Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Miguel Lurgi, Associate Professor in Computational Ecology, Swansea University

Setting aside land for nature is one of the main global strategies to conserve biodiversity. From national parks to local reserves, these areas are designed to give wildlife the space it needs to thrive. But my latest research with colleagues shows that these protected areas don’t always work in the way we expect.

They can help increase the number of species and provide habitats for large predators. But they don’t necessarily preserve the complex web of interactions that keeps ecosystems functioning. Our study found that the effectiveness of protected areas varies widely across Europe. This has mixed effects on the ecological relationships that sustain life.

Protected areas are central to international conservation policy. In 2022, governments at the UN biodiversity conference (Cop15) agreed to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. The framework aims to protect 30% of the world’s land and sea by 2030. The ambition is to halt biodiversity loss and safeguard the services that healthy ecosystems provide.

But while the number of protected areas continues to grow, there is still debate about how well they work. Most studies measure biodiversity success by counting species or tracking population trends. These are important, but they miss a crucial part of how ecosystems operate: the network of ecological interactions. Interactions between species such as predator-prey relationships connect species together in ecosystems and are crucial for their persistence.

---

Read more:
World’s protected natural areas too small and isolated to benefit wildlife – new study

---

We wanted to find out how effective protected areas are at maintaining these networks. Understanding this is central to ensuring that conservation measures protect not only individual species, but the relationships between them that support ecosystem stability and resilience.

We analysed 376,556 records of bird sightings gathered by citizen scientists from online databases. These records covered 509 bird species distributed across 45 protected networks stretching from the Mediterranean to Scandinavia.

By combining these observations with information on which species eats what, we built food webs, which are diagrams that map predator-prey interactions, for both protected and non-protected environments. We then compared the structure of these food webs to assess how well protection helped maintain their integrity.

We found that protected areas can have positive effects on the structure of food webs, but not always. In general, protected sites supported more bird species, particularly those in the middle of the food chain, and we also found larger predators within those areas. For example, less pristine or smaller habitats may only have a sparrowhawk. Whereas more diverse habitats may have a golden or a Bonelli’s eagle. That’s often a sign of a healthier ecosystem.

But for other important features, such as how many interactions each species has or how long the food chains are, the results were far less consistent. Some protected areas showed positive effects, while others showed neutral or even negative ones.

When protection doesn’t mean balance

This means that what works for conserving species does not necessarily work for conserving the ecological interactions between them. Preserving these relationships is crucial because they underpin ecosystem stability.

If predators decline or disappear altogether, their prey can grow, unchecked. This may disrupt the balance of an entire ecosystem. One striking example comes from the Aleutian Islands off Alaska, where the loss of sea otters led to an explosion in sea urchins and the near collapse of kelp forests.

The same principles apply across terrestrial ecosystems. The loss of pollinators, for instance, can have dramatic consequences for both wild plants and crops, threatening food security as well as biodiversity. These examples show why it’s not enough to conserve species in isolation. The connections between species also need protection.

Our study found that how well a protected area works depends a lot on where it is located and how it is managed. We found that factors such as remoteness, habitat diversity, human pressure and the amount of surrounding agricultural land were all linked to how well food webs were preserved.

Protected areas established under the EU Birds Directive, which specifically focuses on maintaining bird populations and habitats, showed the strongest positive effects. This suggests that having a clear conservation goal and strong management practices makes a real difference.

Protected areas that are more diverse in habitat types also tend to support richer ecological networks. This demonstrates the importance of maintaining habitat integrity. In comparison, areas with a lot of human activity or patchy habitats often find it harder to maintain the balance of species and interactions that make ecosystems thrive.

Rethinking how we measure conservation

Our study highlights the complexity of conservation action. Simply protecting land is not enough. To be truly effective, conservation must consider not only how many species live within an area, but also how those species interact.

These interactions are essentially the ecological glue of the natural world. They are what allow ecosystems to persist and perform vital functions such as pollination, pest control and nutrient cycling. Ignoring them risks overlooking early warning signs of ecosystem collapse.

---

Read more:
Protecting Brazil and Indonesia’s tropical forests requires political will, law enforcement and public pressure

---

To secure a sustainable future, conservation policies must go beyond species counts and focus on safeguarding the intricate networks that keep life in balance.

If we focus on how nature functions, not just which species live there, we can make sure protected areas really keep our ecosystems healthy.

Miguel Lurgi 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. Why national parks and nature reserves don’t always safeguard ecosystems as expected – https://theconversation.com/why-national-parks-and-nature-reserves-dont-always-safeguard-ecosystems-as-expected-266623

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Joel Gray, Associate Dean, Sheffield Hallam University

There can be no doubt that any conversation about British girlbands of the last 30 years would be dominated by Spice Girls.

In whichever corner of the globe you are, they were the defacto pop force of the late 1990s – and their impact has been long-lasting. From Adele to Beyonce Knowles-Carter, many contemporary world-class artists cite them as an inspiration.

However, new BBC documentary series Girlbands Forever focuses on many other girlbands who have emerged in British pop music from the early ’90s (Eternal) to the present day (Little Mix). It takes a broadly chronological overview, charting their development, releases and eventual splits in almost forensic detail.

As both a girlband fan and researcher, I was, though, disappointed that it offers little discussion of the impact these artists have had on their fans. Also absent from discussion is the link to queer audiences – something many girlband members have made specific reference to themselves.

One celebratory theme that is strong throughout this three-episode series is diversity and sisterhood. Eternal, All Saints, Atomic Kitten, Sugababes and Little Mix were all made up of racially diverse singers. And as each girlband passed the baton to the next generation, both media and society seemed more and more at ease with this concept.

Other topics of discussion include changes in the media (from newspapers to gossip magazines to reality television to social media) and society more broadly (rave culture, “Cool Britannia” and changing governments). This grounds the girlband discussions in a wider context.

