Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By John Fox, Senior Lecturer in Police Studies, University of Portsmouth

As a researcher of police occupational culture, I was horrified, but not at all surprised by the recent Panorama programme in which an undercover reporter exposed sexism, racism and general thuggishness among some Metropolitan Police officers.

Nearly a quarter of a century ago, the BBC produced another groundbreaking example of undercover reporting in the world of policing. In The Secret Policeman (2003), journalist Mark Daly joined Greater Manchester Police as a recruit officer. He covertly recorded his new colleagues making racist remarks. This was just five years after the publication of the Stephen Lawrence inquiry, and the report finding the Met “institutionally racist”.

This latest Panorama demonstrated unequivocally that the Met still has not rooted out these views in its ranks.

My first thought when sitting down to watch the programme was, “Why can the BBC successfully infiltrate the closed world of police misconduct when the force’s own teams are seemingly incapable of doing so?”

Every police force has a branch called a professional standards department (PSD). They are supposed to gather intelligence on corrupt or bad officers, which can lead to a misconduct tribunal. If gross misconduct is found, the officer may ultimately be dismissed.

The Met has seen several high profile cases of police misconduct in recent years. These offenders – from Wayne Couzens, who murdered Sarah Everard, to serial rapist David Carrick – have often been dismissed as “bad apples”.

After Carrick’s conviction in 2023, I argued that the Met culture was so toxic that to protect the public (as well as its own good officers), their PSD should employ intrusive workplace monitoring. This should mean using covert devices and undercover operatives, no matter how uncomfortable it may make staff feel.

In 2021, Hampshire police’s PSD used a listening device to covertly record officers using racist language after a whistleblower was brave enough to come forward. I am not aware that this form of evidence gathering has been utilised in the Met.

In his response to the Panorama documentary, Met Commissioner Mark Rowley said he had “disbanded” the team in question. A serving officer has since been arrested over an allegation linked to a Panorama investigation.

But I would like to know that the Met PSD will go further, and conduct a thorough and systematic review of samples of past video footage from each similar team across the force.

Throughout the Panorama episode, officers were wary about talking to the undercover reporter – one actually asked if he was wearing a wire. Despite the horror of the programme as a whole, I was encouraged by this. For the culture to change, any police officer who is a racist or misogynist must be made to feel that they, rather than decent officers, are the ones working in a hostile environment.

I would suggest that a few years ago it was the other way round. We know that Carrick was openly nicknamed “bastard Dave” and Couzens was openly known as “the rapist”. Yet their notoriety among colleagues did not seem to come to the attention of the Met PSD. If Rowley has achieved nothing else, I am hopeful that he has at least reduced the feeling of impunity and being “untouchable” which seemed to prevail among bad officers under previous Met command teams.

Whistleblowers and workplace culture

Of greater concern though was the disturbing evidence of a complete distrust in any whistleblowing procedure. Rowley claimed that over the last four years, “internal reporting has trebled thanks to the courage and conviction of colleagues”.

This is very good news, but Panorama clearly revealed that officers making sexist or racist comments were still protected by higher-ups and the overall force culture, with detractors, who wish to work in a safe, ethical environment, still feeling intimidated into silence.

There is ample research which has shown that casual misogyny towards women in the police service – both officers and other staff – is rife. Panorama has now provided clear evidence of this. Sadly, it seems many women in the police workforce feel they have to silently put up with it.

Currently the police have the highest-ever rate of voluntary resignations on record. More officers than ever are choosing to resign after a short period of service because they quickly realise they don’t enjoy, or feel comfortable, working in the police. Two of the main reasons for leaving early were a sense they needed to “fit in” with the prevailing workplace culture, and discovering that their new job did not match the “values” they expected to find.

---

Read more:
Misogyny in police forces: understanding and fixing ‘cop culture’

---

Police tackle organised crime groups using all sorts of covert methods, including undercover operatives infiltrating gangs to gather intelligence on their activity. The bad officers in the Met who are relentlessly dragging down public trust in not only their own force, but all the UK’s forces, need to be treated like members of an organised crime group. As well as much better initial recruitment vetting, senior leaders must be bold and ruthless in finding out how their staff think and behave, both on and off duty. The BBC has shown them how.

John Fox 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. It shouldn’t take undercover journalists to expose policing’s sexist and racist culture – https://theconversation.com/it-shouldnt-take-undercover-journalists-to-expose-policings-sexist-and-racist-culture-266681

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thomas Gift, Associate Professor and Director of the Centre on US Politics, UCL

The US vice-president, J.D. Vance, recently declared that he “doesn’t give a shit” if the Trump administration’s strike on a suspected Venezuelan gang boat is called a “war crime”. In a speech to hundreds of senior US military officers weeks later, the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, then called for troops to ignore “stupid rules of engagement”.

These anecdotes are a reminder that, for all the focus on President Donald Trump’s overt attacks on democratic institutions at home, his administration’s approach to the law of armed conflict – the corpus of laws governing how militaries fight wars – is just as suspect.

In my upcoming book, Killing Machines: Trump, the Law of War, and the Future of Military Impunity, I make the case that Trump is unique among US presidents in the extent of his willingness to discard the law of war. This doesn’t mean that all of Trump’s predecessors in the White House have meticulously followed the law to the letter – far from it.

President George W. Bush, for example, was widely accused of riding roughshod over the law of armed conflict in waging his “war on terror” after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. His administration was alleged to have authorised or tolerated “enhanced interrogation techniques”, including waterboarding, stress positions and sleep deprivation, which are widely considered torture.

However, unlike past American commanders-in-chief, other US executives at least showed outward deference to the law of armed conflict, even as they pressed the law’s limit behind the curtains.

