Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Colleen Murrell, Chair of the Editorial Board, and Full Professor in Journalism, Dublin City University

The world’s media are currently busy recording the tales of released Israeli hostages, freed Palestinian prisoners and their families after a ceasefire came into effect for the war in Gaza. But they are doing so while still being held at a distance from the centre of the story.

Foreign journalists have been banned by Israel from entering the Gaza Strip independently since the start of the war. And senior members of the international media are not optimistic that access to Gaza will change any time soon.

I asked Phil Chetwynd, global news director at Agence France-Presse (AFP), why he thought Israel was so insistent at keeping out external reporters. He told me:

Any situation where independent media are kept out or targeted gives rise to questions about the motivation. We are told it is because of our safety, but we have been covering wars non-stop for the past 100 years. We are ready to assume the risks. Given the extraordinary high death toll of journalists in Gaza, we have to presume it is a deliberate attempt to stop media revealing the full impact of the war and the Israeli military campaign.

---

Read more:
How Israel continues to censor journalists covering the war in Gaza

---

He reflected on how AFP would like to plan its coverage.

Our Palestinian journalists have done an amazing job, but all our Gaza staff journalists were evacuated over a year ago. They would like to return. The Palestinian freelancers who work for us have also done incredible work, but they are absolutely exhausted after two years of conflict. So we need journalists to be able to enter the Gaza Strip – I do not make a distinction between Palestinian and international.

He added:

I think it is important to have fresh eyes on the situation on the ground. I would also say it is sometimes easier for international journalists to report more freely on the activities of Hamas.

Reporting on Gaza

For the past two years, the only access Israel has provided for foreign media to enter Gaza has been under embedded conditions with the Israeli military. In the weeks following the October 7 Hamas attacks in 2023, a number of British reporters including from the BBC and Channel 4 News did avail of this restricted coverage. American correspondents and news agencies have also taken up offers.

But this access has been sporadic and has favoured Israeli journalists. In August 2025, an ABC Australia team managed to secure an “embed” trip to the Kerem Shalom aid site in southern Gaza after repeated requests were turned down.

In his report, ABC’s Matthew Doran pointed out that embeds are “highly choreographed and controlled”. However, Doran explained that he accepted the trip as “an opportunity to gain access to a site Israel is using to prosecute its case it is trying to feed the population of Gaza – an argument the humanitarian community, and world leaders, argue is full of holes”.

Doran noted that the small embed trip included an Israeli media outlet, an Israeli writer and “a handful of social media influencers”, all eager to post pro-Israeli sentiments. Israel has consistently accused the international media of succumbing to Hamas propaganda.

A number of initiatives have been tried over the past 24 months to enable external reporters access to Gaza. The Foreign Press Association (FPA) in Jerusalem has challenged the restrictions in Israel’s supreme court.

On September 11, the FPA noted that it had been a full year since it submitted its second petition to the court. But despite the urgency, it said “the court has repeatedly agreed to the [Israeli] government’s request for delays and postponed one hearing after another”.

---

Read more:
Gaza: high numbers of journalists are being killed but it’s hard to prove they’re being targeted

---

Petitions have also been sent to the Israeli authorities with the backing of international media organisations and groups such as Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). Both of these have coupled their campaigns with calls for an immediate end to the killing of Palestinian journalists in Gaza who have been the world’s only eyes on the conflict as witnessed by those under fire.

According to the CPJ’s Jodie Ginsberg, writing in the Guardian in August, more than 192 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza since the start of the war. This number includes 26 journalists whom the CPJ believes have been targeted deliberately in “the deadliest conflict for journalists that we have ever documented”.

Israel has denied targeting journalists, except in cases where it has accused particular Palestinian journalists of being terrorists. The CPJ has argued in return that Israel should stop “its longstanding practice of labelling journalists as terrorists or engaging in militant activity, without providing sufficient and reliable evidence to support these claims”.

As recently as September, the BBC along with AFP, Associated Press and Reuters launched a film calling on the Israeli authorities to allow the international press access to Gaza. It noted the media’s part in informing the world about the D-Day landings, the Vietnam war, the Ethiopian famine, the Tiananmen Square massacre, the Rwandan genocide, the Syrian refugee crisis and the current conflict in Ukraine.

David Dimbleby’s narration calls on Israel to allow international reporters in, “to share the burden with Palestinian reporters there so we can all bring the facts to the world”.

But looking at the current stalemate, a cynic might ponder if the the first open access to Gaza will be to the Washington press caravanserai that will surely be allowed in to document the rebuilding of Gaza into a Trump-envisioned riviera.

Colleen Murrell has received funding from Irish regulator Coimisiún na Meán (2021-4) for research for the annual Reuters Digital News Report Ireland.

– ref. Israel is still not allowing international media back into Gaza, despite the ceasefire – https://theconversation.com/israel-is-still-not-allowing-international-media-back-into-gaza-despite-the-ceasefire-267356

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Todd Landman, Professor of Political Science, University of Nottingham

How many people in the UK are victims of modern slavery? At present, we don’t actually know. There is no consensus on the answer to this question, despite the wide interest in finding it, and the tools and data to do so.

Over a decade ago, before the passage of the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015, data analysts estimated that there were between 10,000 and 13,000 victims of modern slavery in the UK. Since then, there have been four further estimates between 2014 and 2023, ranging from 8,300 to 136,000.

Why such a huge range? Estimates use different indicators and definitions of modern slavery, as well as different estimation methods.

