselves are managed.

---

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

---

Lynn Dicks receives funding from UKRI (NERC and BBSRC). She is affiliated with Natural England, as a Board Member, and the East Suffolk Trust as a Trustee.

Katherine Berthon receives funding from UKRI BBSRC. She is affiliated with the H3 Project (https://h3.ac.uk/) and a member of the British Ecological Society.

Iris Berger 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 farmers are finding greener ways to produce food, from East Anglia to Andhra Pradesh in India – https://theconversation.com/how-farmers-are-finding-greener-ways-to-produce-food-from-east-anglia-to-andhra-pradesh-in-india-261890

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Samuel Farley, Senior Lecturer in Work Psychology, University of Sheffield

Sadly, most people will come across a workplace bully at some point. Unwarranted criticism, ostracism, personal insults, and verbal or physical threats are just some of the tools in the bully’s locker. Over time, the target of bullying can find it increasingly difficult to defend themselves from this behaviour.

Bullying undermines productive workplaces, and can damage the reputations of both the bully and the organisation. Of course, it is even more damaging for the targets of the bully, who report physical and psychological health problems, job loss, and even symptoms of post-traumatic stress.

With up to one in ten UK employees experiencing bullying, this problem could affect more than three million workers across the country.

In a recent research study drawing on data from 2,469 employees over a four-year period, we examined whether experiences of bullying were related to changes in the “big five” personality traits: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism.

It’s well known that bullying is bad for wellbeing, performance and mood. But why would we think that bullying might change core aspects of a person, including their personality?

Our predictions were primarily based on a personality change theory. The core idea is that repeatedly experiencing thoughts, emotions and reactions that are at odds with a person’s normal traits can actually change them over time.

For example, extroverts are typically cheerful, sociable people who seek excitement. However, an extrovert exposed to bullying would in all likelihood start to experience negative emotions regularly. They might withdraw socially, and could learn that social isolation is an effective way to avoid bullying. As a result, their normal outgoing traits might reduce over time.

Our results showed that being bullied was associated with significant reductions in extrovert traits and conscientiousness (that is, being dependable and organised). The drop in conscientiousness could be because the target feels demotivated by the unfairness of being bullied – or the bullying may even take the form of removing meaningful tasks from the colleague.

Being bullied was also linked to increased neuroticism, which is the tendency to experience negative emotional states such as anxiety, anger and depression.

We also found that longer periods of bullying were associated with the target becoming less of an extrovert and more neurotic.

This suggests that, in addition to all the other harms, bullying can also rob people of their cheerfulness, sociability, dependability and calmness.

Who do bullies target?

Our research also explored whether personality traits were a risk factor for experiencing bullying. We discovered that conscientiousness and extroversion may put workers at greater risk of attracting the attention of a workplace bully.

A cautious interpretation of this might infer that conscientious employees are targeted by those envious of their higher performance levels (tall poppy syndrome – where high-flying people are “cut down” out of a misplaced sense of egalitarianism). It is less clear however why extroverts might be targeted.

Interestingly, when we looked at people who experienced sustained bullying over longer periods of time, we found that other personality traits were risk factors. Neuroticism, openness (encompassing traits of imagination, curiosity and novelty) and disagreeableness were all linked to experiencing bullying for a longer duration.

This indicates that emotional, unconventional and argumentative people tend to experience the most bullying. However, it’s still not fully understood whether it is personality that attracts bullying, or whether in fact the bullying is driving personality change.

There is little other research on the personality types most likely to be targeted by bullies. And we don’t yet know if the personality changes suffered by them are likely to be permanent. However, we do have concrete knowledge about the factors that are most helpful in limiting the impact of bullying on victims.

Working in a supportive environment where wellbeing is prioritised and where there are processes to enable a resolution can really help those experiencing bullying. Equally, receiving support from colleagues, friends and family can limit the damaging effects.

Ultimately, bullying is an escalating process that causes lasting harm. The best medicine is to end the experience as soon as possible, or better yet, prevent it altogether.

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. How workplace bullying can affect your personality – https://theconversation.com/how-workplace-bullying-can-affect-your-personality-265350

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jane Wright, Commissioning Editor, Arts & Culture, The Conversation

No one wants to see a good Jedi turn bad, but that’s exactly what happens to Luke Skywalker actor Mark Hamill in The Long Walk, an adaptation of a Stephen King story of the same name. Hamill plays the terrifying major who presides over a group of young men taking part in a barbaric televised contest that requires them to walk continuously at a speed above 3mph or be summarily executed.

The setting for this violent dystopian thriller is a bleak 1970s America in the grip of economic decline that follows an unnamed war. A forerunner to the Hunger Games (the film is directed by Francis Lawrence, who helmed four of the five-film franchise), The Long Walk focuses on the idea of suffering and survival as spectacle. It’s not hard to see the source material’s influence on series like Squid Game or films like Koushun Takami’s Battle Royale.