Writing in the Washington Post in 2020, during Trump’s first term as president, Georgetown University law professor Rosa Brooks said: “Bush at least tried to cloak his administration’s use of torture in legal sophistry, a backhanded testament to the strength of the norms his aides sought to circumvent.” Brooks added that “in contrast to Bush, Trump makes no secret of his disdain for the laws of war”.

The list of ways Trump has openly attacked the law of war is long. He denounced the Geneva conventions, a set of treaties that established rules for humane treatment during armed conflicts, in his 2016 presidential campaign. He described them as a “problem” for the conduct of US wars and pledged to bring back “a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding” if elected as president.

Around the same time, Trump also advocated the killing of civilians. In an interview with Fox News in December 2015, Trump said militaries needed to “take out” the families of Islamic State militants. He even endorsed dipping bullets in pig’s blood, considered impure in the Muslim religion, to intimidate Islamic terrorists.

Trump’s expressed contempt for international law doesn’t stop there. He has attacked global laws on state sovereignty and the use of force against terrorists, urging the US to “fight fire with fire”. Trump has also threatened to bomb cultural sites, proposed pillaging Middle Eastern oil fields for profit and lambasted the need to fight “politically correct” wars while terrorists “chop off heads”.

Not least, in 2019 and 2020, Trump pardoned multiple US servicemembers and private military contractors accused or convicted of war crimes. In 2019, condemning a decision by military courts to prosecute US service members convicted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Trump mocked on social media: “We train our boys to be killing machines, then prosecute them when they kill!”

Trump’s desire to challenge the law of war prompted journalist Adam Serwer to denounce him as a “war-crimes enthusiast” in the Atlantic magazine later that year. And around the same time, the New York Times ran a headline questioning whether the laws of war were “history” under Trump.

Challenging the law

Why has Trump so openly challenged the law of war? Put simply, as I argue in my book, he has had the means, motive and opportunity.

Trump has relied on right-wing allies in Washington. The Congressional Justice for Warriors Caucus is the group on Capitol Hill that has most vociferously advocated for war crime pardons. It has also defended Trump’s actions in office regarding the military.

Meanwhile, elements of the media have positively spun Trump’s explicit attacks on the law of war to conservative audiences. In his former days as a Fox News personality, Hegseth highlighted war crimes cases on his show and described the accused or convicted service members as heroes facing malicious prosecution.

Data also shows that Republican voters, who emphasise law and order domestically, are willing to discount the law when it comes to conduct by American military personnel overseas. For example, following Trump’s November 2019 war crime clemencies, a national poll showed that nearly 80% of Republicans approved of his actions.

At the same time, study after study has shown that people in or affiliated with the US military tend to lean to the right politically. That tilt was evident on January 6, 2021, when a disproportionate number of former service members ended up in jail for storming the Capitol building in Washington.

Many ex-combatants and current service members within the military have absorbed Trump’s calls to dismiss the laws of war and, by extension, the rule of law itself. The byproduct has been little resistance within the ranks to Trump’s agenda of military impunity.

Prior to Trump, there was little disagreement among US presidents about the moral and strategic imperative of upholding the law of war. Trump’s breaking of this precedent is yet another way in which he has taken the US into uncharted political waters.

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

– ref. Trump is willing to flout the rules of war like no other US president – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-willing-to-flout-the-rules-of-war-like-no-other-us-president-262635

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Christopher Terrell Nield, Senior Lecturer, Bioscience, Nottingham Trent University

It’s a quiet autumn evening. You’re enjoying some TV, when an unscripted movement catches your eye. A large house spider (Tegenaria domestica) is striding across the rug towards you. You make a sudden movement. The spider freezes. You reach for a paper to shoo it away, look back and it’s gone. What did the spider see? Was it afraid of you?

To a house spider we appear as a potential predator. Yet, despite having more eyes than us, most spiders don’t actually see much detail. Their world is sensed mainly by vibration, air currents, touch and taste.

Spiders usually have four pairs of eyes and there are two types: principal and secondary. Principal or direct eyes help the spider see detail; the photo receptor cells of their retinas are at the front. As in other animals they detect light and turn it into signals for the brain. In secondary or indirect eyes the photo receptor cells are inverted. These eyes are sensitive to movement, rather than detail and can give spiders an early warning of potential prey or predators.

About half of Britain’s 37 spider families spin webs to catch prey. Their eyes are usually arranged in two rows and of roughly similar size. They have poor eyesight and use vibration to sense where their food is.

However, in some spider families, vision is important. These are the spiders which hunt or ambush prey and they have much better vision than their web spinning cousins. In the UK, this includes crab spiders (with about 30 species), wolf spiders and jumping spiders (both have about 40 UK species). Wolf and jumping spiders have one pair of eyes much larger than the others. These principal eyes focus on prey and the smaller secondary ones detect movement. Many jumping spiders can wavelengths of light we can’t, such as ultraviolet. They use it to locate prey and in mating displays.

Crab spiders (Thomisidae), named for their flattened bodies and tendency to move sideways, live in meadows and gardens. They can detect movement with their principal eyes from a distance of up to 20 cm. They are ambush predators that use camouflage to blend into flower heads and catch unwary insects with their long front legs. Misumena vatia, another crab spider, takes this strategy further. Its base colour is white, but it can gradually change to yellow. This broadens the number of flower species it can use to trap prey, and hides it from predators.

Net-casting spiders (Deinopidae) are called “ogre-faced” spiders because of their enormous eyes and angry looking appearance. They live in dark tropical habitats. Deinopis species have huge principal eyes whose lenses have a wide field of view. They can concentrate light more efficiently than a cat or an owl. Each night a light sensitive membrane is produced inside the eyes but destroyed at dawn as it is too sensitive to use in daylight.