Several parliamentary inquiries have now been conducted focusing on how the UK can strengthen its response to modern slavery. Part of an effective response is understanding the nature and extent of the issue. And this understanding relies on better methods to produce statistically robust estimates of the scale of the problem.

The UK Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner asked our team of researchers at the University of Nottingham’s Rights Lab to carry out a scoping review of modern slavery estimates.

To do this, we reviewed 46 published studies and 57 data sources, conducted a survey and held workshops with public sector leaders. We identified several methods of estimating modern slavery prevalence in the UK. These can be used depending on the type (or types) of modern slavery and populations that are of interest.

Our report also details how the UK might use existing data in novel and innovative ways, such as producing detailed modern slavery risk and vulnerability maps.

‘Hard to find’ populations

Any robust and statistically sound attempt to estimate the number of victims of modern slavery in the UK confronts what methodologists call “the fundamental problem of unobservability”.

Victims and survivors are a seldom heard, often hidden population comprised of both UK and foreign nationals. The use of force, fraud and coercion that underpin modern slavery are often difficult to detect. They are practices that, while directly experienced, are often not easily observable.

Our review examined studies from around the world that address this problem of hidden populations. Most of the studies we examined carefully follow data collection and data analysis principles to produce robust prevalence estimations for the whole world, for specific countries and cities.

The remit of our review was not to produce a new estimate, but to identify promising methods of estimation. Our findings show that the best methods to date are either “multiple systems estimation”, which analyses multiple overlapping administrative lists of victims, or some combination of sampling and carefully designed surveys. Both involve collecting and analysing data, and draw careful inferences from the data in making their estimations.

For the UK, the original estimation from 2014 adhered most closely to standard principles of data collection and analysis. But since the passage of the Modern Slavery Act in 2015, the picture has changed. The number of offences that qualify as modern slavery has expanded considerably in that time and thus a new estimate is much needed.

While sampling and survey approaches used in other parts of the world produce sound prevalence estimations, no such study using these methods has been done in the UK.

Why counting matters

Official statistics from the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) – the UK government’s framework for identifying victims of modern slavery – show that there have been 21,285 potential victims identified between July 2024 and June 2025. However, these referrals are only for people who are known and have been formally identified. The true number, should a new estimation be produced, is likely to be much higher.

We also know that the referral process itself is highly skewed. Those who took part in our survey and workshops explained that identification varies considerably across police jurisdictions, nationalities and types of offence. These views are corroborated by a new report from the anti-slavery charity Unseen.

While providing a strong foundation, the NRM remains a “convenience sample” from which prevalence estimations and statistical inferences currently remain limited.

---

Read more:
Ten years after the Modern Slavery Act, why has this ‘world-leading’ legislation had so little impact?

---

Our review argues that a slight reform to how data is recorded in the case management system – multiple referrals for the same person should be maintained and not merged into the same record – would enable analysts to provide an up-to-date estimate using multiple systems estimation.

This, along with other studies that focus on particular modern slavery practices for specific subpopulations in the UK, would provide strong evidence on the true number of modern slavery victims. Such analysis would be of benefit to policymakers, law enforcement, academics, charities and survivors themselves.

Todd Landman received funding from the UK Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner (IASC) and from Research England via the Institute for Policy and Engagement at the University of Nottingham.

Vicky Brotherton received funding from the UK Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner (IASC) and from Research England via the Institute for Policy and Engagement at the University of Nottingham.

– ref. Why it is so hard to estimate the number of victims of modern slavery in the UK – https://theconversation.com/why-it-is-so-hard-to-estimate-the-number-of-victims-of-modern-slavery-in-the-uk-266711

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marie Inger Dam, Researcher, Biotechnology, Lund University

A single “sexy” gene could help us combat one of the world’s most destructive fruit pests. By deleting the gene that lets female moths produce their mating scent, colleagues and I created an “unsexy” moth – and showed one way to turn insect attraction into a powerful pest control tool.

You’ve probably seen moths flittering around a bright lamppost on a balmy summer night. Those same insects, in their larval form, are the worms that burrow into your apples and peaches, making them serious pests in agriculture.

Moths are usually controlled with chemical pesticides, but pests evolve resistance and these sprays also harm bees and other pollinators. We need new and more sustainable methods to protect important crops targeted by moth larvae, like apples, maize, tomatoes and rice.

In a new study published in the Journal of Chemical Ecology, colleagues and I have demonstrated a way to unravel sexual communication in insects and provide a more sustainable alternative to pesticides. It seems we can stop moths by using their natural instincts against them.

Moths find their mates through chemical communication. Female moths release a species-specific pheromone, which males can detect and follow over long distances.

Farmers have long used synthetic versions of these pheromones to lure male moths away from females so that they don’t reproduce. But the problem is, every species has its own unique blend of pheromones, and replicating the exact recipe in a factory can be costly.

To achieve pheromone-based control on a large-scale, we need to understand how insects make them in the first place – and find the genes responsible.

How we found the sexy gene

Our study focused on the oriental fruit moth (Grapholita molesta), a serious pest on peaches, apples and other fruit. We wanted to identify the gene responsible for making its pheromone.

Pheromones are made from fatty acids by a specific enzyme. To find the genetic material responsible for that enzyme, we needed to identify the fatty acid, the enzyme and eventually the gene.

The fatty acids from which moth pheromones are derived are the same ones that all organisms make in abundance – like the fats in cooking oils and butter.

We first found the small fatty acid that served as the raw material for the moths’ scent, using a technique called gas chromatography, which separates fatty acids based on their size. When we placed this particular fatty acid onto the moth’s pheromone gland, it was converted into the pheromone, confirming we had the right starting point.

