Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Elna Heimdal Nilsson, Professor of Aeronautical Sciences, Department of Aviation and Aeronautical Sciences, Lund University

Military aircraft – from fighter jets to transport planes – are playing a significant role in today’s unstable world. Cumulatively, the operations carried out by these fleets, from combat missions to training flights, consume large amounts of fossil fuel.

Nevertheless, military aviation is rarely included in national climate inventories. In addition to greenhouse gases, aviation also emits other pollutants such as soot and particles, which affect both climate and air quality, and have detrimental effects on human health and ecosystems.

Recently, the UK government announced that it would purchase 12 F-35A fighter aircraft, some of which will be used to reduce a backlog in pilot training. The F-35A is the standard variant of the F-35 fighter jet.

While the decision is primarily motivated by defence and alliance commitments, it also has environmental implications. Expanding training activities will increase the number of flight hours, and consequently, fuel use and emissions. Fighter jets consume large quantities of fuel per flight hour.

The combustion process in aircraft engines releases carbon dioxide (CO₂), but the impact on the climate and environment extends further: emissions of soot particles, nitrogen oxide compounds, water vapour and sulphuric compounds influence atmospheric chemistry and cloud formation.

The persistent contrails and the cirrus clouds they generate are estimated to cause an impact on the climate comparable in magnitude to the warming effect of CO₂ from commercial aviation.

Any assessment of mitigation options must therefore consider both CO₂ and non-CO₂ effects arising from aircraft engine combustion. To mitigate aviation-related climate effects, the civil aviation sector has been promoting the development of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF).

When produced from waste oils or residues, hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (Hefa) fuels – which are forms of sustainable aviation fuel – typically achieve 50–70% lower life-cycle CO₂ emissions compared with fossil-based jet fuel. Synthetic aviation fuels known as advanced power-to-liquid (PtL) e-fuels, produced using renewable electricity, could reduce emissions by more than 80%, though they are not yet available at scale.

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

In addition to a lower carbon footprint compared to fossil fuels, SAFs have
also been shown to produce fewer soot particles during combustion, reducing the likelihood and severity of contrails and cirrus clouds.

For technical reasons, down to the specific molecular composition SAF compared to fossil based jet fuel, commercial SAFs are currently not certified as standalone fuels. However, they are available for blends of up to 50% along with fossil-based jet fuels.

The quality of the sustainable fuels is very high and there is no technical barrier to their use in military aviation. The question is: to what extent can the climate and environmental impact of military aviation operations be reduced if sustainable aviation fuels are introduced?

Sustainable fuel and the F-35

Let’s take the example of the F-35, which was the aircraft purchased recently by the UK government. Under certain conditions, the F-35 can burn five tonnes of jet fuel in a single sortie lasting an hour. For comparison, a diesel car like the Volvo V70 would, in its whole lifespan, burn an amount of fuel corresponding to just four hours of combat manoeuvring with the F-35.

Technically, the F-35 is already approved to operate on blends of conventional kerosene and certified synthetic fuels. Similar to civil aviation standards, military standards allow for blending ratios of up to 50%, depending on the production pathway.

No modifications to engines or fuel systems are required. F-35 flights that used commercially available fuel with 40% SAF were carried out by the Norwegian Air Force in early 2025.

There are no significant technical barriers to the new F-35A aircraft entering UK service to operate on commercially available SAF blends with up to 50% renewable fuel. Compatibility is not the limiting factor, but, unfortunately, the availability and cost of fuel are.

For military training flights, which may involve large numbers of sorties, SAF can therefore provide significant reductions in life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions. A 50% blend of Hefa, for instance, could cut average CO₂ emissions per flight by around one third.

Since contrails can account for a large fraction of aviation’s total climate impact, this effect is potentially important. The strategic allocation of SAF to flights that are most likely to generate persistent contrails, like training missions at high altitude in humid conditions, could amplify the climate benefit of limited SAF supplies.

The UK’s acquisition of additional F-35A aircraft will help address a backlog in pilot training, but it will also increase emissions. From both a climate and national security perspective, SAFs represent the most practical near-term mitigation option.