Deinopus spinosa catches prey by making an expandable silken net. It deposits white faecal droppings onto a leaf as aiming points then waits above the net, head down. When an insect walks across the target area the spider opens the net and thrusts it down to enclose its prey.

Wolf spiders (Lycosidae) are ambush predators, also with enlarged principal eyes. Pardosa amentata scans its surroundings for movement with its secondary eyes, though it can only focus on prey up to a few centimetres away. As its target moves closer, a row of secondary eyes, which detect movement, is used to gauge distance. Wolf spiders also use vision for courtship. On encountering a female, a male stands on its back legs, waves its palps, and vibrates its front legs in time with them. A spider’s palps are appendages in front of its mouth. They can sense touch and taste and are also used in mating. Pardosa dances differ from species to species, enabling females to recognise males they can mate with.

Wolf spiders often hunt at night and their posterior median eyes shine in torchlight because they have a reflective membrane. This membrane acts as a mirror, so light passes their photo receptors twice which enhances low light vision. This structure is an example of parallel evolution as it is seen in nocturnal animals as diverse as cats and crocodiles.

Jumping spiders (Salticidae) are among the few invertebrates with large camera-like eyes like those seen in most vertebrates (including us). Their eyesight is sharper than any other spider and is comparable to that of pigeons or cats. Portia africanus can image up to about 75 cm, relying on shape and colour to identify prey. Jumping spiders detect movement with their secondary eyes, which give a blurry image. The spider then turns and focuses its primary eyes onto the object. These give a sharp image. The spider then uses its lateral eyes to judge distance, and when close enough (2-3 cm) it jumps.

So how does this relate to our hearthrug spider? Any of these seen in autumn are usually males searching for females. As a web builder, Tegenaria senses changes in light and motion, but not detail. So they would see us as a large moving shape.

This may cause it to freeze, part of the looming response of many animals, including humans. Freezing or faking death can be effective protection as many predators are stimulated by movement. Was this a conscious act, or just a reflex? Research suggests insects might feel joy and pain, so why not spiders? Freezing and flight suggests they are more afraid of us than we are of them.

Christopher Terrell Nield 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 does the world look through a spider’s eyes? – https://theconversation.com/how-does-the-world-look-through-a-spiders-eyes-264406

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Gater, Research Assistant at the Centre for Adult Social Care Research, Cardiff University

For years we’ve been warned that technological advances and artificial intelligence (AI) are set to sweep people out of work. But when we think about whose jobs are really under threat, the answer isn’t quite so simple.

Forecasts differ, and the speed of technological change makes it hard to predict exactly which roles will disappear. But one thing is clear – some groups are far more vulnerable than others. In particular, low-skilled, manual jobs – work that many working-class young men often find themselves in – are especially exposed.

My latest book looks at how young working-class men in the south Wales valleys view work, masculinity and the future. What I’ve found is a troubling mismatch between the kinds of careers being automated, the policy solutions being put forward and the identities and aspirations of those who rely most heavily on manual employment.

If such issues are not addressed, we risk rising youth unemployment and a widening of social inequality.

The workers most vulnerable to automation are those in routine manual roles. These include jobs like factory work, for example. These roles, often held by men with fewer qualifications, are easier for machines to replicate because of their repetitive nature.

By contrast, jobs that rely on social and emotional skills such as nursing and counselling are harder to automate. These roles are often associated with femininity or softer expressions of masculinity.

Governments are not blind to these risks. The UK government has promoted lifelong learning and digital upskilling as strategies to help workers adapt to technological change since 2021. The goal is to improve access to training and education so people can work alongside machines rather than be replaced by them.

Yet sociological evidence raises doubts about how effective this approach will be for marginalised men.

Masculinity and manual work

Many sociological studies have found that young working-class men are often drawn to manual work. This pull is rooted in social ties and an inherited sense of masculine identity, where physical jobs are seen as suitably “manly”.

At the same time, formal education and customer‑facing service roles are frequently rejected, viewed as feminised and at odds with traditional ideas of masculinity.

---

Read more:
Why ‘toxic masculinity’ isn’t a useful term for understanding all of the ways to be a man

---

In my work with young men in the south Wales valleys, I’ve found both continuity and change in how they think about jobs and masculinity. The continuity is clear. Manual work remains attractive, with fathers, uncles and grandfathers serving as role models. These careers are visible in communities, reinforcing the idea that this is “what men do”.

By comparison, other forms of employment – especially those coded as caring or service-oriented – are less visible and less valued.

‘Rupturing process’

But there are also signs of change. Some of the young men I spoke with expressed interest in careers beyond traditional manual roles. These included becoming a paramedic, a chef, or working in the media.

These changes often came through what I call a “rupturing process”, when a person or experience disrupts long-held ideas of masculinity and work. One young man’s decision to train as a chef, for example, was inspired by learning to cook with his grandmother. The experience influenced him to pursue a path outside the usual gendered expectations, and to embrace a softer, more expressive form of masculinity.

I also found that these young men are not entirely “anti-education”. Rather, they approach it pragmatically. They engage with subjects they see as useful for their ambitions and dismiss those they view as irrelevant. This nuance is often missed in policy debates that paint them as simply resistant to learning.

My research offers grounds for optimism. Despite the stereotypes, working-class young men are not all bound to regressive notions of manhood or limited to manual ambitions. Some are broadening their goals, sparked by different influences that alter their views on work and masculinity.

But optimism alone is not enough. Current policies centred on digital upskilling and lifelong learning will fail if they ignore the cultural and structural barriers that shape job choices. For some young men, a preference for manual labour remains strong, tied to community traditions and masculine identity. Simply offering new skills will not address that.