Next, we needed to find the exact enzyme that turned that specific fatty acid into that specific pheromone. The key was a double bond between two carbon atoms – that’s a job done by enzymes called desaturases. Searching the moth’s DNA we found many desaturase genes, but only one that was active in females but not in males. This looked like the right gene.

Creating an unsexy moth

To test the gene’s function, we used Crispr – a precise gene-editing tool sometimes described as “genetic scissors” – to delete the suspected desaturase gene in moth eggs. When the moths grew into adults, females without the gene could no longer produce their pheromone, confirming it as the crucial link in their sexual communication.

Silencing this single gene meant we’d effectively created an “unsexy” moth – one that couldn’t hope to attract a mate. Our method can also be applied to different species, including other pest moths that make similar pheromones.

Pest control with insect genes

Chemical pesticides remain the main defence against crop pests, but resistance is spreading fast and pesticides are linked to soil contamination, pollinator declines and more.

Pheromone-based pest control avoids these problems. When synthetic pheromones are spread in a field or orchard, males become confused because they follow the synthetic trails instead of those made by the female moth, reducing their breeding success.

Our “unsexy” moths helped us identify the exact gene behind this mating signal. Knowing which gene produces the pheromone means we can now reproduce the pheromone outside the insect – for example, by inserting the gene into yeast or plants that act as “biofactories”.

These engineered organisms can then produce the pheromone naturally and cheaply, the same way we use genetically modified yeast to make medicines like insulin.

Our discovery connects lab research to real-world pest management: by decoding the moth’s love signal, we’ve taken a step towards greener, gene-based production of pheromones that could one day replace chemical pesticides.

Marie Inger Dam is a co-inventor on several patent applications relating to pheromone production.

– ref. We turned off moths’ sex signals – this could be the key to greener pest control – https://theconversation.com/we-turned-off-moths-sex-signals-this-could-be-the-key-to-greener-pest-control-266312

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laura Standen, Doctoral Researcher, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London

Everyone gets headaches. Everyone misplaces their phone or forgets a name now and then. Most of the time, these moments are harmless – the result of stress, fatigue, or just a busy mind. Yet they’re also examples of symptoms that can, in rare cases, signal something far more serious: a brain tumour.

So how can you tell the difference between a brain tumour and an ordinary tension headache, stress, a poor night’s sleep, or even a hangover?

As part of my research into earlier detection of brain tumours, I spoke with patients who had been diagnosed with one. Their experiences revealed a recurring pattern: both patients and GPs often dismissed early symptoms, which sometimes led to delays in diagnosis. This echoes findings from a previous study showing that people frequently overlook the warning signs. This is a problem because brain tumours require more invasive treatment if they’re not detected early.

Brain tumour symptoms often resemble everyday experiences – tiredness, stress, migraines, or the menopause – and overlap with much more common conditions such as anxiety, sinus infections, or chronic headaches.

When symptoms are vague or subtle, they can be easy to ignore or rationalise away. In a healthcare system where GP appointments can be difficult to get, patients may wait until symptoms become impossible to dismiss. One patient I spoke with told me: “I think probably I had symptoms about certainly two or three months before.”

Here are seven symptoms described by patients in my study, all of which were easy to mistake for something else.

It’s important to stress that having one or more of these symptoms doesn’t mean you have a brain tumour. But if something feels persistently “off” or out of character for your body, it’s worth getting checked.

1. Difficulty finding words

Some people noticed they struggled to think of specific words, form full sentences, or join in conversations without a delay. One patient said the experience felt “odd and out of character”, but they dismissed it at the time. Another wrote down their symptoms because they couldn’t say them out loud, knowing something was not quite right, but they “couldn’t explain to anyone what was going on”.

Word-finding problems can sometimes be linked to fatigue, stress, or even anxiety – but when they persist or come on suddenly, they may warrant further investigation.

2. Brain fog

Several patients described a general fogginess: difficulty focusing, thinking clearly, or remembering things. One booked a GP appointment but by the time it came around, they had forgotten why they’d made it, leading to a missed diagnosis.

Brain fog can have many triggers including menopause, poor sleep, or stress. One family member recalled: “When the symptoms came up, the answer was, ‘She’s going through the menopause.’” But when brain fog is accompanied by other neurological changes, such as speech or vision problems, it’s important to take note.

---

Read more:
Menopause and brain fog: why lifestyle medicine could make a difference

---

3. Numbness or tingling

Some people reported tingling or numbness that shifted around the body. Two patients noticed it affected only one side: “Half of my lower right side of my face and half my tongue, half of the inside of my mouth.”

This can happen when a tumour affects the brain’s sensory or motor control areas – the regions that send and receive signals to different parts of the body. While numbness can have other explanations (such as trapped nerves, poor circulation, or migraines), new or one-sided symptoms should always be checked.

4. Visual disturbance

Changes in vision were another early sign. One patient experienced double vision while watching TV and assumed they needed new glasses. Another said straight lines appeared curved. “I thought they’d sent us a load of dodgy mugs because they’re all oval, and people looked at me going: ‘What are you on about?’”

Visual changes can have many causes, including eye strain or migraines. But sudden or unusual distortions – especially when they occur alongside other neurological symptoms, such as headaches, dizziness, difficulty speaking, weakness or numbness on one side of the body, or problems with coordination – warrant medical attention.

5. Messy handwriting

Several patients noticed their hand-eye coordination changing. One recalled: “There was one moment when I couldn’t write. I was writing some notes in a meeting, and then it just became really messy writing.”