The F-35 is technically compatible with sustainable aviation fuels – and substantial life-cycle emission reductions are achievable this way. Additional benefits may come from reduced contrail formation. However, limitations in global SAF production and their higher costs restrict the extent to which these fuels can currently be deployed.

SAFs will not make military aviation climate neutral, but they could substantially reduce its environmental footprint at a time when both security and sustainability are pressing concerns.

Elna Heimdal Nilsson 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. Sustainable fuels could reduce the climate impact of military aircraft – https://theconversation.com/sustainable-fuels-could-reduce-the-climate-impact-of-military-aircraft-264792

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sarah A. Walker, Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology, Durham University

You’ve probably seen the word “narcissist” thrown around online in headlines, on dating apps or in therapy-themed TikToks. But the label that people often unthinkingly slap on toxic bosses or reality TV villains hides a much more complicated psychological picture.

Psychologists have studied narcissism for many years, but over time, our understanding has evolved. One of the biggest changes is that today, narcissism is no longer seen as just grandiosity, arrogance or egotism.

Early scientific descriptions of narcissism focused on dominance, ambition and self-importance, all of which are traits associated with traditional masculine stereotypes. That meant narcissistic tendencies in women were often misread or overlooked. When those traits show up as emotional sensitivity, insecurity or relational manipulation, they sometimes still are misdiagnosed as anxiety, mood disorders or borderline personality disorder traits.

The most extreme and persistent forms of narcissism can sometimes be diagnosed as narcissistic personality disorder. This condition was added to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the American Psychiatric Association’s diagnostic manual, in 1980. But most people with narcissistic tendencies won’t meet the threshold for a diagnosis.

So what does the research actually say?

Narcissism in general is now understood as a complex set of personality characteristics that can show up in different ways.

Psychologists had long suspected that there might be different kinds of narcissism, but it wasn’t until 1991 – when researcher Paul Wink and his colleagues presented a model including grandiose and vulnerable subtypes – that they were more formally recognised. Although there are other models, this remains one of the more popular approaches to understanding narcissistic tendencies in the wider population.

A 2021 review by US psychologist Joshua Miller and his colleagues pulled together decades of research to offer one of the most authoritative summaries of how psychologists now understand narcissism. It explains that narcissism has a common foundation, which includes things such as self-importance and entitlement. It then branches into different forms of narcissism, such as grandiosity, antagonism and vulnerability.

Researchers now often use the terms grandiose and vulnerable to describe two major forms of narcissism. One person with narcissistic traits may be bold with high levels of grandiose traits, confidence and emotional resilience. Another might be defensive, anxious and hypersensitive to criticism. Both show signs of narcissistic self-focus, but they end up looking quite different in how they experience and express emotion.

In a 2022 research paper I wrote with colleagues, we carried out the first meta-analysis examining how narcissistic traits relate to the ability to control one’s emotions. The results showed that vulnerable narcissism is consistently associated with greater emotional difficulty, which means these people might find it harder to keep their emotions in check.

In particular, people with high scores on vulnerable narcissism scales are more likely to rely on suppression. Suppression is a strategy that people use to hide or inhibit their emotional expressions, and has been linked to poorer wellbeing. On the surface, suppression might sound like self-control.

In some situations, it can be. For example, keeping a lid on your emotions when your boss is yelling at you. But trying to mute emotional expression without addressing the underlying emotions increases stress when it becomes our default strategy. It can worsen mental and physical health over time.

In contrast, grandiose narcissism wasn’t linked with emotion regulation difficulties. In fact, several of the studies included in our analysis suggest that people with higher levels of grandiose traits may not experience as much emotional distress in the first place. This challenges the popular idea among researchers that people who exhibit narcissistic tendencies are also experiencing emotional instability.

Emotional intelligence and self-perception

The differences between forms of narcissism show up in emotional intelligence research as well. In a 2021 systematic review on narcissism and emotional intelligence, my colleagues and I found that people with grandiose traits often said they were good at understanding and managing emotions. For instance, how well they think they can handle anger or recognise other’s emotions.

But when their skills were tested using emotion tasks (such as recognising facial expressions or identifying the best way to respond to an emotional situation), their performance didn’t always match up with how skilled they said they were. This is consistent with a 2018 study which also found that people with grandiose tendencies rated themselves as emotionally skilled but performed worse on skill-based emotional intelligence tasks compared to other participants.