If we want the future of work to include everyone, we need targeted interventions that speak directly to this situation. That means community-based programmes, mentoring by relatable role models and education pathways that are flexible and practical.

Just as importantly, it means telling a new story about what work – and masculinity – can be. The robots may be coming, but the future doesn’t have to leave working-class young men behind.

Richard Gater has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).

– ref. What work means to working-class young men in an age of increasing automation – https://theconversation.com/what-work-means-to-working-class-young-men-in-an-age-of-increasing-automation-262298

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Gatto, Assistant Professor in Critical Organisation Studies, Northumbria University, Newcastle

Warning: this article contains spoilers.

In One Battle After Another, three characters (Bob Ferguson, Colonel Steven Lockjaw and Sergio St Carlos) represent three different models of fatherhood.

Fatherhood is a timely theme. The place of men in society is being debated and challenged by polarising figures from both sides of the political spectrum.

One side promotes a regressive vision of the patriarchal man harking back to ideals of fathers as dominant breadwinners and protectors. The other side argues for caring masculinity, involved fatherhood and men taking responsibility in their communities to break the cycle of intergenerational gender inequity.

This is a battle for hearts and minds, and such battles are rarely won with stats and figures. As the success of TV shows like Adolescence has demonstrated, there is nothing like a great story to cut through political stagnation and reach a wider audience.

One Battle After Another offers another opportunity to reflect on the past, present and future of fatherhood. This is established territory for director Paul Thomas Anderson, whose masterpiece There Will be Blood (2007) depicts the complex and dysfunctional relationship between Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) and his adopted son, H.W (Dillon Freasier). The gut-wrenching scenes of paternal abandonment in that film offer an enduring example of the all-too-familiar “absent father”.

Lockjaw: the absent father

The absent father is a culturally embedded version of masculinity present in many popular films, that has been experienced by generations of children. TV series like Mad Men (2007) have explored a simultaneously utopian and dystopian version of 1960s fathers as emotionally absent.

In One Battle After Another, actor Sean Penn’s visceral depiction of the aptly named Colonel Steven Lockjaw provides an extreme example of patriarchal fatherhood: absent yet casting a dreadful shadow over a family. Lockjaw is driven to bloody revenge in pursuit of his biological daughter, a daughter he has had no hand in raising.

We know from studies on absent fathers that such absence can have a lifelong effect on children. Lockjaw, with his bizarre behaviours and fawning pursuit of neo-Nazi recognition, offers an allegory for the current rise of alt-right masculinity as jarringly jingoistic and egoist.

Such satire is valuable but also aligns with existing critiques of the manosphere. We need only look to Elon Musk’s infamous hand gesture at the second inauguration of Donald Trump, and his later appearance with his son in the oval office to conjure similarly disturbing visuals of fatherhood. This film breaks newer ground with its depiction of flawed father involvement and the less researched community leadership.

Bob Ferguson: the involved father

Involved fatherhood has been researched for many decades. The triad of a dad’s interaction, availability and responsibility with and for their children is the core criteria.

With Leonardo DiCaprio’s Bob Ferguson, we are introduced to a relatable, “good enough” involved father. He is the product of state hostility to father involvement. Research has shown that the intent of fathers to be involved is often stifled by patriarchal gender norms and workplace stigma.

As an involved father, single dad Bob comfortably meets two of the three criteria – he is physically and emotionally engaged with his daughter, Willa (Chase Infiniti). His enduring presence is partial evidence of responsibility. However, we also see the deleterious impact his drug and alcohol abuse has had on his role as responsible caregiver. The roles have reversed for him and 16-year-old Willa. Bob’s version of involvement is symbolic of the father that cares and stays, but is flawed and unsupported.

Sergio St Carlos: the caring father

Finally, we come to Benicio del Toro’s, Sergio St Carlos, a Karate sensei, Willa’s teacher and father to the community. Offering a counternarrative to bombastic male leaders, Sergio calmly resists tyranny. As a leader, he might be interpreted as emblematic of the much-vaunted male role model, yet Sergio is also flawed. He drinks and drives, leaves much domestic care to his family and revels in his role as antagonist to the law. Yet, such flaws allow this caring father to feel recognisable, relatable and attainable.

Researchers have been writing about caring masculinities for years. Central to understanding this idea is the prioritisation of caring values of positive emotion, interdependence and relationality, and the rejection of domination.

In Sergio, we find a father who cares for his family and his community. Through him, we see a new depiction of fatherhood as the role of a caregiver and care receiver in harmony with his wider community.

Such admirable qualities may seem utopian and fantastical, yet these dads exist. Close to where I live, North East Young Dads and Lads offers a community lifeline to young dads: many later become support workers. One Battle After Another reminds us that community fathers can make a real difference.

---

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.

---

Mark Gatto received funding from BA Leverhulme from 2022-2024.
Mark Gatto is an Academic Board member for Working Families

– ref. One Battle After Another: Sean Penn, Leonardo DiCaprio and Benicio Del Toro explore three visions of fatherhood – https://theconversation.com/one-battle-after-another-sean-penn-leonardo-dicaprio-and-benicio-del-toro-explore-three-visions-of-fatherhood-266858

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Callum Roberts, Professor of Marine Conservation, University of Exeter

Most of the UK’s commercial fish stocks are not in a healthy state, according to a new landmark report.

Marine conservation charity Oceana UK’s Deep Decline report – one of the most comprehensive analyses of fish stocks since Brexit – finds that half of the UK’s top ten commercial fish stocks are either critically low, overexploited, or both. These include icons of our seas such as North Sea cod, North Sea herring and north-east Atlantic mackerel.