Small coordination changes can sometimes be due to fatigue or distraction, but consistent deterioration in writing, fine motor skills, or balance can signal problems with the brain’s motor control areas, which coordinate movements such as writing or buttoning a shirt.

6. Personality changes

Altered behaviour or mood can be subtle but telling. One patient thought their irritability and loss of motivation were just signs of burnout: “I didn’t really put two and two together. I just wanted to retire because I was fed up with it.”

It’s natural for personality to fluctuate with life changes or stress, but sudden or marked differences, especially alongside other symptoms, may indicate something more.

7. Headaches

Headaches are common and usually nothing to worry about. But for some of the patients I spoke with, the pain was constant and unrelenting, lasting for weeks. “It was lasting over a week, and it was pretty much coming on daily,” one said.

---

Read more:
Why your migraine might be making you crave a large Coke and fries

---

Improving diagnosis

My current research investigates whether new tools can help GPs identify potential brain tumours earlier. These include cognitive function tests, which can assess memory, attention and language skills and liquid biopsies: blood tests that look for fragments of tumour DNA circulating in the bloodstream.

Because brain tumour symptoms are so varied and often overlap with everyday conditions, diagnosis is difficult. Most of the time, the symptoms listed here will have nothing to do with cancer. But when unusual changes occur together or persist longer than expected, they shouldn’t be ignored.

The patients I spoke with all shared the same message: if something doesn’t feel normal for you, get it checked. Even if it turns out to be nothing serious, that reassurance is worth it.

Laura Standen receives funding from Barts Charity.

Suzanne Scott receives funding for research from Barts Charity, National Institute of Health and Care Research, Cancer Research UK, Google LLC, and Oracle Head and Neck Cancer.

– ref. The seven symptoms that can delay brain tumour diagnosis – and why early detection matters – https://theconversation.com/the-seven-symptoms-that-can-delay-brain-tumour-diagnosis-and-why-early-detection-matters-266215

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Julia Shaw, Research Associate, Criminal Psychology, UCL

After years of trying to understand the minds of people who hurt others, I have recently turned my attention as a criminal psychologist from violent crimes to the less well-known world of green crime.

While researching for my new book, Green Crime: Inside the Minds of the People Destroying the Planet and How to Stop Them, I wanted to understand those who pose a threat to us on a much larger scale, at times even an existential level. Why do people choose to destroy the Earth and what can we do to stop them?

When I tell people that I am interested in environmental crimes, they often query two things. First, some ask whether I’m talking about environmental activists. No, people who take to the streets to raise awareness for the planet, even those who commit crimes like vandalising a building, are committing crimes for the environment, not against it. It is a problem that so many people think of the protesters who want to protect the planet before they think of those destroying it.

Second, people often conflate environmental crime and environmental harm. In other contexts, we understand that not all harms are crimes. For example, we know the difference between an aggressive argument and murder. Both are harmful, but only one is a crime. The same goes for environmental issues. There are many things that a company or person can legally do that are harmful to the Earth but are not crimes. Often it is only the most serious forms of environmental harm that are criminalised.

An environmental crime is when someone breaks a law related to destroying or contaminating our earth, air or water, or killing off biodiversity like trees and animals. These green crimes include acts like burning down a protected nature reserve, poaching an endangered species, or releasing toxic untreated water into rivers and lakes that makes people sick.

Alberto Ayala, executive director at the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, exposed what is alleged to be one of the biggest corporate fraud and environmental crime cases of all time: the dieselgate scandal in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests.

When I interviewed him, Ayala made it clear to me that we need people to check that companies aren’t poisoning our air, or selling us things that make us sick or that might explode. Industry has repeatedly proven that it isn’t always going to have our, or the planet’s, best interests in mind. Regulators make sure there are guardrails.

It’s also not just companies we need to pay attention to. A lot of large-scale environmental crime is committed by organised crime syndicates. Some are armed and murder people in the process of committing environmental crimes.

Undercover agents, like those working with the Environmental Investigation Agency (a charity based in London and New York), infiltrate these organised crime networks. Agents gain the criminals’ trust, catch them on hidden cameras, and give evidence bundles to local police or Interpol so they can further investigate and press charges. Environmental lawyers then make sure those charges are turned into convictions.

Once these environmental criminals are caught, there are researchers who help shed light on their mindsets and motivations. Examples include Vidette Bester, who studies illegal miners, and Ted Leggett, who has led research for the UN’s report into world wildlife crime.

Six pillars

By synthesising research like theirs with wider work from the social sciences, I have developed a psychological profile of environmental criminals. I call it the six pillars model. The profile helps to show that their motivations are more nuanced, and at times relatable, than it first appears.

People commit green crimes because they feel it is easier to do something illegal than to do it legally (ease), because they feel they will get away with it (impunity), and because they take more than they need – and take it away from others (greed). Environmental criminals also convince themselves that what they are doing isn’t that bad (rationalisation) and that everyone else is doing it too (conformity). Feeling like there is no other option, either because the person is destitute or because they feel incredibly pressured at work, is also an important factor (desperation).

By understanding these factors we can hopefully recognise the moments when we are at risk of becoming environmental criminals ourselves, or of making other harmful decisions. In the fight for nature, it remains important to reduce our environmental footprint by choosing more plant-based meals, avoiding unnecessary flying, buying vintage rather than new, and insulating our homes.

I do all of these things because I know that not only do they help reduce the harm to nature I personally contribute to, but also because I want to normalise these behaviours in my own social circle. That being said, I also know that me doing these things won’t make nearly as much difference as catching environmental criminals.