In contrast, people with vulnerable narcissistic traits tend to rate themselves lower in emotional intelligence, and seem to genuinely struggle more with managing emotions in everyday life.

So what should we make of all this?

It’s time to move beyond the pop-psych trend of labelling difficult people as narcissists. Narcissism isn’t about taking too many selfies. And no, the partner who ghosted you or the colleague who dominates meetings isn’t necessarily high in narcissistic traits either – no matter how much we might like to complain about them over coffee.

These kinds of casual diagnoses aren’t just unhelpful, they’re often wrong.

Narcissism is a complex psychological pattern that can show up in different ways and can reflect a deeper struggle with things such as self-esteem, emotion regulation and social connection. Understanding this doesn’t excuse people’s bad behaviour – not at all. But it does help us look past the stereotypes to get a clearer picture of what narcissistic traits look like in everyday life.

Sarah A. Walker 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. What we’ve learned about narcissism over the past 30 years – https://theconversation.com/what-weve-learned-about-narcissism-over-the-past-30-years-258505

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jim Hoare, Honorary Research Associate in the Centre of Korean Studies, SOAS, University of London

China invited world leaders to its capital, Beijing, recently to celebrate the 85th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in the second world war. Western leaders were notably absent. But despite the presence of many other leaders, such as Russian president Vladimir Putin, it was the arrival of North Korea’s Kim Jong-un that seemed to attract most international media attention.

This was Kim’s fifth visit to China since he assumed power in 2011 – the last was in 2019 before the COVID pandemic. And it was the first time he had attended a multilateral international meeting.

Kim travelled to Beijing by train – an armoured train at that. Although he does not seem to have the fear of flying his father had, it is not the first time Kim has used a train to travel overseas. In 2019, he went to Hanoi in Vietnam – a much longer journey – to meet US president Donald Trump the same way.

The train allows for a large entourage and provides an opportunity to prepare for meetings. It may also be more secure than the country’s aircraft after some years of no or little use due to the pandemic and the effective sealing off of North Korea from most of the rest of the world.

Aside from the travel preferences of its leadership, here are three things we learned about North Korea from the summit in Beijing.

1. There is no obvious succession plan

Kim was accompanied not by his wife, Ri Sol-ju, who was with him on at least one previous visit to China. Nor did he travel with his sister, Kim Yo Jong, who has been seen by many as a power in her own right. He arrived in Beijing with his daughter, Kim Ju Ae, who is believed to be about 13.

She first appeared in public in 2022, joining the North Korean leader at an inspection of a major intercontinental ballistic missile launch. Kim Ju Ae has been seen with her father, and occasionally her mother, on several subsequent occasions. This has led to speculation that she is being groomed to be Kim’s successor.

However, she made no appearances with her father after arriving in Beijing. This may have been a learning trip rather than an indication that she has been selected to succeed her father.

Before 2022, there was similar speculation about Kim Yo Jong, who was noted for hostile statements on relations with South Korea. While she has not disappeared from the scene, Kim Yo Jong is not shown the same level of deference as her niece.

If Kim is preparing a successor, he is departing from the approach of his grandfather and first North Korean supreme leader, Kim Il-sung, as well as his father, Kim Jong-il. Kim Jong-il did not make public appearances until he was in his 30s. He was not identified as the successor until later.

Only after he suffered a stroke in 2008 did Kim Jong-il select Kim Jong-un, aged 24, as his successor. To select a child – and a female at that – seems fraught with difficulties. Korean society, north and south, still tends to attach a high value to age and experience. And despite formal equality in both countries, there is a strong belief in male superiority.

2. It can rely on strong regional support

More significant than the presence of his daughter was the reception given to Kim Jong-un in Beijing. He was beside the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, and Russia’s Putin in front of the other leaders on the viewing platform for the ceremonial parade. This was the first time that leaders of the three countries had met together since Kim Il-sung, Mao Zedong and Nikita Khrushev met in China in 1959.

Kim Jong-un also held summit meetings with Putin and Xi, both of whom had signed up to sanctions on North Korea just a few years ago because of its nuclear programme. All of that now seems forgotten. The meeting with Putin reinforced the rapidly developing relations between the two countries, especially over the war in Ukraine.