Only 41% of the UK’s commercial fish populations have been found to be healthy. A quarter are being fished beyond sustainable limits. And one in six are both critically low and yet still being overfished, placing them on a course to collapse. Many others, like skates, have been so historically depleted that they have all but disappeared and no longer even appear in statistics.

This disaster was entirely predictable and avoidable. Nearly five years on from the UK’s historic rupture from Europe, most people struggle to name any benefits from Brexit. One of the few benefits I can think of is the power to manage our fisheries without being beholden to the annual horse trading for fishing quotas in Brussels.

Freed at last from the constraints of collective bargaining, the UK could make rational decisions to delivery healthier seas and prosperity for the fishing industry.

Management under the EU’s common fisheries policy was famously flawed. Rather than confront difficult decisions about how to share limited resources, politicians routinely set quotas far above scientific recommendation for sustainable fishing – exceeding them on average by a third over more than 20 years.

If a farmer took more sheep to market every year than they produced, they would soon be out of business. Fisheries ministers failed to apply the same logic, so fish stocks dwindled and fishermen lost their jobs.

But for UK fisheries ministers, it seems that bad habits are hard to unlearn, and they continue to ignore expert advice. Rather than enjoying a rebound, our seas remain in deep decline.

Take the humble cod. Once the cornerstone of UK’s national dish fish and chips, North Sea cod is now at such low levels that, in September 2025, the international body providing scientific evidence for fish catch regulation – the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (Ices) – advised a zero catch quota to safeguard the future of the cod fishery. Yet North Sea cod is still being overexploited. Ignoring science risks a future where the nation’s favourite dish is no longer affordable or even available.

The Irish Sea is the worst affected region of the UK with four in ten of its stocks overfished according to Oceana’s report, up from a quarter just five years ago. In the Celtic Sea, quotas for cod in 2024 were set higher than the estimated number of adult fish left.

This is political negligence, not ignorance. The UK has world class fisheries science, yet ministers repeatedly ignore their own experts.

Ocean health underpins the UK’s blue economy, from fishing to tourism. Fishing alone supports tens of thousands of jobs, particularly in communities with few alternatives. When stocks collapse, boats tie up, processors shut down and skills honed over generations are lost.

Who is to blame for this avoidable calamity? Ministers obviously, but who are they listening to if not their scientific advisors? Paradoxically, for over 50 years, the large corporates of the fishing industry have been tireless cheerleaders for their own demise, urging ministers to let them catch more fish, in doing so putting short-term benefit over long-term sustainability and job security.

Those with small, local boats – those not raking in the big money – are left trying to eke out a living from a depleted ecosystem. The fact is, if you keep within nature’s limits, you can fish forever.

---

Read more:
The secret to healthy and sustainable fish fingers – an expert explains

---

Ocean ally

There is more at stake than just emptied seas and ailing fisheries. The sea is one of our strongest allies in fighting climate change. Seagrass meadows, kelp forests and seabed sediments capture and store carbon, acting as natural defences. Overfishing and destructive bottom trawling damage these habitats and release carbon dioxide into the sea and atmosphere, stripping away our climate resilience just when we need it most.

Imagine instead a future of abundance. Herring shoals flashing silver. Puffins plunging into dense fish swarms. Porpoises chasing mackerel. Fin whales blowing once more in our waters. This vision is not fanciful.

---

Read more:
Mussel power: how an offshore shellfish farm is boosting marine life

---

The good news is that recovery is possible. We need only look at healthiest stocks in Oceana’s report, such as west of Scotland haddock, western Channel sole and North Sea plaice. What did they all have in common? Catch limits set in line with scientific advice.

The truth is that strong nature protection is the friend of fishing, not the enemy it is often painted as. Globally, when areas of the sea are genuinely protected and destructive fishing methods are banned, nature rebounds at speed. Fish populations multiply, wildlife flourishes and coastal communities gain a secure future. Protected areas rebuild fish stocks and feed productive fisheries in surrounding waters.

With the right choices, the UK could have more abundant seas that provide both food and jobs while restoring the wonders of marine life. Overfishing is a political choice.

For too long, governments have chosen short term quotas over long term security. Recovery is also a choice: the UK should set a new course that gives both ocean life and fishing communities a fair deal and a prosperous future.

---

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.

---

Callum Roberts receives funding from Convex Insurance Group and EU Synergy, and UK Natural Environment Research Council. He is a board member of Nekton and Maldives Coral Institute.

– ref. Half the UK’s fish stocks are overfished – but the evidence shows how they can be revived – https://theconversation.com/half-the-uks-fish-stocks-are-overfished-but-the-evidence-shows-how-they-can-be-revived-266285

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow

UK chancellor Rachel Reeves has set out a “youth guarantee” aimed at ending long-term unemployment among young people. Under the plan, a young person who has been out of work for 18 months would be offered a temporary job, apprenticeship or college place.

The UK has just under a million young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neet) – thought to be around 13% of the country’s 16- to 24-year-olds.

Under Reeves’ plans, those who refuse the offer could face benefit sanctions. The scheme is being positioned as a way to boost growth while keeping to Labour’s fiscal rules ahead of November’s budget.

The idea has some logic. Long-term youth unemployment has consequences that reach far beyond the individual. Research from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that young people who are out of work for extended periods often face lower earnings for decades afterwards, as well as poorer health and social outcomes.

Economists sometimes describe this as “scarring” – that is, lasting negative economic effects. By contrast, job losses that come mid-career tend to have less lasting economic impact because these workers have more experience or skills that they can use to get their next job.

So the argument that tackling youth unemployment offers particularly high returns is, in theory, credible.

Long-term future

The difficulty is whether the guarantee, as outlined by Reeves, can deliver anything more than temporary relief. It is not yet clear where the promised jobs will come from.