Written in 1967, King’s story was a heartfelt response to the Vietnam draft and the impact of the war on his generation. Our reviewer Matt Jacobsen found the setting of a dark, inhospitable America a clever inversion that distils many of the familiar themes of the Vietnam movie. Indeed, he points to the deadly road march as reminiscent of GIs trudging through the jungle of Vietnam in 1980s films like Platoon and Full Metal Jacket.

At the film’s heart is the relationship between Ray Garraty (Cooper Hoffman) and Peter McVries (David Jonsson) with distinct echoes of Stand By Me in its depiction of friendship between boys. It has particular resonance in today’s bleak cultural environment for young men, vulnerable to the darker influences of social media and the conflicting expectations placed on them.

In The Long Walk, wit, tenderness and compassion come to the fore as the contestants are made vulnerable by the punishing exertions of the march and the violence meted out to those who falter. Some consolation perhaps, in what is undoubtedly a grim but compelling watch.

The Long Walk is in cinemas now

---

Read more:
The Long Walk: a brutal, brilliant film about suffering in the name of patriotism

---

KPopping and queer Americana

I have to say I’m late to the KPop Demon Hunters thing, and only started paying attention when a colleague mentioned his young daughters were crazy for it, and explained it was now Netflix’s most watched film ever.

That’s quite an achievement, and it ticks all the boxes: catchy tunes, stunning animations and relatable themes, not to mention a good dose of girl power in the form of three K-pop girl-banders who use their voices to protect the world from demonic forces (of course). But how much does the film reflect the real K-pop phenomenon? Our Korean culture expert Cholong Sung has the answers.

KPop Demon Hunters is on Netflix now

---

Read more:
KPop Demon Hunters gives a glimpse into K-pop culture in South Korea

---

What at first seems like a forbidden love story between a young woman and her fiance’s brother, On Swift Horses unexpectedly pivots to the hidden queer culture that existed in the United States of the 1950s. At the height of the American dream, when culture celebrated marriage and family as duty-bound goals, both characters turn out to be attracted to their own sex.

The glossy iconography of 1950s Americana is reimagined for this hidden world, making visible the queer lives that existed below the radar at a time of social censure and legal repression. This is an enjoyable watch that perhaps, according to our reviewer, would have worked better as a TV series, affording the space to develop characters more fully.

On Swift Horses is in cinemas now

---

Read more:
On Swift Horses: a film that fails to go deep enough on the complex queer lives of people in the 1950s

---

Love in a warm climate

I do love a bit of dark Scandinavian intrigue, so a new adaptation of Ibsen’s The Lady From The Sea makes a welcome addition to London’s theatrical fare. Starring Alicia Vikander as Ellida, a woman drawn ineluctably to the ocean, and Andrew Lincoln as her husband Edward, the setting is transferred from the Norwegian fjords to the Yorkshire coast.

Loaded with contemporary relevance, writer and director Simon Stone references Beyoncé and Just Stop Oil activism, and features a millennial protagonist struggling with climate anxiety. Does it work in this updated incarnation? Read our review and find out.

The Lady From The Sea is on at the Bridge Theatre in London until November 8

---

Read more:
The Lady from the Sea: a fierce play that shies from the wonderful unknowability of Henrik Ibsen’s original

---

From the late medieval period to the Arts and Crafts movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, The Nature of Gothic at the Blackburn Museum and Art Gallery explores the fascinating history of decorative borders. The show takes in in a diverse array of historical examples, from Islamic calligraphy adorned with floral frames, to vividly illuminated medieval manuscripts and the lush decorated margins of Pre-Raphaelite paintings.

The Nature of Gothic at the Blackburn Museum and Art Gallery until December 13

---

Read more:
New exhibition explores history of decorative borders: from medieval manuscripts to William Morris

---

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

– ref. A violent dystopian thriller, KPop Demon Hunters and an updated Ibsen play: what to see this week – https://theconversation.com/a-violent-dystopian-thriller-kpop-demon-hunters-and-an-updated-ibsen-play-what-to-see-this-week-265553

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel O’Brien, Lecturer, Department of Literature Film and Theatre Studies, University of Essex

Over the course of an illustrious film career which began in 1960, Robert Redford starred in more than 50 films and directed nine. He was nominated for an Oscar four times, won best director for his debut Ordinary People in 1980, and received an honorary Oscar for his contribution to the film industry in 2001. It’s an extraordinary body of work – here we pick our ten favourites.

1. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)

Robert Redford defined his Hollywood stardom in 1969 with George Roy Hill’s Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, a film that reconfigured both the western and the buddy movie. Riding the momentum of New Hollywood titles like Easy Rider and Midnight Cowboy, Hill’s film struck a balance between fresh storytelling and classic Hollywood style.

Playing opposite Paul Newman’s wily Butch, Redford’s cool, sharp-shooting Sundance creates one of cinema’s most iconic duos. Their charisma and wit onscreen are as striking as their arresting good looks. But this is also carefully balanced. Sundance’s inability to swim, for example, adds humour and vulnerability, humanising Redford’s star power. The final defiant freeze-frame is culturally iconic, while the film’s legacy lives on through the Sundance Film Festival, providing a platform for independent filmmakers.