We need to include green crime in conversations about how to save our planet. And we need to better acknowledge, and celebrate, the people who are holding environmental criminals accountable.

This article features reference to a book that has been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on the link and go on to buy something from bookshop.org, The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

---

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.

---

Julia Shaw 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. Criminal psychologists are profiling a different kind of killer – environmental offenders – https://theconversation.com/criminal-psychologists-are-profiling-a-different-kind-of-killer-environmental-offenders-262633

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Antonio Navas, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Sheffield

What makes some countries rich and others poor? Is there any action a country can take to improve living standards for its citizens? Economists have wondered about this for centuries. If the answer to the second question is yes, then the impact on people’s lives could be staggering.

This year’s Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences (commonly known as the Nobel prize for economics) has gone to three researchers who have provided answers to these questions: Philippe Aghion, Peter Howitt and Joel Mokyr.

For most of human history, economic stagnation has been the norm – modern economic growth is very recent from a historical point of view. This year’s winners have been honoured for their contributions towards explaining how to achieve sustained economic growth.

At the beginning of the 1980s, theories around economic growth were largely dominated by the works of American economist Robert Solow. An important conclusion emerged: in the long-run, per-capita income growth is determined by technological progress.

Solow’s framework, however, did not explain how technology accumulates over time, nor the role of institutions and policies in boosting it. As such, the theory can neither explain why countries grow differently for sustained periods nor what kind of policies could help a country improve its long-run growth performance.

It’s possible to argue that technological innovation comes from the work of scientists, who are motivated less by money than the rest of society might be. As such, there would be little that countries could do to intervene – technological innovations would be the result of the scientists’ own interests and motivations.

But that thinking changed with the emergence of endogenous growth theory, which aims to explain which forces drive innovation. This includes the works of Paul Romer, Nobel prizewinner in 2018, as well as this year’s winners Aghion and Howitt.

These three authors advocate for theories in which technological progress ultimately derives from firms trying to create new products (Romer) or improve the quality of existing products (Aghion and Howitt). For firms to try to break new ground, they need to have the right incentives.

Creative destruction

While Romer recognises the importance of intellectual property rights to reward firms financially for creating new products, the framework of Aghion and Howitt outlines the importance of something known as “creative destruction”.

This is where innovation results from a battle between firms trying to get the best-quality products to meet consumer needs. In their framework, a new innovation means the displacement of an existing one.

In their basic model, protecting intellectual property is important in order to reward firms for innovating. But at the same time, innovations do not come from leaders but from new entrants to the industry. Incumbents do not have the same incentive to innovate because it will not improve their position in the sector. Consequently, too much protection generates barriers to entry and may slow growth.

But what is less explored in their work is the idea that each innovation brings winners (consumers and innovative firms) and losers (firms and workers under the old, displaced technology). These tensions could shape a country’s destiny in terms of growth – as other works have pointed out, the owners of the old technology may try to block innovation.

This is where Mokyr complements these works perfectly by providing a historical context. Mokyr’s work focuses on the origins of the Industrial Revolution and also the history of technological progress from ancient times until today.

Mokyr noted that while scientific discoveries were behind technological progress, a scientific discovery was not a guarantee of technological advances.

It was only when the modern world started to apply the knowledge discovered by scientists to problems that would improve people’s lives that humans saw sustained growth. In Mokyr’s book The Gifts of Athena, he argues that the Enlightenment was behind the change in scientists’ motivations.

In Mokyr’s works, for growth to be sustained it is vital that knowledge flows and accumulates. This was the spirit embedded in the Industrial Revolution and it’s what fostered the creation of the institution I am working in – the University of Sheffield, which enjoyed financial support from the steel industry in the 19th century.

Mokyr’s later works emphasise the key role of a culture of knowledge in order for growth to improve living standards. As such, openness to new ideas becomes crucial.

Similarly, Aghion and Howitt’s framework has become a standard tool in economics. It has been used to explore many important questions for human wellbeing: the relationship between competition and innovation, unemployment and growth, growth and income inequality, and globalisation, among many other topics.

Analysis using their framework still has an impact on our lives today. It is present in policy debates around big data, artificial intelligence and green innovation. And Mokyr’s analysis of how knowledge accumulates poses a central question around what countries can do to encourage an innovation ecosystem and improve the lives of their citizens.

But this year’s prize is also a warning about the consequences of damaging the engines of growth. Scientists collaborating with firms to advance living standards is the ultimate elixir for growth. Undermining science, globalisation and competition might not be the right recipe.

Antonio Navas 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 this year’s Nobel winners changed the thinking on economic growth – https://theconversation.com/how-this-years-nobel-winners-changed-the-thinking-on-economic-growth-267455

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sanwal Hussain, PhD Candidate in the Department of Politics and Society, Aston University

The spate of public demonstrations against unemployment, corruption and low quality of life around the world is striking because of who is leading them. Young people have used social media platforms such as Facebook, TikTok, Instagram and YouTube to spread information and arrange their demonstrations.

While some of these protests have remained peaceful, others – such as the youth-led demonstrations in Indonesia and Nepal – have become violent. Ten people died in Indonesia’s protests in late August, when public anger over the cost of living and social inequality boiled over after police killed a delivery driver.

And 72 people were killed in Nepal, which saw demonstrations against a government social media ban in early September escalate into widespread protests over political instability, elite corruption and economic stagnation. The gen Z groups leading these protests said the movement had been hijacked by “opportunist” infiltrators.