Following Putin’s acknowledgement of the role North Korean troops have played in Ukraine, Kim said: “If there is any way we can assist Russia, we will certainly do it as a fraternal duty.” This may open the door for North Korea to send more troops to Ukraine and provide Russia with arms and ammunition.

In return for North Korea’s assistance, Kim has had economic support and, probably, some help in updating his country’s military capacity. Troops sent to support Russia will also have learned lessons about the nature of modern warfare.

The meeting with Xi produced pledges of further economic cooperation. Despite signing up for sanctions over the nuclear issue, China has not stopped providing food and oil to North Korea. This support now seems likely to increase.

Xi said the two countries were “friends with a common destiny”, while the Korean Central News Agency reported that North Korea would invariably support China’s interests.

3. It has been recognised as a nuclear state

Absent from both meetings was any reference to the denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula. This seems to indicate that both Russia and China accept that North Korea is a nuclear state.

According to a 2025 assessment by the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Kim views nuclear weapons as a “guarantor of regime security”. Some experts estimate that North Korea has produced enough fissile material to build up to 90 nuclear warheads.

Russia, China and North Korea can all show benefits from the summit in Beijing. Russia has a promise of continued North Korean support in the Ukraine conflict.

China, meanwhile, has reinforced its traditionally close relationship with North Korea. And Kim has not only been treated as a major world leader, but has gained additional practical support from his two big neighbours.

In such circumstances, it seems unlikely that he will be very receptive to overtures from Trump or to make any concessions over the nuclear issue.

Jim Hoare 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. What we learned about North Korea at the summit in Beijing – https://theconversation.com/what-we-learned-about-north-korea-at-the-summit-in-beijing-264718

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andy Levy, Reader in Psychology, Edge Hill University

When TV personality Danielle Lloyd was diagnosed with melanoma earlier this year, she faced not only the anxiety of cancer treatment but also a disturbing reality: influencers spreading dangerous misinformation about sun protection.

After having a suspicious mole removed and awaiting results from a second biopsy, the 41-year-old has become an outspoken critic of social media personalities who lie to their followers about sunscreen products.

Cancer misinformation can have serious consequences, such as leading people to delay or even avoid life-saving treatments, and eroding trust in medical professionals.

Misinformation spreads easily because it taps into people’s emotions and reasoning about health. When faced with a cancer diagnosis, fear, confusion and a desire for control can drive people to seek remedies that offer hope – even if that hope comes from sources that don’t use credible evidence.

Misinformation often offers simple, comforting answers, while real medicine is complex, uncertain and sometimes difficult to accept. Fake cancer claims can feel convincing because they seem to eliminate the uncertainty about whether treatment will work, or if the cancer will return.

Social media platforms can amplify false cancer messages, making them appear more credible or popular than they actually are. This is compounded by the role of influencers and unqualified practitioners, who often profit from promoting pseudoscience.

Message framing plays a significant role in the spread of cancer misinformation. Studies show that we respond more to messages focused on what we might lose rather than what we could gain. This happens because of loss aversion – our psychological tendency to fear losses more than we value equivalent gains.

Cancer messages that highlight potential losses – such as health, comfort or life itself – feel more urgent, personal and motivating than those focusing on potential gains, like improved survival or better quality of life.

Cancer misinformation that emphasises scary losses can be especially persuasive because it taps directly into people’s fears. False claims warning about dangerous side-effects of treatments, hidden risks or conspiracies suggesting doctors want to harm patients strike a deep emotional chord. This makes people more likely to believe and share these messages, even when untrue.

For instance, misinformation claiming that chemotherapy doesn’t cure cancer – and instead causes it to spread and shortens your life – can trigger fear and resistance to treatment.

In contrast, truthful messages stating that chemotherapy can have side-effects, but it greatly increases your chance of survival, may seem less frightening and, sometimes, less compelling because they focus on potential gains rather than losses.

Cancer is an emotionally charged and high-stakes diagnosis. Loss-framed misinformation spreads quickly and can influence decisions that can put people at risk. Even when presented with correct medical information, the emotional weight of loss-informed cancer misinformation can override rational thought.