2. Jeremiah Jonhnson (1972)

Redford’s portrayal of 19th-century mountain man Jeremiah Johnson tells the tale of a disillusioned figure retreating into the wilderness, seeking solace in the solitude, beauty and danger of the Rocky Mountains.

Sparse in dialogue and narrative, the film relies on Redford’s quiet authority to carry it. Very much a product of its era, it frames Johnson in violent clashes with both Native Americans and nature itself. Most significantly, it marked the beginning of Redford’s long partnership with director Sydney Pollack, a fruitful collaboration that would later include The Way We Were, Three Days of the Condor, and Out of Africa.

3. The Sting (1973)

Reuniting with director George Roy Hill, Redford teamed up again with Paul Newman for The Sting, a stylish 1930s caper about two grifters scheming to outwit a crime boss, played with icy menace by Robert Shaw – a stark contrast to the warmth between the leads. This time it’s Newman’s turn to wear the moustache, with Redford clean-shaven, a playful reversal of their Butch Cassidy look. With its clever twists, Scott Joplin ragtime piano score and screen-wipe transitions, the film won seven Oscars at the 46th Academy Awards, including best picture and best director, and earned Redford a nomination for best actor.

4. All the President’s Men (1976)

Alan J. Pakula’s All the President’s Men paired Redford with Dustin Hoffman in a serious contemporary role, dramatising the Watergate scandal just two years after Nixon’s resignation. A taut, uncompromising account of investigative journalism, the film showcases Redford’s range in a part that eschews glamour for realism and the pursuit of truth. Fifty years later it remains one of cinema’s most sophisticated political dramas. The project owed much to Redford, who approached Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein before securing rights to their book, and adapting it for the screen.

5. Ordinary People (1980)

Redford’s directorial debut, Ordinary People was a huge success, winning best picture and earning him the Oscar for best director. A powerful family drama about grief and alienation, it starred Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore and Timothy Hutton. The film transformed Redford’s career, expanding his influence behind the camera.

6. Sneakers (1992)

Directed by Phil Alden Robinson, Sneakers let Redford dip back into the caper genre, this time with a tech-age twist. He plays a former hacker turned security consultant who, along with a mismatched crew (Sidney Poitier, Dan Aykroyd, River Phoenix), is pulled into a plot over a code-breaking device. The film mixes comedy, intrigue and early 1990s paranoia about surveillance, while retaining a breezy touch as Redford holds it all together with his familiar charm.

7. Quiz Show (1994)

Redford’s fourth feature film, Quiz Show, returned to his interest in public scandal – this time shifting from the White House to NBC’s 1950s game show Twenty-One and the controversy surrounding contestant Charles Van Doren (Ralph Fiennes). Exposing how producers rigged the contest to engineer Van Doren’s success, the film probes questions of truth, media and morality, echoing Redford’s enduring fascination with power and integrity in American culture. Nominated for four Oscars, Quiz Show remains one of Redford’s most accomplished and incisive directorial works.

8. The Great Gatsby (1974)

Jack Clayton’s adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby cast Redford as one of literature’s most enigmatic figures: Jay Gatsby, the wealthy, detached, and obsessive dreamer pining for Daisy Buchanan (Mia Farrow). With his good looks and charisma, Redford embodied Gatsby’s allure, mystery and melancholy, even as the film itself divided critics. Lavish costumes and period design capture the excess of the Jazz Age, while Redford grounds the story’s glittering parties with Gatsby’s aching loneliness.

9. All Is Lost (2013)

J.C. Chandor’s All Is Lost is an engaging piece of action survival cinema, with Redford at 77 proving he could still carry a film entirely alone. He plays an unnamed sailor in the Indian Ocean whose boat is punctured by a drifting shipping container, an accident that escalates into a fight for survival on the open sea. With almost no dialogue (just 51 words), the drama relies on Redford’s presence and physicality. Like Jeremiah Johnson transposed from mountains to water, the film is elemental and meditative, and Redford delivers a late-career performance of remarkable endurance, which earned him the New York Film Critics Circle Award for best actor.

10. The Old Man & the Gun (2018)

David Lowery’s The Old Man & the Gun was announced as Redford’s final starring role, and it feels like a fitting farewell. While he later appeared briefly in Avengers: Endgame (2019) and in the anthology film Omniboat: A Fast Boat Fantasia (2020), this was the last feature he headlined.

Redford plays Forrest Tucker, a real-life career criminal who, well into his seventies, escapes prison and keeps robbing banks with a smile. The film isn’t about suspense so much as presence, and Redford brings the same easy charisma that defined his early career. Gentle, nostalgic and playful, it stands as an apt curtain call for a legendary performer and filmmaker.

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Daniel O’Brien 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. Robert Redford: ten great films from a brilliant career – https://theconversation.com/robert-redford-ten-great-films-from-a-brilliant-career-265687

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Verena K. Brändle, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham

Elon Musk seems to enjoy awkward surprise appearances. Joining a far-right rally in London via livestream, he demanded the “dissolution” of the British parliament, falsely linked immigration to violence, and warned that the only option for protesters was to “fight back” or “die”.