If the government pays firms to create placements, they will have been specially created for the scheme, rather than representing real gaps that the firms need to fill to grow their business. When the government subsidy ends, the firms may have no reason to keep the young person on. And a short placement may not provide enough skills development to allow the young person to get a job elsewhere.

What’s more, the government is not proposing to pay the full cost of these placements. If the onus falls on businesses to absorb additional young workers in newly created roles at their own expense, the effect may be negligible. This is because Labour’s wider programme – from higher employer national insurance contributions to new employment rights – already imposes extra costs on employers.

That tension points to a broader issue in Reeves’ strategy. She has pledged not to increase headline tax rates. Instead she is seeking to expand the overall tax base by growing employment and productivity.

Yet that kind of growth usually requires sustained public investment in skills, infrastructure and industrial policy. A scheme that subsidises wages for 12 months may help individuals back into work, but it is unlikely to shift the productivity dial or generate lasting fiscal dividends without a wide programme of investment.

For Reeves, the challenge is that the guarantee must be large enough to create real career pathways and business growth. But to do so requires precisely the kind of government expenditure that is made difficult by her own “non-negotiable” fiscal rules.

Instead of a way to grow within the rules then, the youth guarantee may be added to the list of promises the government cannot fulfil without bending them.

Maha Rafi Atal 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. Will Rachel Reeves’ youth unemployment scheme force her to bend her own rules? – https://theconversation.com/will-rachel-reeves-youth-unemployment-scheme-force-her-to-bend-her-own-rules-266716

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Abigail Taylor, Research Fellow, City-Region Economic Development Institute (City-REDI), University of Birmingham

More than a year after the UK government abandoned the phrase “levelling up”, it has now launched a fresh strategy to distribute funding to disadvantaged communities. The promise to these deprived areas is three-pronged: investment in community facilities, enhancing public spaces like parks, and revitalising town centres and high streets.

The “Pride in Place” programme will provide up to £5 billion over ten years to support around 250 communities. A further £150 million will be shared between around 95 places across England, Scotland and Wales through an associated impact fund.

The funding is aimed at building stronger, more empowered communities and enhancing physical infrastructure. It also forms part of the Labour government’s efforts to tackle the electoral threat posed by Reform UK in some of the country’s left-behind areas.

The programme is not a wholly new announcement. In its spending review earlier this year, the government announced that 25 trailblazer neighbourhoods would each receive up to £20 million over the next decade. This funding has now been rolled into the Pride in Place programme. For the additional 144 areas named recently, this will be new funding.

The programme is putting more decision-making power in local hands – and this is certainly a good thing. It includes proposals for facilities for young people, backed by a £66 million fund called #iwill as well as a £175 million Community Wealth Fund.

Another welcome aspect are plans to help communities share learning and best practice, and to empower them to drive change locally. For now though, there is little detail on how this will work.

What’s different about this fund is that it involves allocative rather than competitive funding. This means that there is no bidding or tender process. The plan to allocate funding directly to areas based on need is likely to be welcomed by councils that previously criticised competitive funding processes for being costly and time-consuming to apply for.

---

Read more:
The ‘levelling up’ bidding process wastes time and money – here’s how to improve it

---

Funding is allocated based on a ranking of neighbourhoods using indices that measure deprivation and community needs. The needs of some areas may have changed since the deprivation index was compiled but compared to the Levelling Up Fund, which was criticised for a lack of clarity, this selection process appears to be clearer and more robust.

Challenges and constraints

But the fund is disappointing in its scale and scope. Specifically, it appears to be focused on smaller-scale cosmetic improvements rather than larger-scale transformational change.

Compared to the New Deal for Communities (NDC) programme, which ran from 1998 to 2011 across the UK, funding for Pride in Place is small. The 39 area partnerships involved in NDC received an average of £50 million – equivalent to nearly £78 million today. By contrast, the highest award from the Pride in Place programme is £20 million.

And the aims of the NDC programme were broader than those of Pride in Place. When NDC was evaluated, litter and anti-social behaviour ranked highly among the issues that people wanted to see addressed. But the funding also supported holistic change by addressing the root causes of challenges such as creating jobs, improving education and training, action against crime, improving the environment and housing and social services.

It was measured against three place outcomes (crime, community, and housing and the physical environment) and three people-related outcomes (education, health and worklessness).

Today, it seems very unlikely that the new programme will offer substantial funding to develop training, education and housing given the sums involved. What’s more, the focus is on revitalising community spaces and boosting local pride rather than tackling inequality in housing or education. All these elements are crucial in driving change in disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

Research has emphasised the importance of long-term holistic funding in addressing regional inequalities in other countries. And a recent study that reviewed UK community and economic development programmes emphasised how important it is to create conditions for communities to harness their “agency and resources”.

But it is difficult to predict the impact of this fund on current or future Reform UK voters. Heading off the challenge from Nigel Farage’s party to Labour’s vote is likely to depend on how deeply the impact is seen and felt by voters at a local level.

This in turn depends on the scale and approach of the programme – things like holistic efforts to tackle social issues and a long-term commitment to the communities involved. This, together with events (the budget this autumn, for example), are likely to shape views both in terms of physical improvements to the areas involved and voters’ perceptions of being heard in policy decisions.

Research has found that constituencies that previously received levelling-up funding saw a lower Reform vote in the 2024 general election. This suggests that visible improvements may indeed erode some of the support for Reform.

But many of the planned projects may not bear fruit until after the next general election. So if the programme is to have a significant impact, it will be important that projects have a tangible impact promptly. Reducing litter, for example, could be a quick win.