The psychological principle that bad is stronger than good (also called “negativity bias”) explains why cancer misinformation that triggers fear or anxiety often sticks more than hopeful, fact-based messages. Negative information simply has a bigger impact on how we think and feel in times of uncertainty.

Prebunking

One effective way to help people avoid falling victim to cancer misinformation is through prebunking. This approach involves teaching people how to spot and resist false or misleading messages before they take hold.

In particular, it focuses on exposing the tactics people use to deceive or scare others, so they’re easier to recognise and dismiss when encountered.

The tactics people can learn to look out for – and prebunk – include fear-mongering, where messages exaggerate risks to induce anxiety, or promises of miraculous cures lacking scientific evidence and misleading statistics that distort facts to support false claims.

---

Read more:
Can a game stop vaccine misinformation? This one just might

---

By being aware of these common techniques, people with cancer can become more vigilant and sceptical when they encounter suspicious information online, on social media, or through word of mouth.

Research suggests that when people understand the strategies behind misinformation, they are less likely to accept false claims at face value. This increased awareness empowers them to pause, question and seek reliable advice before making important decisions about their health.

In the end, prebunking can help people with cancer stay protected against misinformation. It allows them to navigate through the emotionally charged cancer claims out there and make smarter, safer choices.

Scientist Carl Sagan said it best: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” It’s a straightforward idea, but a powerful one — especially when it comes to pushing back against cancer misinformation.

Sagan’s quote is a reminder to slow down, think critically and ask for solid evidence — especially when cancer information sounds unbelievable, too perfect, or just plain alarming.

Andy Levy 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 cancer misinformation exploits the way we think – https://theconversation.com/how-cancer-misinformation-exploits-the-way-we-think-260236

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Eleftheria Kodosaki, Research Fellow in Neuroimmunology, UCL

A new test could help to diagnose memory issues associated with Alzheimer’s disease in as little as three minutes. According to recently published findings the test, called the Fastball EEG test, may one day help doctors flag people who need further checks for Alzheimer’s disease without the need for unnecessary waits or time-consuming procedures.

Alzheimer’s disease affects millions of people worldwide. It’s a progressive condition, in which brain cells are slowly damaged and die – leading to memory loss, confusion and difficulties with thinking and daily tasks.

The disease process begins long before symptoms manifest. Proteins called amyloid and tau gradually build up in the brain, forming plaques and tangles that interfere with communication between nerve cells. By the time memory problems are significant enough for diagnosis, much of the damage has already been done.

It’s important to note that the signs of Alzheimer’s disease and symptoms don’t develop similarly in all patients. This means the amount of amyloid plaques and tau tangles a person has in their brain doesn’t always match the severity of the disease.

In addition, the amount of plaques and tangles can only be estimated via imaging or blood tests. These factors make Alzheimer’s disease difficult to diagnose and predict how it will progress. This is why researchers are keen to develop tests that can spot signs of the disease earlier.

Traditionally, diagnosis has relied on cognitive screening tests, where a doctor asks a patient to remember words, copy drawings or complete problem-solving tasks. These tools are effective, but take time and require trained staff. They may also be stressful for the patients and can be influenced by factors such as a person’s education level, their language skills or test-related performance anxiety.

More advanced diagnostic options, including brain scans and laboratory analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (a fluid which protects the brain and spinal cord), can indicate the presence of Alzheimer’s disease in the brain. But these tests are expensive and invasive.

But the Fastball EEG test uses a different approach.

Instead of asking patients to actively recall or solve problems, it measures how the brain responds to images flashed on a screen. Participants first see a set of eight pictures, which they’re asked to name but not memorise.

Then, during the test, hundreds of images are shown in quick succession – around three per second. Every fifth image is one of the eight previously shown. The EEG headset records the brain’s electrical activity, picking up tiny signals that reveal whether the brain recognises these familiar images.

In healthy people, the recognition response is clear. But in people with mild cognitive impairment (problems with thinking, memory or problem-solving which often precedes Alzheimer’s disease) and especially those with memory issues, the response is weaker.

To understand the test’s suitability, researchers recruited 106 participants to their study. This included 54 healthy adults and 52 people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Among the latter group, some had memory-specific problems (amnestic MCI), while others had difficulties unrelated to memory – such as problems with attention (non-amnestic MCI).