Here are three more places where young people, apparently inspired by the youth-led movements in Indonesia and Nepal, have been demonstrating against their governments in recent weeks.

Peru

Hundreds of young people marched in the Peruvian capital, Lima, in late September against the government’s introduction of pension reforms which require young Peruvians to pay into private pension funds. These protesters were joined a week later by transport workers, who marched towards Congress in the centre of Lima.

In a clash on September 29 – during a protest organised by a youth collective called Generation Z – crowds threw stones and petrol bombs at the police, who responded with tear gas and rubber bullets, injuring at least 18 protesters.

These protests came a few months after Peru’s president, Dina Boluarte, issued a decree doubling her salary. The move, which came despite Boluarte’s historically low approval rating of only 2%, was declared “outrageous” by many observers on Peruvian social media.

Young people there are facing job insecurity and high unemployment, while many say the government is not doing enough to combat extortion by gangs, corruption and rising insecurity.

Reports of extortion in Peru have increased sixfold over the past five years. Figures released by Peru-based market research company Datum Internacional in 2024 suggest around 38% of Peruvians have reported knowing about cases of extortion in their area.

---

Read more:
Peru is losing its battle against organised crime

---

The recent pension reforms added fuel to existing anger. On October 9, after weeks of calls for Boluarte’s government to resign, lawmakers in Peru voted to remove her from office. New elections are due to be held in April 2026.

Morocco

An anonymous collective of young people called Gen Z 212 – a reference to Morocco’s international dialling code – has been at the centre of protests that have spread across ten Moroccan cities since September 27.

The group has organised and coordinated demonstrations through TikTok and Instagram, as well as the gaming and streaming platform Discord. Membership of Gen Z 212 on Discord grew from fewer than 1,000 members at its launch on September 18 to more than 180,000 by October 8.

This movement began in August after eight women died while receiving maternity care in a public hospital in Agadir, a city on Morocco’s southern coast. This sparked outrage over the state of public services in the country.

World Bank statistics from 2023 suggest there are only 7.8 doctors in Morocco for every 10,000 people – far below the 23 doctors for every 10,000 inhabitants recommended by the World Health Organization.

At the same time, Morocco is spending US$5 billion (£3.7 billion) to build the world’s biggest football stadium, as part of its preparations to co-host the 2030 World Cup with Portugal and Spain. Moroccans see their government as having got its priorities wrong. Crowds have chanted slogans such as “We want hospitals, not football stadiums”.

Police have responded to these protests by arresting hundreds of people, with clashes with protesters becoming violent in some parts of the country. Three people were killed on October 1 in what authorities described as “legitimate defence”, after protesters allegedly tried to storm a police station in the village of Lqliâa, near Agadir.

Morocco’s prime minister, Aziz Akhannouch, has invited Gen Z 212 to participate in dialogue with his government, and the group has shared a list of demands focused on basic needs such as education, healthcare, housing, transportation and jobs. However, the protest movement has continued.

Madagascar

At least 22 people were killed and more than 100 injured in anti-government protests across Madagascar in the first week of October. These protests were coordinated by an online movement known as Gen Z Mada – although labour unions, civil society organisations and several politicians became involved once the protests began.

The movement was sparked by the arrest of two Malagasy politicians, Clémence Raharinirina and Baba Faniry Rakotoarisoa, on September 19. Both politicians had publicly called for citizens to stage peaceful demonstrations in the capital, Antananarivo, against water and power supply problems on the island.

The demonstrations focused initially on shortages of basic necessities, an electricity crisis, unemployment and corruption. But they soon escalated into calls for the Malagasy president, Andry Rajoelina, to resign. Protesters have held him responsible for the problems facing their country.

Rajoelina attempted to satisfy the protesters by dissolving his government and calling for “national dialogue” with Gen Z Mada. In a speech on state broadcaster Televiziona Malagasy, he said: “We acknowledge and apologise if members of the government have not carried out the tasks assigned to them.”

However, this move did not stop the demonstrations. Rajoelina subsequently appointed Ruphin Fortunat Zafisambo, an army general, as his prime minister and imposed a strict curfew in Antananarivo, with a heavy presence of security forces, in a bid to end the protests.

The protesters have vowed to continue their struggle and, at time of writing, some are still waving flags with the words “Rajoelina out”. Rajoelina has now fled the country after factions of the army rallied behind the protesters.

In leading the fight against inequality, young people in developing countries are following a well-trodden path. Youth-led protests in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have both toppled governments in recent years. These movements seem to have encouraged others across the globe to empower themselves and demand more from entrenched elites.

Sanwal Hussain 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. Young people around the world are leading protests against their governments – https://theconversation.com/young-people-around-the-world-are-leading-protests-against-their-governments-266950

Source: The Conversation – UK – By April Hayes, Microbiologist, Public Health and Sport Sciences, University of Exeter

Scientists have long been worried about the buildup of antibiotics in the environment.

But in a recent study I led, we wanted to know what happens when bacteria are exposed not just to antibiotics, but to antibiotics and another type of medicine – together, at the low concentrations now typically found in nature.

Up to 90% of the medicines we take pass straight through our bodies, and most are not removed by wastewater treatment plants. These drug residues end up in rivers, lakes and other freshwater systems. In fact, traces of medicines have now been detected on every continent, at concentrations that vary from place to place.