The twin approaches of youth engagement and citizen participation are positive aspects of the Pride in Place programme. The sum of funding for developing community facilities is large. But at its core, the plan falls short in addressing economic disadvantages such as skills, employment and housing. Developing a more coherent strategy around these issues is vital if the government really wants to help voters feel pride in their communities.

Abigail Taylor has received funding from the Chartered Instiute of Public Policy and Accountancy (CIPFA) for research exploring success factors in how international city regions have made progress in addressing regional inequalities and how these factors map to the UK. Abigail has also received funding from CIPFA, the Daiwa Anglo-Japanese Foundation, the Great Britain Sasakawa Foundation and the Japan Foundation Endowment Committee for research examining how regional growth can be enabled outside of national capitals. It draws on lessons from two second cities: Birmingham in England and Osaka in Japan, and focuses on four critical issues: institutional conditions for growth, regional group formation, funding mechanisms, and monitoring and evaluation. Abigail is also a Co-Investigator on the ESRC, AHRC and UKRI funded Local Policy Innovation (LPIP) Hub.

Alice is the theme led for ‘Inclusive and Sustainable Local Economic Performance’ on the Local Policy Innovation Partnership Hub, funded by the ESRC, AHRC and UKRI. Alice is also currently on a part-time secondment to the Centre for Local Economic Strategies a charity focusing on the promotion of community wealth building for local economies.

Jason Lowther 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. Can Labour’s plan to fund deprived communities see off Reform? What the evidence shows – https://theconversation.com/can-labours-plan-to-fund-deprived-communities-see-off-reform-what-the-evidence-shows-266304

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ipshita Basu, Associate professor (Reader) in Global Development and Politics, University of Westminster

When asked how she was doing during her second pregnancy, Neethu, 24, told us she felt worried and cautious. “The doctor said the baby is in a sensitive state,” said Neethu who is from the Irula community in Attappadi in Kerala, India, which lies in the biodiversity hotspot of the Western Ghats mountain range.

Neethu’s first child did not survive beyond a few weeks after birth. Between 2012 and 2021 there were 136 officially reported infant deaths in Attappadi (the actual number is expected to be much higher), where Adivasis (Indigenous people) make up an estimated 43% of the population. This is considered high in a state which has the lowest infant death rates in the country.

Although these deaths had a variety of causes, malnutrition is a well documented problem among Indigenous people in this region. And malnutrition more generally is known to contribute to infant mortality by affecting the health of pregnant or breastfeeding mothers and their children.

The Adivasi families we have spoken to in Attapadi firmly believe that these are avoidable deaths. And our research into long-term changes in Attappadi’s landscape confirmed that the loss of land owned by Adivasis has eroded traditional sources of nutrition.

The state government has responded to the issue of infant mortality and malnutrition through an extension of health and agriculture projects. The “tribal multispecialty hospital” in Kottathara in Attapadi, a specialised medical care facility launched in 2007, is a striking symbol of these efforts.

To ensure everyone has access to nutritious food, special provisions are made for the Adivasis. Field-level community health workers regularly visit pregnant and breastfeeding women. Representatives from the local government and volunteers work hard to ensure Adivasi women deliver their newborns in hospitals.

However, the Adivasi residents of Attappadi are not convinced that this is going to resolve the matter. Maariyamma, an elderly Irula woman is a part of the local women’s collective that was formed in the mid 1990s for ecological regeneration and against alcohol trade in Attapadi. She firmly believes that these infant deaths have been caused by the historical curtailment of traditional millet farming, ecological destruction and the more recent land alienation.

Attappadi was exploited for timber since the early 19th century under colonial rule. Although the lands were claimed by an upper-caste, feudal landlord family, it stayed away in the plains, giving the Adivasis significant control over the land and forests.

The Irula, Muduga and Kurumba communities had farmed diverse varieties of millet in a shifting mode whereby patches of forests were slashed and burnt for farming and left fallow until they regenerated. The elderly respondents we spoke to pointed out that on the eastern slopes of the Attappadi hills, where rains are scarce, Adivasi families farmed enough millet in a season to last for the whole year.

---

Read more:
Young Indian farmers are turning to an ancient crop to fight water stress and climate change

---

Maariyamma fondly remembered old times: “There were hundreds of green leafy vegetable varieties in those days that kept us strong” she said, before breaking into an upbeat song that listed the names of villages and the greens they were known for.

The phase out of millet farming began in the mid-19th century, when the colonial forest department became anxious about conservation, resulting in increased checks on shifting cultivation. In postcolonial times, the widespread distribution of state-subsidised rice slowly started to change food habits. Meanwhile, millet cultivation received no financial state support.

This issue was compounded by two other developments: land alienation and ecological degradation. The arrival of settlers has resulted in many Adivasi communities losing lands. Several oorus (hamlets) lost over 3,000 acres over a span of three generations. This broke down their traditional governance system that managed food sovereignty, consisting of a mooppan (chief), mannukkaaran (soil manager), vandaari (treasurer) and kurunthala (rituals manager).

Reparation and regeneration

Several Adivasi households are now caught up in court cases over land ownership. In the late 2000s, a new wind energy farm sparked a land alienation controversy. A recent tourism boom in Attappadi exacerbates land encroachment by settlers and businessmen, backed by forged land documents.

As Maaran mooppan says, while the link might not be obvious, loss of land and infant deaths are closely connected. Adivasis now depend on cheap rice from fair price shops that have no nutritional value. His words resonate with the demands for food sovereignty being made by Indigenous people in several parts of the world. A 2023 study by the Indian Council of Medical Research pointed at the poor health of the Adivasis in Attappadi, but relegated land alienation (the loss of ownership and access to ancestral lands) as a passing concern in its conclusions.