Particular attention is paid to Little Mix as the girlband who won TV talent show The X Factor in 2011 – yet no mention is made that Girls Aloud did it nearly ten years earlier, when they won Popstars The Rivals in 2002.

Indeed, the fact Girls Aloud are not mentioned at all in the series is a glaring omission. While Little Mix faced abuse from anonymous social media trolls and the Spice Girls were constantly targeted by ’90s tabloid newspapers, Girls Aloud were the defining girlband of the celebrity gossip magazine era in the mid-2000s. Experts such as author Michael Cragg have written about the band’s impact on pop culture, and fans are likely to be disappointed by their omission.

The absence of a band which produced superstar (and later X Factor judge) Cheryl Cole highlights another area which a future series could go into: the solo career struggles and successes of these girlband members. Cole had two solo no.1 albums, and joins Spice Girl Geri Halliwell as one the most successful British female artists of all time.

The success of girlbands has always nurtured rich careers in the entertainment industries for its individual members. Both Jade Thirlwall and Perrie Edwards of Little Mix had top-five albums in the same month recently. Spice Girl Mel B is an international TV icon, judging talent shows on multiple continents; Atomic Kitten Natasha Hamilton has established her own record label; and Eternal’s Louise Redknapp had a top-10 album in 2025.

Spice Girl Melanie C and the All Saints’ offshoot Appleton (composed of sisters Natalie and Nicole Appleton) have been seen in the studio this year, with projects rumoured for 2026.

There are also plentiful non-music projects to mention. Many girlband members go on to support charities and philanthropic causes. Halliwell recently received an honorary doctorate from my university, Sheffield Hallam, for her work advancing rights for women and children on projects with the United Nations and Royal Commonwealth Society for Literacy. And Mel B has received awards for raising awareness of domestic abuse.

But for every number-one record and charity ambassadorship role, there is a member who may have not had the same luck. All Saints star Melanie Blatt, for example, has taken on a “chef residency” at a London pub which, while no bad thing, feels rather different to filming television shows in LA, or the solo efforts of her Girls Aloud and Spice Girls peers.

In contrast to the documentary’s omissions, I am glad it spotlights the brilliance of Atomic Kitten stalwarts Jenny Frost and Natasha Hamilton, who were quintessential noughties pop stars and gay icons.

In lieu of much Spice Girls and Girls Aloud discussion, their energy and charisma brings a welcome feeling of personal nostalgia – and a reminder of why the world needs fantastic popstars. Their cheeky charm, which first won me over 25 years ago, still makes me smile today.

---

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.

---

Joel Gray 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. Girlbands Forever: BBC documentary charts the highs and lows of British girl groups – with one glaring omission – https://theconversation.com/girlbands-forever-bbc-documentary-charts-the-highs-and-lows-of-british-girl-groups-with-one-glaring-omission-268677

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andrew Edwards, Student Learning Developer, The University of Law

In Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula (1887), an English solicitor (Jonathan Harker) is sent to Transylvania to assist Count Dracula, an aristocrat, in his move to England. When Harker discovers Dracula lying in a coffin after feeding on blood, he understands the threat that Dracula poses to England.

Vampires have long represented our political and social attitudes to race, immigration and the threat of foreign invasion – reflecting the prejudices of their times.

My research explores how comic books and graphic novels interrogate political, social and cultural issues. Dracula became a 20th-century pop culture phenomenon, appearing in several films and TV programs. But American comic books were relatively slow to feature vampires.

In 1954, the US Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency investigated the comic book industry. Hearings were held to testify about the perceived harm caused by crime and horror comics. To allay threats to their business, publishers banded together to form the Comics Magazine Association of America and established The Comics Code of 1954, which banned crime and horror content, including stories featuring vampires. A revision and relaxation of the code in 1971 enabled vampires to be used when “handled in the classic tradition” of novels such as Dracula “and other high calibre literary works written by Edgar Allen Poe, Saki, Conan Doyle and other respected authors whose works are read in schools around the world”.

This led to the creation of the character Morbius the Living Vampire, who debuted in Amazing Spider-Man #101 in July 1971. Morbius was a scientist with a blood disease whose experimental cure using vampire bats led to his transformation.

Soon after, Dracula himself joined the Marvel comic universe in Tomb of Dracula #1 (November 1971), a series that ran until 1979. Writer Marv Wolfman and artist Gene Colan had to work within the limitations of the code by ensuring that they adhered to a traditional depiction of Dracula in line with Stoker’s original version. This could have limited the style and content of their stories, which were set in the modern era, but the inclusion of a newly created supporting cast kept the narrative fresh and engaging.

Vampires in American comic books retained this outsider status – invariably they were European immigrants like Morbius, who was born in Nafplio, Greece. In this way, comic vampires continue the literary vampire tradition of tapping into the fear of foreigners.

Doctor Doom: anti-immigrant populist politician

Comic book writer Ryan North explored a variation of this theme with Doctor Doom, the Marvel Comics’ super-villain, in issues of Fantastic Four released this year. Doom will be played by Robert Downey Jr. in the new film Avengers: Doomsday, due in 2026.

Doom rules Latveria, a fictional European country. He has recently declared himself Emperor of the World, supported by leaders of nations across the globe. Doom also uses Trump-style populism by propagating prejudice and fear-mongering against vampires.

In Fantastic Four #29 (February, 2025) Susan Storm, Ben Grimm and Jennifer Walters (also known as the Invisible Woman, the Thing and She-Hulk respectively) meet for lunch in a New York diner. They discuss Doom’s recent activities, which their waitress agrees are wrong before asserting that “at least he’s doing something about those horrid vampires”.