---

Read more:
Environmental antibiotic resistance unevenly addressed despite growing global risk, study finds

---

Even tiny amounts of antibiotics can help bacteria evolve defences that make them harder to kill later. These bacteria become fitter, more adaptable, and able to survive doses strong enough to treat human infections. When that happens, the result is antibiotic resistance – a major global health threat. Already, over a million people die each year from infections that no longer respond to treatment, and that number is expected to rise.

What’s less well known is that many other medicines, including drugs for diabetes, depression and pain relief, can also encourage bacteria to become resistant to antibiotics.

Most previous studies, however, have focused on single drugs in isolation. For example, researchers might test how one antidepressant affects bacterial resistance to antibiotics and usually at doses much higher than those found in the environment.

But in the real world, medicines mix together in complex cocktails at low levels, and we still know little about how those combinations behave.

In our latest research, we tested whether a community of bacteria would become more resistant to antibiotics after being exposed to a mixture of drugs. These mixtures included ciprofloxacin – a common antibiotic frequently detected in waterways – combined with one of three other medicines: diclofenac (a widely used painkiller), metformin (a diabetes medication) and an oestrogen hormone used in hormone replacement therapy.

All three combinations changed how the bacteria behaved. We analysed how the bacterial community shifted: which species declined, which thrived and what resistance genes became more common.

We found that these mixtures made the bacterial community less able to grow overall, but also more likely to contain genes that conferred resistance to multiple antibiotics – not just ciprofloxacin, but others that were chemically different. The bacterial mix itself also changed: new species flourished in the presence of the drug combinations that hadn’t done so under antibiotic exposure alone.

I’d tested these same medicines individually in an earlier study, using the same bacteria and similar experimental conditions. On their own, none of the non-antibiotic drugs increased bacterial resistance. But when combined with an antibiotic, the story changed.

Taken together, these studies reveal something important: medicines that seem harmless on their own can amplify each other’s effects when mixed. That’s a big deal, because scientists often test pharmaceuticals one by one and if a single drug shows no obvious effect, it’s typically ignored. Our findings suggest we shouldn’t be so quick to dismiss them.

In the environment, where countless drugs and chemicals coexist, these mixtures may be quietly shaping the evolution of antibiotic resistance. Understanding this hidden interaction is crucial if we want to protect both our health and our ecosystems in the years ahead.

April Hayes receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council. Her PhD work was supported by AstraZeneca but all work was carried out without input from any funder.

– ref. Growing cocktail of medicines in world’s waterways could be fuelling antibiotic resistance – https://theconversation.com/growing-cocktail-of-medicines-in-worlds-waterways-could-be-fuelling-antibiotic-resistance-266945

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chris Millward, Professor of Practice in Education Policy, University of Birmingham

The merger of Kent and Greenwich universities is set to produce the UK’s first “super-university”. This structure will help the universities manage financial risks, while sustaining their distinctive identities. And the merger could also provide a model for the prime minister’s vision for post-compulsory education, outlined recently at the Labour party conference.

Keir Starmer wants two-thirds of young people to enter higher or technical education or apprenticeships. This embraces both further and higher education, and it demands coherence between them. Building on the model agreed between Kent and Greenwich, that could be achieved by colleges joining universities within a single group.

Further education colleges offer a high proportion of the nation’s technical qualifications and apprenticeships, which are central to the prime minister’s target. In towns without universities, colleges provide the route through post-compulsory education. This is often within group structures.

Some already have links with higher education. London South East Colleges, for instance, has seven campuses, which reach south from Greenwich. The group also has a partnership with the University of Greenwich.

Colleges have experienced equal financial challenges to universities, but for longer. They might be wary of joining universities because it could dissipate their distinctive vocational mission. But the model agreed by Kent and Greenwich shows how that can be sustained.

Combining different traditions

While both are universities, the merger of Kent and Greenwich shows it is possible for institutions with very different identities to combine.

The University of Kent was established in 1965, in the wake of the meritocratic vision for higher education laid out in the 1963 Robbins Report.

This report, produced by the government’s Committee on Higher Education, stated that “university places should be available for all who are qualified by ability and attainment”. It argued that universities should provide a liberal education, rather than meeting employers’ immediate needs. This was embodied in the new maps of learning developed by universities like Kent and their greenfield residential campuses.

Greenwich originates from Woolwich Polytechnic. This was the site from which Labour education minister Tony Crosland announced the expansion of polytechnics in 1965.
Crosland wanted to meet “an ever-increasing need and demand for vocational, professional and industrially based courses”. He also opposed the hierarchy of post-compulsory education, which diminished the status of these courses.

Polytechnics became universities from 1992. Their applied courses then made a pivotal contribution to Tony Blair’s 2001 target for 50% of young people to enter higher education. Blair argued that this would create a society “genuinely based on merit”.

By the time this threshold was passed in 2017, Conservative-led governments had established more universities. Citing Robbins, they expected this to drive higher education expansion through competition and student choice.

Reducing polarisation

Starmer’s speech to the Labour conference signals a different approach. “While you will never hear me denigrate the aspiration to go to university, I don’t think the way we currently measure success in education – that ambition to get to 50% … is right for our times,” he said.

Part of the motivation for this approach comes from a desire to counter Reform UK. People without higher education qualifications are more likely to vote for Reform.

Tackling the dissatisfaction of Reform supporters with highly educated elites requires Starmer to depart from previous assumptions about higher education and meritocracy – that a university education is superior to other pathways through lives and careers. That means placing a higher value on apprenticeships and technical education.

Mergers can improve the financial sustainability of universities and colleges by pooling their risks, operations and investment capacity. For example, a recruitment shortfall in one part of a group can be absorbed by others. Services can be provided at greater scale and lower cost within a group. If investment is needed to build provision in one location, that may be secured through the balance sheet of the whole group.