He did similar in January 2025 when he joined a campaign event of the German far-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD). Again over video he told supporters that “the German people are really an ancient nation” and the AfD is “the best hope for the future of Germany”.

It appears that the currently second-richest person in the world has become a mascot for the European far-right. In 2022, Musk bought one of the major social media platforms, then Twitter, to promote “free speech”. He stepped right into the ongoing “culture war” that is currently polarising US politics and finding traction across Europe. This makes him a problem for democratic politics.

The combination of massive wealth, far-right ideology and power over a large share of public discourse is a recurrent issue for democracy in general, but its negative effects have become even more prevalent in the age of social media. Two aspects are of particular importance here: social media companies’ monetising of user data and a dependence of democratic politics on platform discourse.

Social media runs on an advertisement-based revenue model. Every click or lingering over a post produces data and metadata which are a lucrative resource. Social media companies make a lion’s share of their revenue from charging advertisers to show ads to specific users based on such data. Some of us might remember Mark Zuckerberg replying “Senator, we run ads” when asked during testimony before the US Senate in 2018 how he made money without charging users for his services.

Importantly, advertisers do not only come in the form of clothing brands, restaurant chains and protein shakes. Political parties, governments, think-tanks, and foundations have all paid for ads on social media.

Studies show that social media has contributed to political polarisation during crucial political moments such as Brexit. It also harms democratic discourse when it facilitates online abuse that excludes already minoritised groups from democratic debate. Too often, such abuse is directed at minority women and girls as well as LGBTQ+ people.

Meta has followed X’s turn towards a right-leaning interpretation of “free speech”. It has abolished its third party fact-checking programme, widely credited with helping to manage disinformation.

Meanwhile, politicians across Europe struggle to decide what to do about Musk’s destabilising comments. Keep in mind that governments are doing (or thinking about doing) business with big tech leaders. This situation is politically complex, to say the least, because Musk and others, while being outspoken about their annoyance with aspects of democracy, are also at the forefront of developing the AI technologies many nations are relying on in their hope for economic growth.

This means that Musk has cracked the code for success in capitalist democracies: he makes the headlines with extreme statements, allows debates to unfold “freely” on his platform, and makes some of his money from the generated data.

This situation has created a strange relationship between democratic politics and social media leaders. For people like Musk, there is almost an economic incentive to engage in politics, riling up people and pressuring governments. He is both a business leader and a political actor.

“Free speech” regulations on social media platforms and their leaders’ political stances are increasingly at odds with democratic guidelines. Democracies need to have a more focused debate about how to minimise this incentive structure for destabilising politics.

---

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

---

Verena K. Brändle 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. Elon Musk’s speech to far-right rally should have us all thinking about the power social media companies hold over our democracies – https://theconversation.com/elon-musks-speech-to-far-right-rally-should-have-us-all-thinking-about-the-power-social-media-companies-hold-over-our-democracies-263074

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefano Kaburu, Senior Lecturer in Conservation Biology, Nottingham Trent University

Drinking more than you intended may be something that many humans do, but now research is showing that a taste for alcohol is surprisingly common among animals. In fact a new study has found that chimpanzees may ingest the equivalent of two alcoholic drinks a day from eating fermented fruit.

In the last ten years or so, there has been growing evidence that the ingestion of alcohol might be more widespread across the animal kingdom than previously thought. Fruit flies, for example, lay their eggs in alcohol-rich fermented fruits, which offer the newly hatched larvae nutrients to feed on.

In 2015, scientists observed groups of chimpanzees in west Africa drinking large amounts of raffia palm alcoholic sap harvested by the local villagers. More recently, in April 2025, a population of chimpanzees at Guinea-Bissau were recorded feasting on ripe African breadfruits which contained high concentrations of alcohol.

The published studies mark a shift because evidence of alcohol consumption in wild animals tends to rely more on anecdotal observations. In Sweden, a moose made the news in 2011 when it was found stuck in a tree, apparently drunk from eating fermented apples.

And vervet monkeys in St Kitts, whose ancestors were brought there with enslaved people from west Africa, are often spotted stealing fruity cocktails from tourists.

The new study, led by biologist Aleksey Maro of the University of California, Berkeley, offers insights into how much alcohol is in the ripe fruits favoured by two wild chimpanzee communities living in eastern and western Africa.

Having spent almost a year studying chimpanzees in the wild myself, I have always been mesmerised by how excited they get when they spot their favourite fruits. Chimpanzees go crazy for fruit. They rush over to grab them and stuff their mouths full, all while making joyful noises of appreciation.

In their research, Maro and his colleagues collected more than 200 fruits from about 20 of chimpanzees’ favourite trees. They found large variation in alcohol content with some having zero or nearly zero alcohol content. But some of the fruits most enjoyed by the chimps, such as figs and plums, tend to have a very high alcohol content.