The researchers found that the Fastball test was sensitive enough to distinguish between these groups. Those with amnestic MCI showed significantly reduced brain responses to the familiar images compared to healthy adults and those with non-amnestic MCI. In other words, the test quickly identified the kind of memory impairment most closely linked to early Alzheimer’s.

They then repeated the test a year later. Some of the participants who’d only had mild cognitive impairment in the first test had progressed to either Alzheimer’s disease dementia or another type of dementia, called vascular dementia, which manifests in symptoms similar to Alzheimer’s.

The researchers also asked the participants who developed dementia to perform the standard cognitive tests currently used to diagnose Alzheimer’s. These participants showed no or little difference in this test, which means the test wasn’t sensitive enough to detect the transition from mild cognitive impairment to dementia. But with the Fastball test, the participants performed marginally worse than they had previously.

However, of the 42 participants with mild cognitive impairment who repeated the Fastball test a year later, only eight had transitioned to dementia. So, although the results are very promising in illustrating the test’s accuracy, they should be interpreted with caution as they’re based on a small number of people.

The future of diagnosis

Crucially, the test is fast – lasting only three minutes. It also doesn’t rely on the participant’s effort, mood or test-taking ability, which can influence cognitive test results. It can also be done at home or in a GP’s office, which might reduce anxiety for patients and make it easier to reach a larger group of people.

However, the study did not include other conditions where memory impairment is also present – such as depression or thyroid problems – so it cannot be used as a standalone diagnostic tool for Alzheimer’s disease. Future studies in more diverse populations which take these other conditions into account will be needed to better understand the test’s strengths, limitations and potential.

Other tests, which are currently in development, may be better for diagnosing Alzheimer’s disease specifically. For example, blood tests could transform Alzheimer’s diagnosis once they’re more widely rolled out.

---

Read more:
Alzheimer’s disease blood tests: here’s what they look for, and what they can tell you about your risk

---

These measure proteins linked to Alzheimer’s and can give a snapshot of disease processes happening in the brain. Some tests currently being studied would only require a finger-prick of blood. If they prove to be accurate, this could mean patients could do these tests at home and mail them in for analysis.

Tools such as the Fastball test and blood tests could help shift the focus of Alzheimer’s care from late diagnosis to early intervention. By identifying people at risk of the disease years earlier, doctors could recommend lifestyle changes, monitor patients more closely or provide them with appropriate therapies earlier, while they can still make the most difference.

Eleftheria Kodosaki 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. Alzheimer’s disease: new three-minute test can spot memory issues – here’s how it works and what it can tell you – https://theconversation.com/alzheimers-disease-new-three-minute-test-can-spot-memory-issues-heres-how-it-works-and-what-it-can-tell-you-264519

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tom Oliver, Professor of Applied Ecology, University of Reading

How do you build 1.5 million new homes in five years without destroying nature? Housing is unaffordabe for most people, so the UK government plans to build as many homes as possible, as soon as possible. Assuming this brings house prices down (which isn’t a given), how can it be done without harming wildlife and worsening climate change?

The UK is already one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. According to UK government reports, nature loss drives a loss of benefits to humans, leading to increased risks of flooding, food insecurity, disease and pollution. Nature loss already contributes significantly to the declining physical and mental health of the UK population, with nature poverty varying markedly between postcodes.

In my research as an ecologist, I study how urban planning can be nature-centric. Being sensitive to the history of a place when designing housing, asking what other beings already have their homes there and how people can live alongside them, puts humans on par with other species, rather than objectifying them as lifeless “assets”.

No longer seeing humans as the centre of everything is a worldview shift that’s recognised by organisations such as the UN and the European Environment Agency as essential for a sustainable civilisation. It might seem radical, but when existing approaches aren’t working, you need to change tack.

Even with current environmental regulations, the UK government is failing to meet its own targets for restoring wildlife and providing clean water and air. It remains on track for just nine out of 43 environmental commitments. Environmental protection policies and their implementation are failing.

Take, for example, the concept of biodiversity net gain. This policy outlines how much habitat needs to be “restored” in exchange for developers destroying nature to build homes. Yet the promised nature restorations rarely happen.