Outside, sat on the sidewalk, is a dishevelled, slumped vampire holding a sign that reads: “Anything Helps.” Apart from slightly elongated nails and subtly pointed canine teeth, there is nothing to distinguish him from any other normal person begging on a street.

Sue, Ben and Jen then leave the diner and encounter a terrified family of four being chased by an angry crowd. The father exclaims “Please! Leave us alone!!” and “Please don’t kill us” as they try to outrun the mob. The family, dressed in normal casual clothes, are vampires.

Protected by the heroes, the parents explain that they are starving. Having been turned away from a blood bank, and not wanting to harm people, they had resorted to eating a pigeon, which prompted the chase. Members of the crowd scream “Vampires!”, “Kill them!” and call them “monsters”. The parents are killed by a member of the mob, but the vampire children are saved by the Fantastic Four. This leads to Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic) creating a synthetic food substance that quenches vampires’ bloodlust, before ensuring the children are re-homed with their aunt.

Thinking that solving vampires’ hunger for blood will render Doom’s propaganda impotent, the story ends on a foreboding scene: a normal suburban house in America, with parents waving off their children to school. However, their house is bedecked with Maga-style pro-Doctor Doom flags and signs. It seems that Doctor Doom is still winning the hearts and minds of many Americans.

In One World Under Doom #3 (April, 2025) a group of superheroes and super-villains team up against their common enemy and find out how Doom has manipulated the world’s leaders. Using their own powers, they discover that he has not used magic, telepathy or mind control. He has merely negotiated with other leaders to become World Emperor. His populist policies have been embraced by the public.

This, along with the anti-vampire rhetoric and misinformation, creates a powerful allegory of the far-right ideologies that are currently being propagated by politicians across our own world. This current portrayal of Dr Doom as a proxy for public figures and politicians who use anti-immigrant rhetoric, harmful stereotypes and egregious misinformation, strongly suggests that they are the real monsters. Not the immigrants – or vampires for that matter.

---

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.

---

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

Andrew Edwards 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. A brief history of comic book vampires – including a homage to Donald Trump – https://theconversation.com/a-brief-history-of-comic-book-vampires-including-a-homage-to-donald-trump-266188

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Holly Crudgington, Postdoctoral Researcher in Adolescent Mental Health, University of Oxford

Most of us know what it’s like to be a teenager at school – and how it feels to fit into (or fall outside of) a school’s social hierarchy. This typically includes some version of the popular kids, the loners and the in-betweeners, who have friendships that span across different groups.

However, teen hierarchies are more than a passing social order. Research suggests that these social networks and positions can shape mental health too. In a recently published study, my colleagues and I found that they also relate to one of the most serious health challenges among young people today: self-harm.

Self-harm – hurting yourself on purpose – is common in adolescence. While it is likely that some self-harm goes unreported, around 16%-22% of adolescents report having harmed themselves at least once. The behaviour appears to be increasing, particularly among adolescent girls. Worryingly, adolescents who self-harm have an increased risk of worsening health and mental health, including fatal outcomes like suicide.

There may be many reasons someone engages in self-harm. For example, it can be a coping mechanism to relieve emotional distress (intra-personal) by focusing on a physical sensation. Or it can be shaped by social factors (inter-personal) such as peer relationships.

For example, teenagers may be being influenced by the behaviour of others or use it as a means of communicating distress. Indeed, research has found that peer relationships are deeply important in adolescence and matter for self-harm.

However, little research has focused on how the school-based friendship networks of teens relate to self-harm. We addressed this gap by analysing data on teen friendship networks and self-harm from a cohort study of adolescent mental health in the UK called the Resilience Ethnicity and Adolescent Mental Health (Reach) study, which follows a large a group of people over time.

Reach has collected data from around 4,000 adolescents from 12 mainstream secondary schools in inner-city south London. Pupils at the schools completed questionnaires on their mental health and social networks (among other measures) over time. To date, Reach is the largest and most recent cohort study of adolescent mental health among young people from diverse inner-city areas in the UK.

In this study, we focused on the first year of Reach data collection, when adolescents were aged 11 to 14 years old. Adolescents were asked to report if they had “ever tried to harm or hurt themselves”, with 14% reporting yes. They were also asked to name friends within their school year. This is the first time a cohort study in the UK has collected data on both school friendship networks and self-harm.

We used social network analysis to “map” out teens’ friendship networks and to calculate several measures reflecting young people’s social positions within their networks.

This included: “popularity” (how many people named you as a friend), “bridging” (being an in-betweener and connecting otherwise disconnected friendship groups) and social isolation (having zero or one friend only), among other measures. We also looked at how many of their friends had reported self-harm, and then explored if and how these different network measures related to self-harm.

Social networks and self-harm

We found that both who adolescents are friends with in school and how they are connected to their friends were linked in different ways with self-harm. Strikingly, nearly half of adolescents had at least one friend who reported self-harm. This was linked to adolescents being more likely to report engaging in self-harm themselves, which might suggest peer-influence.

Various social positions in teen networks were also linked to self-harm. Some positions were protective, meaning adolescents were less likely to self-harm, whereas other positions were risky, meaning they were more likely to self-harm. Risky positions included social isolation, but also to some extent popularity and bridging (in-betweener).

While popularity is often seen as a desirable social status, it could also bring with it social pressures which may indirectly lead to self-harm. Bridging may reflect adolescents who are “between” different friendship groups, which may be socially taxing and link to self-harm.

Protective positions included “sociality” (nominating lots of people as friends) and being part of a tight-knit friendship group with friends who are friends with each other. However, the strongest links were for social isolation and having friends who report self-harm.

We also tested if there were any differences by gender. We expected the effects to be stronger among girls compared with boys. However, we found little evidence of this – which suggests that social networks relate to self-harm the same across boys and girls from our diverse, inner-city London sample.