This suggests that chimps may intentionally select fruits for their high levels of alcohol. Because of the large quantity of fruits chimpanzees can eat every day (up to 4kg), the authors worked out that both female and male chimps consume roughly 14 grams of alcohol per day. This corresponds to a standard US alcoholic drink (UK standard drinks contain eight grams of alcohol).

But it’s not fair to directly compare these numbers between humans and chimps since the effect of alcohol depends on how big an individual is. Alcohol tends to be less potent in bigger people.

With an average weight of around 40kg, chimps tend to be smaller than humans. So the amount of equivalent alcohol that chimps consume actually corresponds to two American standard drinks per day. It sounds like chimps know how to have a party.

The drunken monkey hypothesis

Twenty-five years ago, Robert Dudley, who is one of the authors of the new study, proposed the “drunken monkey hypothesis”. This suggests that alcohol consumption in humans might have an ancient history. Dudley’s idea is that ingesting alcoholic fruits might have given an evolutionary advantage to animals. The alcoholic content in fruits can, for example, indicate to animals which ones are rich in energy and sugar.

Drinking alcohol can be good for health. Fruit flies, for example, ingest alcohol to kill parasites. Even in humans, studies have shown that low levels of alcohol consumption may reduce the risk of heart disease.

Support for the drunken monkey hypothesis came from research showing that the proteins humans need to break down alcohol in their body was already present in the common ancestor we share with gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos that lived 10 million years ago.

This was a time when African forests started shrinking, and apes started coming down from the tree, adopting a more land-based lifestyle. It’s possible that these apes gained an advantage in eating ripe fermented fruits that had fallen onto the ground, avoiding the competition with other fruit-eating animals who could eat unripe fruit on trees.

Researchers also think that alcohol might make them more sociable. Chimpanzees in west Africa, for example, were observed in April 2025 eating and drinking fermented fruits together.

However, according to Dudley, in addition to having the same human protein that breaks down alcohol, chimpanzees may drink alcohol in low concentrations due to the high volume of liquid and food they ingest. So their stomach may fill up before alcohol reaches intoxicating levels.

This would explain why, in the 11 months that I spent watching chimps in Tanzania, I didn’t once see them wobbling around the forest, clutching a juicy fruit while laughing uncontrollably.

Stefano Kaburu 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. Chimpanzees ingest more than the equivalent of one alcoholic drink a day – new research – https://theconversation.com/chimpanzees-ingest-more-than-the-equivalent-of-one-alcoholic-drink-a-day-new-research-265644

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Vitaly Kazakov, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Manchester

If you were to read this: “Unity through music: top artists from across the globe come together on one stage to inspire and unite millions” you could be forgiven for thinking it’s an advertising blurb for next year’s Eurovision. But it isn’t. On the contrary, it’s the slogan for this year’s Intervision song contest, which takes place in Moscow on September 20.

Intervision was initially conceived during the cold war as a “counterweight” to Eurovision, but it never really caught on and was discontinued in 1980. Russia subsequently took part in Eurovision between 1994 and 2021, and it was ultimately expelled after the invasion of Ukraine. It recorded its only win in 2008, and hosted the contest in 2009.

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, issued a decree in February this year announcing that Intervision would be revived “to further develop international cultural and humanitarian cooperation”. This year’s contest will feature artists from 23 countries, including representatives from China, Africa, Asia, Latin America, Central Asia and the Middle East. Interestingly, the US will also have an entry – although the original artist pulled out “for family reasons” on September 17. His place has been taken by an Australian singer who is resident in the US.

Intervision is a prime example of the way in which, in today’s highly febrile geopolitical situation, popular cultural and sporting events are being weaponised.

This is nothing new, nor is it exclusive to contemporary Russia. In the sporting world, many people saw Qatar’s enthusiasm for hosting the 2022 World Cup as a way of cementing its position as an important regional hub in the Middle East. In the sports world, the use of major events to project soft power is known as “sportswashing” – and everyone does it. Think of the opening ceremony of the London 2012 Olympics which was directed by the multi-award winning film-maker Danny Boyle.

Now, analysts are examining the way the Putin administration is using music to further its political end and calling it “songwashing”.

Intervision is clearly being taken very seriously by the Kremlin. The deputy prime minister, Dmitry Chernyshenko – who presided over the planning for the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014 – is chair of the organising committee. Konstantin Ernst, head of Russia’s Channel One TV network and mastermind behind the Sochi 2014 opening ceremony, is also heavily involved.

In what appeared to be a direct snipe at Eurovision, the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov – a close ally of Putin – said Intervision would be free from “perversions or affronts to human nature”. After Eurovision in 2024, the country’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, said the contest had “surpassed any orgy, sabbath, or ritual sacrilege”. This sort of
conservative messaging has been a staple of Moscow’s political communication to audiences at home and abroad for more than a decade.

The cultural boycott of Russia since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine has hurt the country’s efforts to reach audiences. Russia has been barred from an array of major sporting and cultural events such as the Olympics, the football World Cup and European Championships and Eurovision. Its ballet, opera companies and orchestra have been barred from many of the world’s most prestigious venues and works by Russian composers and playwrights have been blacklisted in many countries.