---

Read more:
Thousands of babies needlessly die each year, but women’s groups can save many

---

The colonial and postcolonial intrusions by the state and settlers in Attappadi also resulted in deforestation and desertification. The state response in recent times was to initiate the Attappadi Hills Area Development Society, an organisation that divided Attappadi into watersheds and encouraged reforestation to raise the groundwater levels that were earlier depleted.

Although Adivasis nominally participated in this programme, it lacked a vision to ensure the restoration of Adivasis’ food and land sovereignty, producing short-term gains in access to water that were reversed when funding stopped in 2012.

A few recent attempts by the state government, such as the Millet Village initiative to revive millet farming, highlight the pitfalls of welfare interventions that do not address the land question. Though some Adivasi households participated in these initiatives, our respondents insist that the seeds are not native and that the products are aimed at urban consumers for whom millets are marketed as superfoods.

Neethu’s generation, several of whom we talked to and stayed with, display a complete aversion to millet-based meals and affinity towards processed foods, a habit developed in boarding schools where Adivasi children are taught in yet another state-sponsored model of engaging with the Adivasis.

This challenges the idea that Indigenous health can only be improved with increased medical care and highlights how the ecological destruction and loss of land and food sovereignty has affected the health of today’s population.

Ecological reparations involve directly addressing the historical relationship between colonialism and Indigenous health. Our research shows that a sustainable future requires listening to Indigenous peoples’ demands for food sovereignty as the key to improving health resilience.

---

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.

---

Ipshita Basu receives funding from the British Academy on the Knowledge Frontiers grant project titled “Planetary Health and Relational Wellbeing: Investigating the Ecological and Health Dimensions of Adivasi Lifeworlds.”

Sudheesh R.C. receives funding from the British Academy on the Knowledge Frontiers grant project titled “Planetary Health and Relational Wellbeing: Investigating the Ecological and Health Dimensions of Adivasi Lifeworlds.”

– ref. How land restoration could address malnutrition among India’s Indigenous families – https://theconversation.com/how-land-restoration-could-address-malnutrition-among-indias-indigenous-families-263297

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pooja Saini, Professor in Suicide and Self Harm Prevention, Liverpool John Moores University

Hormonal changes during menopause can drive suicidal thoughts – a crisis that healthcare services have failed to recognise or adequately address. The devastating link is laid bare in research my colleagues and I conducted recently.

The study, which involved interviews with 42 women who experienced suicidal thoughts and behaviour during perimenopause or menopause, exposes a troubling pattern. Women in crisis are being prescribed antidepressants instead of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), despite clear menopause guidelines stating that antidepressants should not be a first-choice treatment for menopause-related low mood.

Over the past two decades, suicide rates have climbed among women in their mid-40s to mid-50s – precisely the age when most experience the menopausal transition. Yet the role of hormonal changes in this mental health crisis has been largely ignored.

Women in the study described feelings of profound hopelessness and entrapment. One participant said: “What’s the point in being alive? What purpose, what function do I have? I’ve got nothing left to give, nothing left to contribute. Why am I still here?”

The perimenopausal depression they described went beyond ordinary low mood, encompassing crushing fatigue, a sense of worthlessness and the feeling of being a burden to loved ones. Many questioned whether their lives had any remaining value or purpose.

A healthcare blind spot

The research revealed alarming gaps in medical knowledge and care. Women reported lengthy delays in receiving appropriate hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and frequent misdiagnoses. Many said their GPs lacked a basic understanding of how hormones affect mental health.

“There was zero knowledge about hormones,” one woman said of her GP. “They were doing their best with what they felt they knew, but they didn’t know anything about this subject whatsoever. It’s not on their assessments to ask about women’s menstrual cycles.”

Even when women explicitly requested hormone treatment, some were refused due to a rigid interpretation of clinical guidelines. Research shows that antidepressants are being prescribed disproportionately to women – a pattern that, in some cases reported in the study, worsened symptoms rather than relieved them.

The hormonal upheaval of menopause doesn’t occur in isolation. In midlife, women often juggle caring responsibilities, career pressures and domestic demands. These are pressures that layer on to the biological changes they’re experiencing, creating an intense mix of physical and emotional strain.

Women are now widely recognised to be losing jobs, relationships and, in some cases, their capacity to make decisions due to menopausal symptoms. Mood swings, anxiety, brain fog, hot flushes and feelings of profound sadness can be debilitating. Yet, for many, these symptoms are dismissed or misunderstood.

This dismissal has deep historical roots. The outdated diagnosis of female “hysteria” – a misogynistic label used to pathologise women’s emotions – once justified treatments as extreme as asylum confinement and electroconvulsive therapy. The word may be gone, but its legacy endures in the way women’s hormonal suffering is still minimised as exaggeration or overreaction.

There are signs of change. In 2021, an independent UK government report made ten recommendations to support menopausal women in the workplace and beyond. And, in November 2024, clinical guidelines were updated to recommend psychological support for women experiencing early menopause.

But suicide risk for midlife women has not been adequately highlighted in menopause guidance – a gap that urgently needs addressing.

Many women in the study reported dramatic improvements in mental wellbeing and a reduction in suicidal thoughts after receiving timely HRT and support from healthcare professionals who actually listened. Some described their lives as becoming tolerable again after years of suffering.

Not all women will benefit from hormone replacement, but all deserve to have their hormones checked and to be offered treatment when appropriate. The choice should be theirs – informed, supported and taken seriously.

The silence around menopausal mental health has lasted too long. It’s time healthcare services recognised this crisis for what it is: a matter of life and death.

Pooja Saini is affiliated with NHS organisations, charities and non-for profit organisations.

– ref. The mental toll of menopause – what women really feel – https://theconversation.com/the-mental-toll-of-menopause-what-women-really-feel-261982