It is important to note that these findings come from data that was collected at a single point in time. This means our findings are associations, and we cannot imply causation, or establish which direction the associations might be in. For example, do social networks predict self-harm, or does self-harm predict social networks? This needs to be further studied.

Our study highlights that self-harm is an important health challenge to tackle in adolescence – and considering teens’ social networks in school may be an important part of tackling that challenge. Specifically, self-harm is not something to be understood in isolation – but there may be social elements to the behaviour for some, and it may be shaped by teens’ social networks.

It also suggests that if both connection (such as having friends who self-harm) and disconnection (social isolation) from peers are associated, then there is a need for more than one approach to self-harm prevention in schools. While it may be tempting to focus on those who are socially isolated, it is also important to consider friendship group dynamics, and how adolescent’s self-harm may affect the wider peer-network.

Ultimately, peer relationships in adolescence deeply affect us and can continue to shape mental health for decades. The more we understand teen social networks, the better we can support young people’s mental health.

This research was conducted as part of a PhD project supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), Centre for Society and Mental Health at King’s College London (ES/S012567/1), the European Research Council (REACH 648837), and the London Interdisciplinary Social Science Doctoral Training Partnership (LISS-DTP). The author declares no competing interests.

– ref. How teen friendships may predict self harm – https://theconversation.com/how-teen-friendships-may-predict-self-harm-267553

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chau Le, Senior Lecturer in Banking and Finance, University of Lincoln

Sustainable or responsible investing has experienced huge growth over the past decade. This investment approach is anchored in environmental, social and governance principles and is known as ESG. This set of standards is designed to ensure that funds are directed toward companies that protect the environment, have a positive impact on people through things such as labour standards, and operate ethically, transparently and with accountability.

Global ESG assets are predicted to hit US$40 trillion (£30 trillion) by 2030. Yet, despite the rise, inconsistencies in standards and data across ESG providers make responsible investing far more complex than it should be.

The world today faces compounding crises – climate change, geopolitical instability and what economists call “macroeconomic fragmentation”. This refers to the breaking apart of global economic cooperation: countries are turning inward, imposing tariffs, pursuing divergent monetary policies, and allowing political tensions to impede cooperation on shared challenges.

The traditional boundaries of ESG are now being tested – and difficult questions emerge. Should ESG funds continue to exclude arms and defence firms? Or perhaps it is time to reconsider what sustainability really means in today’s volatile world.

---

Ever wondered how to spend or invest your money in ways that actually benefit people and planet? Or are you curious about the connection between insurance and the climate crisis?

Green Your Money is a new series from the business and environment teams at The Conversation exploring how to make money really matter. Practical and accessible insights from financial experts in the know.

---

For decades, defence companies were lumped into the same category as tobacco firms or fossil fuel giants – excluded from ESG portfolios for being damaging to society or incompatible with peace. For example, an EU report in early 2022 recommended that investments in weapons be formally classified as “socially harmful” and therefore excluded from funds marketed as ethical.

But since the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, public sentiment – and investor perception – has begun to shift. Security is being reframed as a prerequisite for sustainability. Without peace and stability, there can be no climate action.

Several countries have already begun adapting their policies. Germany, for instance, has reclassified defence as part of its national sustainability strategy.

SEB, one of the Sweden’s largest banks, had long prohibited its funds from investing in the arms industry. But after the war in Ukraine, it reversed this policy to allow selective investments in the defence sector. The bank cited a changing geopolitical landscape for its decision.

And more recently, the European Commission’s ReArm Europe plan was released in March 2025. This aims to mobilise €800 billion (£697 billion) in defence investments over the next four years.

These changes raise a critical question: can defence spending now be seen as part of a responsible investment strategy?

A world of grey zones

Despite the growing push to integrate defence into the ESG framework, the EU has yet to formally clarify whether such investments are consistent with its sustainable finance criteria. Without guidance, businesses and financial institutions face a confusing and often contradictory landscape.

As sustainable investing becomes more mainstream, it’s increasingly vulnerable to greenwashing, political pressures and competing ethical values. What qualifies as “ethical” in one country may be unacceptable in another.

For example, large-scale hydroelectric projects in southeast Asia may satisfy the “E” (environmental) component of ESG by producing low-carbon energy. But they can also lead to the displacement of Indigenous communities – undermining the “S” (social) element.

Individual investors appear to be increasingly interested in making their money matter. But many remain unaware of how ESG funds are constructed – or what they may include. The presence or exclusion of defence companies is rarely disclosed clearly in fund documentation. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to align investments with personal ethics.

To make more informed choices, investors should demand clearer reporting, especially regarding dual-use technologies. This is tech that can be used for both civilian and military purposes and controversial sectors such as nuclear energy and surveillance technologies.

Investors could consider asking whether the fund explicitly discloses its position on defence, arms or dual-use technologies, as well as how it balances short-term geopolitical realities with long-term environmental sustainability. Fundamentally, they should consider whether what they know of the fund’s ethical stance aligns with their own values.

In an age of accelerating climate risks and geopolitical fragmentation, the ESG landscape is far from black and white. The inclusion of arms and defence in “ethical” or “responsible” investing may seem paradoxical, but it reflects a deeper shift.

These days, security and sustainability are increasingly intertwined. The real challenge is not just how we invest – but how we define the good we aim to achieve. As the world grows more complex, so too must the frameworks for responsible finance.

Chau Le 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. Conflict and the climate crisis may mean it’s time to rethink what we mean by responsible investing – https://theconversation.com/conflict-and-the-climate-crisis-may-mean-its-time-to-rethink-what-we-mean-by-responsible-investing-259486

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tessa Devereaux, Assistant Professor in Politics, SOAS, University of London

Mali’s military regime is coming under increasing pressure from Jama’a Nusrat ul-Islam wa al-Muslimin (JNIM), an armed group linked to al-Qaida that now controls large swathes of territory across the Sahel region of western and north-central Africa. The group is blockading major highways in Mali and torching tanker lorries, with dwindling fuel supplies threatening to suffocate the country economically.