The Kremlin’s response has been to arrange its own versions of what is sometimes dubbed “mega-events”, albeit on a much smaller scale. In 2023, Putin announced Russia would host a World Friendship Games, to be held in Yekaterinburg the following year, “to ensure the guaranteed free access of Russian athletes and sports organisations to international sports activities, and the development of new formats for international sports cooperation”. The event was subsequently postponed over fears that it would not attract enough top competitors, despite a large prize pot on offer.

A Brics Games featuring competitors from 82 countries was held in Kazan in the Russian republic of Tatarstan in June 2024. Russia topped the medals table.

Likewise, the University International Sports Festival was Russia’s response to being barred from hosting the FISU 2023 World University Games.

Seeking new audiences for ‘Russian values’

Russia’s use of such sporting and cultural events has been described as a new form of “Potemkinism” – after the showcase villages built in Imperial-era Russia to impress visitors. Although, to be fair, projecting soft power in this way is in no way exclusive to Russia or any other authoritarian states.

Intervision is the same. It’s designed to appeal to both a domestic crowd, legitimising Putin’s regime, as well as projecting “Russian values” and cultural depth to the rest of the world (at least to those paying attention). These events signal to audiences at home and abroad that things are “normal” in Russia, despite the country being engaged in a bitter war with its neighbour Ukraine.

It dovetails with attempts to build anti-western coalition through its efforts on the diplomatic stage. It is also an effort to send a message about Russia and the state of the world to audiences which might be wary of what they regard as an all-pervasive US influence.

At first glance, these Soviet-era events may appear as a quirky manifestation of cold war nostalgia. But they are part of a push by countries like Russia, China and others to build a rival cultural and international order.

It’s highly unlikely that Intervision will send the Russian entry Shaman – a controversial, pro-war singer described as one of Russia’s chief propagandists – into the global pop stratosphere. But it’s worth keeping an eye on how global audiences respond, particularly those beyond the west. It may be that some people outside the joyously camp Eurovision bubble are receptive to Intervision’s more conservative messaging.

Vitaly Kazakov receives funding from the European Commission’s Horizon Europe programme.

– ref. Intervision: Russia’s bid to rival Eurovision song contest – but with more conservative values – https://theconversation.com/intervision-russias-bid-to-rival-eurovision-song-contest-but-with-more-conservative-values-265685

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Katherine Steele, Senior Lecturer in Sustainable Crop Production, Bangor University

Many Britons enjoy a curry served with a heap of fluffy white basmati rice, its delicate aroma balancing the heat of the dish. But few stop to think about the grain’s long journey. From the paddy fields of India and Pakistan, through regional markets and rice mills, then matured for a year in silos before being shipped in bulk to the UK.

It then passes through one of the country’s 16 processing sites before reaching supermarket shelves. The UK imports around 250,000 tonnes of basmati rice every year – making it one of the world’s biggest markets.

This summer, consumers got a glimpse of what could potentially happen when that supply chain goes wrong. Four people were arrested in late July after investigators found different types of rice in bags being passed off as a well-known basmati brand.

The National Food Crime Unit uncovered the alleged fraud when tests showed the wrong type of rice inside premium-brand packets. The operation began in Leicester, where police arrested a man suspected of repackaging ordinary rice into counterfeit basmati bags. Three more arrests followed in London. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) says the investigation is ongoing and no charges have been brought.

Basmati is a prestigious grain, prized for its nutty flavour and popcorn-like aroma. Alongside jasmine from Thailand and Italy’s arborio, it sits at the top of the speciality rice market. When shoppers buy a packet of basmati, they expect quality. If it falls short, they may feel cheated and think twice about buying that brand again.

To prevent this, the UK operates strict rules under the basmati code of practice. The code sets out which varieties can legally be called basmati, how they may be blended and what level of non-basmati grain is tolerated.

There must not be more than 7% of another rice variety in a packet. It’s a figure reduced from 20% two decades ago, but which cannot be lowered further because of the realities of handling multiple varieties in large mills.

This code was agreed by the Rice Association and the British Retail Association, and it applies across Europe. When exporters in India and Pakistan develop new basmati varieties, samples are sent to the Rice Association in London for approval.

An important tool in enforcing these rules is DNA testing. Every grain carries a genetic fingerprint that can confirm whether it belongs to one of the approved basmati varieties.

Public analyst laboratories regularly test shipments entering the UK and EU. The FSA also runs an annual survey of basmati products bought at random from retailers.

The current DNA test for basmati authentication was developed through collaboration between my colleagues and me at Bangor University, the FSA and public analysts.

We profiled hundreds of rice varieties and continue to refine the markers used to identify basmati. Before the method was approved, our team ran blind tests of results from known spiked mixtures of grains across different laboratories to ensure reliable results.

An age-old problem with modern costs

Food fraud is nothing new. For centuries, unscrupulous traders have substituted cheaper goods or mislabelled products.