Investment of this kind is crucial for enhancing teaching quality, learner experiences and reputational standing. But group structures can also minimise course duplication and improve progression arrangements. Rather than competing with each other, colleges and universities within a group can agree course content and admissions requirements.

That enables learners to move seamlessly between different levels and types of education. It also builds connections between towns with colleges and the cities where most universities are based, broadening both study options and job prospects.

Group structures could advance separately in higher and further education. That would encourage competition and hierarchy, rather than coherence and progression. But bringing the two streams of post-compulsory education closer together could help achieve Starmer’s ambition to reduce polarisation. It might also give both universities and colleges some financial breathing room.

Chris Millward 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. Could further education colleges get involved with university mergers? It might help meet Keir Starmer’s education goals – https://theconversation.com/could-further-education-colleges-get-involved-with-university-mergers-it-might-help-meet-keir-starmers-education-goals-266820

Source: The Conversation – UK – By William Perry, Postdoctoral Research Associate at the School of Biosciences, Cardiff University

When Storm Amy battered the Scottish Highlands in early October, it tore through a salmon farm’s sea pens, releasing around 75,000 fish into open water in Loch Linnhe. The scale of the escape is alarming. It comes at a time when wild Atlantic salmon – already classified as “endangered” in Great Britain – are in decline.

For an animal so central to the UK’s ecology, culture and economy, the incident has serious implications.

At first glance, it might sound like a rare bit of good news: thousands of fish freed from captivity, perhaps even helping to bolster wild populations. But the reality is far less heartwarming.

These fish are not wild salmon in any meaningful sense. They are highly domesticated animals, selectively bred over decades for traits that make them profitable in captivity but poorly equipped for survival in the wild.

Aquaculture – the farming of fish and other aquatic species – has become one of the fastest-growing forms of food production in the world. The most valuable of all farmed marine species is the Atlantic salmon, which accounted for 18% of global marine aquaculture production value in 2022. The UK is the third largest producer, with almost all production centred around Scotland’s coast.

Modern salmon farming typically involves rearing young fish in freshwater hatcheries before transferring them to sea cages or pens. Each farm may hold six to ten large nets, each containing up to 200,000 fish.

Having salmon nets open to strong tidal currents is key to their design, allowing clean oxygenated water to enter and waste to be removed. However, this also means that they are vulnerable to adverse weather conditions.

To combat this, more sheltered coastal regions are used, like fjords or lochs, but this only offers so much protection. Storm Amy demonstrated that vulnerability all too clearly.

From wild fish to livestock

Atlantic salmon farming began in the 1970s. Since then, the species has undergone intensive selective breeding, much like sheep, dogs or chickens. Fish have been chosen for faster growth, delayed sexual maturity, disease resistance and other commercially desirable traits.

Around 90% of the salmon used in Scottish aquaculture originate from Norwegian stock. After 15 generations of selection, these farmed salmon are now among the most domesticated fish species in the world. They no longer resemble their wild relatives in important ways.

---

Read more:
Wild salmon are the Zendayas of the fish world – what that tells us about conservation

---

Farmed salmon differ genetically, physiologically and behaviourally. They are often larger, mature differently and feed on pellets instead of hunting live prey. Changes which make them more vulnerable to predators.

Farmed salmon even have traits which will make them less attractive to wild counterparts. Many would struggle to survive for long in the wild.

The problem isn’t just that farmed salmon die when they escape but what happens when some of them don’t. Studies show that in certain Scottish and Norwegian rivers, more than 10% of salmon caught are of farmed origin, with numbers highest near intensive farming areas.

Although these fish are maladapted to wild conditions, a few survive long enough to reach rivers and attempt to spawn.

When they breed with wild salmon, their offspring inherit a mix of traits – neither truly wild nor farmed – leaving them less suited to their natural environment. This process, known as “genetic introgression”, gradually damages the genetic integrity of wild populations.

Timing makes this latest incident particularly concerning. Wild salmon are now returning to Scottish rivers to spawn. The sudden influx of tens of thousands of farmed escapees increases the chance of interbreeding, and of long-term genetic damage.

The scale of this single escape is extraordinary. Scotland’s total returning wild salmon population is estimated at around 300,000 fish. The release of 75,000 farmed salmon represents roughly a quarter of that number.

Even if only 1% of the escapees survive and breed, that would mean around 750 fish entering rivers and potentially mixing with wild populations. A 2021 Marine Scotland report found that rivers near some fish farms are in “very poor condition”, with evidence of major genetic changes. Worryingly, other nearby rivers previously classed as being in “good condition” could now be at risk too.

Wild Atlantic salmon already face multiple human-driven threats like climate change, habitat loss, pollution and invasive species. Genetic pollution from farmed escapees is yet another blow. It’s one that undermines the species’ resilience to other forms of environmental change.

The release caused by Storm Amy may be one incident, but it’s symptomatic of a wider problem. As storms intensify with a changing climate, the likelihood of future escapes grows. Without tighter regulation, better containment measures and effective genetic monitoring of wild populations, these events could continue to erode what’s left of UK’s wild salmon.

---

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.

---

William Perry 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. Almost 75,000 farmed salmon in Scotland escaped into the wild after Storm Amy – why this may cause lasting damage – https://theconversation.com/almost-75-000-farmed-salmon-in-scotland-escaped-into-the-wild-after-storm-amy-why-this-may-cause-lasting-damage-267354