Expert observers have described JNIM as one of “Africa’s deadliest jihadist groups”, with the insurgency responsible for an estimated 64% of violent events in the Sahel area since 2017. It is rapidly expanding its territorial reach, and has launched a series of coordinated attacks across Mali in recent months.

The group has seized army infrastructure, carried out strikes on convoys of fuel tankers, and assaulted foreign-owned factories and mines. It has also kidnapped foreign nationals for ransom. Some experts anticipate that the group may soon start a full siege on the Malian capital, Bamako.

So what is behind JNIM’s success? On the surface, the explanations are clear. Mali’s government has struggled for decades to assert control over the northern and central regions of the country. Decades of neglect, corruption and state brutality have eroded public trust in state institutions, while human rights abuses perpetrated by the military have deepened these grievances.

A wave of military coups across the Sahel in recent years has been met with cautious optimism in some quarters, raising anticipation of a more effective counterinsurgency strategy against JNIM forces. Yet the group’s recent successes in Mali suggest a militarised approach has done little to increase the region’s stability.

Explaining JNIM’s success

JNIM has provided security and justice in a context where state efforts have failed. As an amalgamation of several preexisting armed groups, the group has deep local roots across the Sahel – encompassing people from the Tuareg, Arab, Fulani, Songhai and Bambara ethnic communities.

This has allowed it to intervene effectively in communal conflicts, from tackling banditry to solving disputes over resource access. With some parts of Mali having been governed exclusively by the group for 11 years, it is clear that JNIM is providing an attractive offer to much of the civilian population.

Research shows that JNIM also appeals to local populations in other, more unexpected, ways. One overlooked factor is the group’s emphasis on social mobility. Its leaders have criticised and attacked local elites for neglecting social welfare provisions and employment opportunities, while maintaining rigid social hierarchies.

This social justice message means the group appeals especially to formerly enslaved populations and marginalised pastoralists, some of whom have reported seeing recruitment as “an opportunity for social liberation”.

As a nomadic herder from central Mali’s Mopti region described in a 2016 interview with Leiden University researcher Boukary Sangaré: “The only feeling that animates us is that we can free ourselves from the yoke of the domination of our elites. We have long been subjected to all forms of exploitation by the administration in complicity with our elites … This is why many of us are in the bush with weapons.”

Rigid gender norms are another piece of the puzzle, with access to marriage being at the heart of the group’s appeal to disenfranchised youth. Marriage is a key social institution in Mali. Yet soaring bride prices – payments made to a bride’s family that are almost universal across Mali – mean marriage is largely out of reach for young men.

Islamist groups have offered practical solutions to this gendered grievance. In one survey from 2020, carried out by the NGO International Alert, 100% of women and 90% of men surveyed in the Mopti region said JNIM affiliates had improved access to marriage.

As one man described in an interview in 2022: “The jihadists have helped to reduce the celibacy of women. Now everyone finds someone … They reduce all the expenses of the ceremonies that prevented young people from getting married, so they get married more easily.”

Focus groups conducted in central Mali demonstrate similar findings. One respondent in the village of Siniré reported in 2020 that “high bride prices are now prohibited; they have to be reasonable … Nowadays you’re free to marry without money being demanded from you.”

These strategies have even boosted support for JNIM among women. Known for enforcing strict dress codes and curbs on freedom of movement, Islamist groups like JNIM are often assumed to be straightforwardly oppressive to women – yet evidence suggests the story is more complicated.

By appealing directly to them and capitalising on gender grievances in Mali, the group is able to undermine powerful local elites and establish social control over large areas of territory.

In the context of widespread gendered discrimination, Islamist courts are sometimes seen as more likely to rule in favour of women. In focus groups held in the central Malian villages of Sampara, Siniré and Torodi, one woman described how “if a girl is forced into marriage, she may now appeal to the armed extremists to uphold her right to consent”.

Other women see Islamist governance as a worthwhile trade-off, noting that the group offers protection from sexual violence. A survey conducted across Mali in 2019 identified physical protection as a primary motivation for Malian women to support Islamist groups.

In 2020, during an interview with International Alert, a female public figure in Mopti compared the jihadists favourably to other armed groups, as well as state actors. She explained: “The jihadists are responsible for less sexual abuse compared with the others … and any of their people who are found guilty of these kinds of acts are executed.”

The rapid recent expansion of JNIM across the Sahel, and the increasing threat it poses to the city of Bamako, make it clear the group should not be underestimated. Meanwhile, the scorched-earth campaign pursued by Mali’s military government has done little but exacerbate resentment.

JNIM has proved adept at navigating the social and political fault lines which the Malian state and international community have long ignored. Unless these root causes are addressed, the group is unlikely to be defeated.

Tessa Devereaux has received funding from the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, United States Institute of Peace and the International Studies Association. She is an Assistant Professor in Politics at SOAS, University of London.

– ref. Why an armed group linked to al-Qaida is gaining ground in Mali – https://theconversation.com/why-an-armed-group-linked-to-al-qaida-is-gaining-ground-in-mali-268787

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matt Jacobsen, Senior Lecturer in Film History in the School of Society and Environment, Queen Mary University of London

In Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960), Marion Crane looks up at the house looming in the night sky behind the Bates Motel, its hybrid New England/Victorian style oddly out of place. We’re left with the odd, impossible feeling of a face made up of windows for eyes and a door for a mouth.