While swapping rice is less harmful than adulterating food with toxic substances, it still matters. Consumers resent being duped, brands suffer reputational damage and companies that play by the rules lose out. The stakes are high because the UK rice industry is worth close to £1 billion a year.

There are points of vulnerability every time the grains get passed from one trader to the next. It is not known whether it mainly takes place overseas. Economic pressures may be making the problem worse. As the UK experiences sluggish economic growth, opportunities for food crime may be increasing.

Counterfeiting is easier to identify using DNA testing than when known mixtures of varieties are introduced further up the food chain. It is probable that some of the less well-known brands of rice sold in the UK may contain varieties that are not listed in the basmati code of practice. These could easily slip through the DNA test because complex mixtures can be made to contain all the right molecular signatures.

Even so, food sold in the UK is among the most closely regulated in the world because of the work done by the FSA. Their National Food Crime unit leads the fight against food crime as exemplified by the recent case of the counterfeit basmati, but consumers must be vigilant because there are still fraudsters about. This can include being wary of poorly printed packaging labels, misspellings, broken seals and unusual pricing. Because if the price seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Katherine Steele receives funding from UKRI, DEFRA and Food Standards Agency.

– ref. Why your basmati rice might not be what you think it is – https://theconversation.com/why-your-basmati-rice-might-not-be-what-you-think-it-is-264146

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Patrick Byrne, Professor of Water Science, Liverpool John Moores University

The amount of toxic “forever chemicals” flowing into the River Mersey in north-west England has reached some of the highest levels recorded anywhere in the world.

My team’s research links much of this contamination to old landfills, waste facilities and past industrial activity. Even if these chemicals were banned tomorrow, they would continue polluting our rivers for decades, possibly centuries.

But there is a path forward. We’ve developed a new method
to track and prioritise the largest sources for clean-up, giving regulators a clearer picture of where to act first.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), more commonly known as “forever chemicals”, are a large family of human-made chemicals found in everyday products like food packaging, water-repellent clothes and fire-fighting foams. They are valued for their ability to resist very high temperatures and to repel water and oil, but these same properties make them extremely persistent.

Once released, some PFAS could take thousands of years to break down. They accumulate in the environment, build up – with different compounds accumulating at different rates – inside the bodies of wildlife and people, and have been associated with harms to health. The most studied types have been linked to cancers, hormone disruption and immune system problems.

Last year, my research team discovered that the amount of two potentially cancer-causing PFAS chemicals washing off the land and into the Mersey was among the highest in the world. In our follow-on research, we travelled upstream to try and locate where these PFAS are coming from. But with hundreds of potential PFAS sources, how do we isolate the largest ones?

The secret is measuring something called the PFAS load – the total amount of PFAS flowing through the river at a given point, rather than just the concentration in the water.

Here’s why that matters: a small stream can have high concentrations but carry only a small total amount, while a large river with lower concentrations can be transporting far more PFAS overall. If we only look at concentration, we risk missing the really heavy polluters.

By measuring PFAS loads at multiple points along the Mersey system, we could see exactly where the largest increases occurred. That told us both the location and the scale of PFAS inputs.

We detected PFAS chemicals at 97% of our sample sites, even in supposedly pristine streams draining from the Peak District national park. But the big breakthroughs came when we matched the largest PFAS load increases to specific areas.

PFBS (a type of PFAS) was coming in huge amounts from land draining old landfills in the Glaze Brook watershed near Leigh, west of Manchester. PFOA, a globally banned and cancer-causing PFAS, appeared to originate from a waste management facility on the River Roch, north of Manchester. PFOS, another banned PFAS, was entering the River Bollin, with strong evidence pointing to historic firefighting foam use at Manchester Airport.

What’s most striking to me is that all these sources are rooted in the past – old landfills, waste sites or historic industrial use. These chemicals are no longer in production, but they are still escaping into the environment, decades later.

This is where PFAS load measurements make a real difference. Instead of chasing the highest concentrations – which might lead to cleaning up small streams that contribute little overall – we can target the sites releasing the largest total amounts of PFAS into our rivers.

It’s a simple idea with major implications. In a world where environmental regulators face tight budgets and limited monitoring capacity, knowing exactly which sites are the biggest sources is vital.

The Mersey is just one example. Around the world, PFAS contamination follows a similar pattern: numerous potential sources scattered across the landscape, many of them historical. The chemicals’ extreme persistence means they will continue cycling through rivers, soils and wildlife for generations unless active steps are taken to remove or contain them.

Our latest study shows that measuring PFAS load can help solve one of the toughest challenges in managing chemical pollution: working out where to start. By identifying and prioritising the biggest sources, regulators have a realistic chance of reducing the flow of forever chemicals into our rivers – and perhaps one day, making that nickname a little less true.

Patrick Byrne receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council.