That uncanny sense of a building being unconsciously anthropomorphised became a well-used horror trope, from the New England clapboard home of The Amityville Horror (1979) and at scale in Kubrick’s The Shining (1980), the vast Overlook Hotel’s lit windows strongly suggesting a brooding, malevolent giant looking back at the camera.

Part of an early 2000s wave of horror-tinged animated family films, Monster House (2006) takes that eerie suspicion that houses are looking back at us and makes it brilliantly literal. The house really is looking back at DJ and Chowder, two pals who believe they see sinister goings-on across the street in the house of cranky, gap-toothed Mr Nebbercracker (Steve Buscemi).

As the film’s plot unfolds, we see the shutters of the top windows open and shut like eyelids, sharpened slats flip up and become teeth in the mouth of the front doors and the clapboard exterior creak and contort into frowns and sneers.

---

Read more:
Scary stories for kids: Gremlins and the terror of normal, even cute, things becoming horrific

---

From the opening shot that follows an orange autumn leaf as it floats to the ground, Monster House oozes Halloween atmosphere. Co-written by beloved American comedy creator Dan Harmon (Rick and Morty and Community), it’s a perfect film for horror aficionados and a brilliant first taste of the genre’s delights for the young novice.

In the first three minutes alone there are visual references to The Shining, Rear Window, Creature from the Black Lagoon, Psycho and others I likely missed. Behind its quirky horror-lite surface there is a surprisingly emotional story of a devoted husband and wife, and a charming depiction of childhood friendship.

---

This article is part of a series of expert recommendations of spooky stories – on screen and in print – for brave young souls. From the surprisingly dark depths of Watership Down to Tim Burton’s delightfully eerie kid-friendly films, there’s a whole haunted world out there just waiting for kids to explore. Dare to dive in here.

---

This film is ostensibly for a family audience but I don’t mind admitting it scares me. It carries a PG certificate and I might place the age range at 8+ for this film, not least because of the (apparent) onscreen death that occurs in the first ten minutes.

I regularly recommend it to seasoned grownup horror fans for how well it understands and executes the conventions of the genre. Watching it almost 20 years after its release, the CGI animation is clearly a bit clunky but the atmosphere remains deeply creepy.

The film is particularly brilliant in its execution of the “Lewton Bus” variety of fake-out jumpscares. These creative acts of trickery are named for a moment in the Val Lewton-produced 1942 film Cat People where the audience fears that Jane Randolph will be mauled by a growling off-screen feline only to be startled by the engine of a bus pulling up to the kerbside. This iconic scene became the basis for similar jump scares in classics of the horror genre, from Halloween to The Descent.

---

Read more:
A brief history of the haunted house in western cinema and literature

---

Centring on friendship between a group of industrious kids and the inherent creepiness of American small town suburbia, the film is also a nostalgic love letter and a gateway to the fiction of Stephen King. It is particularly inspired by IT, whose dilapidated “House on Neibolt Street” provides the scariest sections of King’s book and its 2017 film adaptation. King fans will also spot the cymbal clattering toy monkey as a reference to King’s short story The Monkey.

While some of the film’s eerie tension is lost once the house uproots itself and goes on a small-scale, Godzilla-like suburban rampage, it’s a film that is unafraid to try out fun ideas and follow through on its weird promise. Monster House is one of my favourite family films and, for its sheer love and enthusiasm for the genre, one of my favourite haunted house films full stop.

Monster House is suitable for children 7+

---

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.

---

Matt Jacobsen 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. Scary stories for kids: Monster House is a kid’s film for serious and budding horror buffs alike – https://theconversation.com/scary-stories-for-kids-monster-house-is-a-kids-film-for-serious-and-budding-horror-buffs-alike-268518

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Diogo Veríssimo, Research Fellow in Conservation Marketing, University of Oxford

Environmental crime is big business, often listed among the world’s top five criminal activities, just behind counterfeiting and drug crime. So it would be reasonable to think it is a big priority for global law enforcement.

But our new research suggests this is not the case. For each country using a global list to track down wanted individuals, less than 2% of the crimes they were wanted for were environmental, on average.

Interpol’s red notices are one of the few ways to understand international law enforcement priorities. When nations submit a red notice, these alert Interpol’s 196 member nations of the details of a wanted person, including physical characteristics and a description of the crime.

Once approved, Interpol publishes this on its list of red notices, and requests that law enforcement agencies including police forces assist in locating the named person – then provisionally arrest them pending extradition or other legal action.

Red notices do help. Recently, Simon Leviev, an alleged fraudster dubbed the “Tinder Swindler”, was arrested after a red notice was issued for allegations of defrauding multiple women he met on the dating app of large sums of money. The notice flagged him as a wanted person when making an international border crossing, promoting cross-border cooperation between police and border forces. He was arrested at the Georgian border for crimes committed predominantly in Norway.

Our research examined how frequently this is used to combat environmental crime, compared with other crimes such as fraud or murder. By analysing red notices, we wanted to know if environmental crime is a global priority.

Our results showed that this tool is rarely used for environmental offences. Of more than 4,400 active Interpol red notices when we did the study in December 2023, just 21 were categorised as environmental crimes. That’s less than 0.5% of the total.

---

Read more:
Explainer: what is an Interpol red notice and how does it work?

---

If you’re thinking maybe this tool only works for high-profile individuals, that isn’t the case. Earlier this year, Interpol coordinated a global operation involving 138 countries and regions to arrest 365 suspects and seize 20,000 endangered animals.

And in 2023, Tanzania requested the publication of two red notices which led to cooperation between Tanzania, Thailand and Egypt to track down a wanted individual for tortoise trafficking. The publication of the red notice flagged their wanted status as they crossed an international border, leading to their arrest.

Red notices can evidently be a useful tool in the fight against growing environmental crime.