– ref. How I tracked the biggest hidden sources of forever chemical pollution in UK rivers – new study – https://theconversation.com/how-i-tracked-the-biggest-hidden-sources-of-forever-chemical-pollution-in-uk-rivers-new-study-261967

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Martin Farr, Senior Lecturer in Contemporary British History, Newcastle University

Donald Trump’s first state visit to the UK, in June 2019, was an attempt by the British government to try to forestall the threat of Trumpism, a set of ideas and style of leadership that were not, in the end, embedded. The unprecedented second state visit of September 2025 has been an attempt to accommodate the second Trump administration – one already much more purposeful and consequential.

In one respect, the two visits are complementary: they feature an imperturbable president entreated by beleaguered prime ministers. Theresa May was humiliated publicly by Trump, and was gone the following month. Starmer has almost nothing in common with Trump except a quite unexpected, and largely inexplicable, personal chemistry.

Briefings on Air Force One, as it headed to the UK, would have been brief – the president is easily bored – and aimed at preparing him for what awaited: thousands of people in uniform choreographed to the inch to impress a mere dozen or so Americans, and one in particular.

There were issues of substance, some of which are very substantial indeed. A civil “nuclear partnership” almost complementing the 70-year-old military nuclear partnership. As they already do in the older partnership, the two sides will now recognise the other’s standards and safety assessments in civil nuclear projects. More was made of the vaunted “tech prosperity deal”.

These agreements are meaningful and had Lord Mandelson at their core, before his sacking. He would be justified in viewing – as he doubtless does – that the state visit was in part a posthumous monument to his ambassadorship.

State visits are a key part of national diplomacy, and particularly when royalty may be deployed. As ever, Trump tests norms to breaking point. In a constitutional monarchy such as Britain’s, the monarch acts on the advice of the government. But Trump is potentially so damaging by association for the government (and Starmer in particular) that the monarch was more central than ever.

Trump and his supporters will not admit publicly that so dominating a political actor makes people bend to their will. Faced with the most imperious president in the history of the imperial presidency, they seek to accommodate, pre-empt, cajole, appease. One exception is a king.

This state visit – and the likely return trip of Charles to the US for the 250th anniversary of US independence next year – is a card the British were suitably shameless in playing. There is a clear rapport between the two; indeed, a rapport that would have been unlikely – given their different personalities – with Elizabeth II. Charles III has proven to be an essential, rather than merely complementary, element of the special relationship.

For once, there’s a precedent for so singular a president. In November 2003 – after a million marched in London in opposition to the US-UK invasion of of Iraq – President George W. Bush scarcely left a barricaded Buckingham Palace.

Where a state visit ordinarily occasions – demands – an open-topped carriage ride along the Mall with the monarch, it is a unique irony that the leader of Britain’s closest ally had to travel by drone-shielded helicopter. No members of the public – who effectively paid for the visit – saw the president.

This time, Windsor suited much more than Buckingham Palace as the venue because, as one might hope from a castle, it is secure and can repel the unwanted.

Wednesday’s procession professing “Trump not welcome” was a relatively modest affair. The Stop Trump Coalition – an umbrella association of over 60 organisations including CND, Extinction Rebellion, Fossil Free London, Keep our NHS Public, and the National Education Union – may need to reconsider its founding imperative.

That the demonstration was significantly smaller than the one that greeted Trump in 2019 – notwithstanding the even more fevered and febrile public square – is testament to a sense of resignation occasioned by this repeat of history.

Opposites attract

Inasmuch as it’s possible with Trump, nothing was left to chance, apart from the press conference, where disagreement was minimal, though unusually clearly stated – a sign of confidence. Starmer and Trump were clearly reading from different hymn sheets on recognising Palestine and net zero. Trump’s suggestion that the UK follow his lead by sending the military out to deal with illegal immigration is more a disagreement of degree.

They were, however, news lines which were catnip to Starmer’s critics on the right, and in the weeks to come will receive repeated airings. As expected, the Mandelson/Jeffrey Epstein affair had receded in the press – if not the public mind. That Trump denied knowing Mandelson, despite their private meeting the week before, said much more about the president than it did the former ambassador.

Without any public presence whatsoever, the ceremonies and parades were for one person only. The risk of looking slightly desperate, however, proved one worth taking. US media coverage was minimal, meaning wider exposure was limited, and the president was clearly impressed.

The visit also demonstrated, more than ever, the value of royal diplomacy: that it can lubricate, augment, constitute a historical-cultural thread that impresses those a UK government may wish to impress. The extent to which that translates into material benefits is harder to test.

The state visit of President Trump to the UK mattered to both, but it mattered much more to one. Contrary to expectations, opposites so far have attracted. The special relationship has survived and even prospered in the face of uncertainty.

Its smooth passing may provide a locus for a natural – rather than yet another staged – reset. May’s fluffing of the 2017 general election was enough in Trump’s eyes, to condemn her, but so far Trump’s affection for Starmer has withstood the growing talk of the defenestration of a prime minister with a 22% approval rating. There remain three years to see how long that persists.

Martin Farr 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. Trump, Charles and Starmer: a successful state visit steadies an uncertain premiership – https://theconversation.com/trump-charles-and-starmer-a-successful-state-visit-steadies-an-uncertain-premiership-265597