Why this matters

Environmental crime is vast, including illegal logging, mining, waste trafficking, and the poaching and smuggling of wildlife. Together, these activities generate billions of dollars each year, often ranking just behind the global trade in drugs and arms.

They drive deforestation, pollution and biodiversity loss, while fuelling corruption and violence as they converge with other violent, organised crimes.
They can be incredibly harmful not just to the environment but people too.

There is a growing recognition of the impact of pollution on people’s health, for example. Without tackling this crime, growing global commitments to protecting biodiversity, such as through the 30×30 target – where nations commit to protecting and conserving a minimum of 30% of land and sea for biodiversity by 2030 – risk becoming symbolic.

The near-absence of environmental criminals from Interpol’s red notice list matters because it reflects how low environmental enforcement still ranks in global policing priorities. As long as these crimes are treated as less important, they will continue to thrive in the shadows, with enormous social and ecological costs.

Strengthening cooperation between national police forces through means such as Interpol red notices could make a big difference, especially in the face of cuts to international development funding, which may leave some enforcement agencies under-resourced.

Environmental crime isn’t a niche issue, it’s a threat to global security, public health, and issues such as pollution and water quality that the public depend on. If governments truly consider it a crisis, why aren’t more of its perpetrators on the world’s most-wanted list?

The problem may not simply be that governments don’t care. Environmental crime often crosses borders and legal systems. It’s not always clear who is responsible, or even which laws apply.

A crime such as illegal fishing or waste dumping may affect multiple countries, making prosecution difficult. Some nations still treat environmental offences as minor, while others lack the capacity to investigate the crime enough to find out who is responsible.

It is important to understand why nations aren’t using Interpol’s red list more effectively to prosecute environmental crime. Finding out if it’s lack of will, resourcing, or understanding of how to prosecute the perpetrators could be key to tackling environmental crime more effectively.

---

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.

---

Diogo Veríssimo receives funding from the UK Government’s Illegal Wildlife Trade Challenge Fund.

Sally Sinclair receives funding from The Leverhulme Trust Space for Nature Doctoral Scholarships.

– ref. Why are so few environmental criminals on Interpol’s ‘most wanted’ list? – https://theconversation.com/why-are-so-few-environmental-criminals-on-interpols-most-wanted-list-268346

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stephen Wood, Professor of Management, University of Leicester

More than five years into the homeworking revolution, a narrative seems to have emerged – of employees being hauled back to the office against their will. This contrasts with what COVID taught us: that people can work flexibly, benefit from not commuting, and even work for employers based far from their home – expanding the labour pool for employers.

In fact, both of these arguments are oversimplifications.

There is nothing inherent to working from home that makes it inefficient or efficient. It may not be particularly flexible, and may lead to people working longer hours (though this is variable). Even if employees welcome it, they may still experience downsides like missing in-person relationships.

The one pre-COVID study which used objective data to compare homeworking and onsite working, from Stanford University in the US, found that productivity of homeworkers was higher. But later studies, using objective and subjective measures, have produced mixed results.

The pre-COVID study later found no difference in average productivity levels between hybrid and full-time on-site working. Hybrid workers did nonetheless have higher levels of job satisfaction and lower quit rates.

But these studies do not delve behind the figures, implying that productivity simply reflects employees’ effort. In contrast, my recently published research, using professional workers from two universities in the last phase of COVID lockdowns, reveals a more complex picture.

The employees I interviewed reported that homeworking enhanced their ability to focus, particularly through having fewer interruptions from colleagues. They were saying they were more effective but not necessarily more efficient. Their emphasis was on getting tasks done, rather than the working hours or effort this required.

The majority did not report a significant increase in hours worked. If their working day was longer, it often reflected a change in when work was done – for example, to accommodate home-schooling.

Fewer interruptions and better focus may lead to workers achieving more in less time. But it may equally mean employees take more care over their work, or delve into issues in more detail – both of which may actually reduce the number of tasks achieved.

Of course, better quality of work can sometimes translate into greater productivity. If a worker is more focused when writing reports, for example, this could result in fewer drafts and less time spent proof-reading.

The paradoxes of homeworking

Homeworking is characterised by paradoxes. In my study, many employees missed the social side – yet the lack of interruptions was a positive consequence of this. One employee called homeworking “a two-sided coin. Yeah, I really enjoy the ability to concentrate better and focus, [but] I miss being able to engage with people [in] daily contact.”

A second paradox emerged: remote working allows people to spend more time at home, but it also makes it harder for them to detach from work. Again, the positive and negative sides of homeworking are interdependent.

Consequently, homeworking has similar effects on performance. The lack of social interaction diminishes people’s ability to do their job, yet the lack of interruptions increases it. More time with family and for domestic duties is good for wellbeing, yet struggling to switch off is detrimental to it.

How well employees perform in their jobs (and domestic tasks) will reflect how well they manage these tensions – and deal with questions such as: “Should I complete a task, or attend to my family?”

These challenges are managed in various ways, using substitutes for face-to-face interactions and strategies to detach from work. Methods used within my sample include having a separate office or asking family members not to interrupt them during work hours.

More subtle strategies to separate work from home life include people dressing in work clothes before logging on, then changing when finishing work. One man used a towel to cover his PC after logging off, to hide his work equipment and signal the end of his working day.

What employees want

How successful people felt in managing these homeworking conflicts had a big influence on how they judged their performance – and their view of homeworking and its role in their future lives.

Hybrid working – where an employee combines working at home with working on-site – is a way of managing these contradictions so employees achieve a more integrated life. Most participants in my study preferred it – even though they had learned to manage working at home during their forced experimentation with it during COVID lockdowns.

I found that attitudes to homeworking changed over the course of the pandemic. At first, many people were wary. For example, a personal assistant believed she could not possibly do her work at home, as it depended on a close relationship with her boss – but later began to realise that she could.

Most participants said they would not want to go back to a full-time on-site role, because they did not want to lose this improved work–life balance. But the majority were particularly attracted to hybrid working, which they said helps to manage the paradoxes of homeworking.

There was widespread recognition that some aspects of work are best done on-site and others at home. Strikingly, avoiding commuting or wanting to spend more time at home were not key considerations for most of my interviewees.

However, my findings suggest that reversing the trend towards homeworking, or attempting to limit hybrid working patterns, may be at odds with the preferences of workers. Reports of conflicts over hybrid working are commonplace – for example, the dispute at the UK’s Office for National Statistics.

I believe there is no need to pit the benefits of on-site working and homeworking against each other. Rather, the aim should be to make both options function optimally. Employers should encourage line managers and employees to review what can – and cannot – be done at home.

As for employers who really want on-site working as the default, they should begin by ensuring they provide an attractive work environment and opportunities for employees to feel involved.

Stephen Wood’s research was part-supported by a grant from the University of Leicester’s ESRC Impact Acceleration Account (GrantES/T501967/1).

– ref. Home vs office working: why it doesn’t have to be a battle – https://theconversation.com/home-vs-office-working-why-it-doesnt-have-to-be-a-battle-267084

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jack McNamara, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Exercise Physiology, University of East London

Exercise is like medicine for the heart, and just like with medication, you need the right “dose” for it to be effective. But a recent study suggests that the dose might not be the same for everyone. Researchers found that men need roughly twice as much exercise as women to see the same reduction in their heart disease risk.

This recent study asked over 85,000 UK adults aged 37-73 to wear an accelerometer (a device that measures body movement and activity levels) on their wrist for seven days. They then tracked each participant’s health outcomes for just under eight years.

The results are eye-opening.

Women who did roughly four hours of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week – activities, such as brisk walking, jogging, cycling or dancing, which raise your breathing and heart rate – had around a 30% lower risk of coronary heart disease. Men needed to do roughly nine hours of the same types of physical activity to see a similar reduction.

This was also true for people already living with heart disease. The paper estimated that women diagnosed with coronary heart disease needed to do around 51 minutes of physical activity each week to reduce their risk of death from any cause by 30% – while men needed to do around 85 minutes of exercise.

Although these findings might sound shocking to the average person, they confirm something that exercise scientists have suspected for years. There is also a clear biological reason that can partly help explain why women and men see such different results from physical activity.

Biological differences

Women typically have higher oestrogen levels than men. This hormone has important effects on how the body responds to exercise.

Oestrogen can help the body burn more fat for fuel during endurance exercise and helps keep the blood vessels healthy – partly by supporting their energy-producing mitochondria (the tiny powerhouses inside cells that generate energy for vital functions).

Women also tend to have more slow-twitch muscle fibres, which are efficient and fatigue-resistant. These muscles suit the kinds of steady, sustained physical activity most exercise guidelines recommend.

So the gap in “minutes needed” for similar heart benefits between women and men isn’t as shocking as the findings might suggest.

Since the study used device-measured activity, instead of asking people to recall from memory the amount of activity they did, this means the data on physical activity was accurate.

It’s also important to note the study still showed a graded benefit. More total weekly activity was linked to lower risk of coronary heart disease in both women and men. Everyone gains from moving more. The difference is just in how much activity buys the same reduction in risk.

The study does not claim that women should do less exercise – nor that men can’t reach similar benefits. It only shows that men may need more weekly activity to get there.

But there are limits to keep in mind. Activity was measured for only one week – then people were followed for about eight years.

And, as it’s an observational study, other factors that could have partly influenced the results were not taken into account – such as menopausal status (when oestrogen levels drop significantly) or whether a woman was using hormone replacement therapy (which can restore some oestrogen levels). These factors could influence how women’s bodies responded to exercise.

It’s also worth noting that the volunteers came from the UK Biobank study. These volunteers tend to be healthier and less deprived than the general population – factors which can affect baseline heart health, access to safe places to exercise and time available for physical activity. This can affect how widely the results apply to everyone.

Still, these results make an important point about current exercise recommendations and whether they need to be revised.

Exercise recommendations

Current exercise guidelines from the World Health Organization, the American Heart Association and the NHS are sex-neutral. But this new study challenges these recommendations – showing they might not apply equally to everyone.

For decades, most exercise research was done predominantly in men and results were often assumed to apply equally to women. As better device-based data arrives, we’re learning that women and men may get different returns for the same number of active minutes.

This matters because women and men experience heart disease differently – from symptoms to outcomes. If the amount of exercise needed to reach the same benefit also differs, our advice should reflect that while still keeping things simple and practical.

This isn’t about telling women to exercise less. The 150-minute baseline remains a useful target – and many people don’t yet meet it. What these findings suggest is that women who meet current targets may see more heart health benefits per minute of exercise. That’s encouraging news for anyone who struggles to find time for longer workouts.

For men, the message isn’t “double your gym time”. It’s to keep building activity in ways that fit your week – with more total minutes bringing even greater heart health benefits. Whether different types or intensities of exercise might be more efficient for men remains a question for future research.

Both men and women clearly benefit from regular physical activity. That’s not in question. But what does need to be recognised is the clear biological differences that influence the returns men and women see from the same types of exercise.

Cardiac rehabilitation and exercise referral schemes often set identical targets for men and women. This new research suggests we may want to rethink schemes and tailor goals to each person’s starting point.

But until cardiac rehabilitation becomes more personalised, the core message for now is: move more, sit less. Aim for the baseline 150 minutes of exercise each week if you can. More helps if you’re able to.

Jack McNamara 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. Why men need more exercise than women to see the same heart benefits – https://theconversation.com/why-men-need-more-exercise-than-women-to-see-the-same-heart-benefits-268624