Doubling down on this approach, under new planning-system reforms to quickly build new homes, the government is enabling developers to pool promised habitat “units” and restore them elsewhere.

But simply destroying nature in one place and rebuilding it elsewhere isn’t the answer. Not least because ecosystems (such as the complex interactions between soil fungi, plants and insects) take decades to mature. Plus, people living in new homes in areas where nature has been cleared will experience fewer health benefits.

Instead of treating nature something as separate from us, like a property we have a right to destroy, we can reassess our relationship to it. Nature as being an intrinsic part of us is a more scientifically accurate worldview, as well as essential for protecting it.

Last year, an international science body produced a report ratified by 147 governments, including the UK. The conclusion identified the main causes of global biodiversity loss as the disconnection from and domination over nature, the concentration of power and wealth, plus the prioritisation of short-term, individual and material gains. That report, along with many others, states the need for “fundamental system-wide shifts in views, structures and practices”.

Scaling up eco-homes

Many nature-centric housing solutions already exist in Brazil, Italy and the Netherlands. The challenge is how to build them at scale, while adapting them to the nature in a local region. Housing design and surrounding areas can be tailored to help regionally rare animals like otters, certain bats as well as amphibians, insects and plants.

I recently led a workshop with experts from law, urban planning, architecture, garden design and housing policy, and they agreed that the technical expertise to build such homes already exists. What is missing, they said, is the deeper mindset shift needed to bring about such an ambitious programme of social change.

The key challenge is to expand our imaginations for how we can live more in harmony with other species and build political courage for such housing. Building these homes may take longer than the government’s five-year target, but anything less will continue to drive the loss of nature on which our health and prosperity depends.

Research my colleagues and I conducted shows that promoting this nature-centric shift in worldviews must become a top priority. It goes beyond just the housing sector and relates to the design of our businesses, governance and education systems.

Without a change in underlying attitudes, environmental regulations are simply rules that get ignored, hence the poor state of our rivers and the loss of our nations plants and wildlife.

We cannot build 1.5 million homes with a casual attitude to trashing nature in the process. The real solutions to the housing crisis go beyond bricks and mortar and rules about where to put them. We need to rebuild our care and responsibility to the natural world, acknowledging nature as something we humans are deeply part of, instead of apart from.

More effective institutions and legal innovations (such as giving rights to nature) then follow from that. To solve the housing crisis in ways that are genuinely sustainable requires a shift in mindset as a prerequisite for housing development.

---

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.

---

Tom Oliver has received research funding from BBSRC, NERC, Natural England and VKRF for developing climate adaptation plans for humans and other species, and for critically investigating ‘nature-centric’ governance approaches. He was affiliated with Defra as a senior scientific fellow on their Systems Research Programme, with the Government Office for Science working on long-term risks to the UK, and spent four years with the European Environment Agency on their scientific committee. He currently sits on the Food Standards Agency science council and Office for Environmental Protection expert college. He is author of The Self Delusion: The Surprising Science of Our Connection To Each Other and the Natural World, published by Weidenfeld and Nicholson, and the forthcoming book The Nature Delusion: Why We Can’t Fix The World Without Fixing Ourselves, published by Bristol University Press.

– ref. Why building nature-centric housing involves a mindset shift – https://theconversation.com/why-building-nature-centric-housing-involves-a-mindset-shift-261995

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jennifer Mathers, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Aberystwyth University

After a meeting hosted by the French president, Emmanuel Macron on September 4, 26 countries have pledged to create a “reassurance force” to provide security guarantees for Ukraine in the event that a peace agreement with Russia is reached. The Russian president reacted by saying that Russia would target any European troops deployed in Ukraine.

He said if they appeared in Ukraine while Russia’s “military operation” was still underway, “we proceed from the fact that these will be legitimate targets for destruction”. And if a peace deal were eventually agreed, he added: “I simply do not see any sense in their presence on the territory of Ukraine, full stop.”

Russia is maintaining its demand that any peace deal should involve Ukraine ceding the regions it has occupied or part occupied: Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

But new evidence has come to light suggesting that Putin’s territorial ambitions in Ukraine go well beyond those regions.

A map, spotted in the background during a briefing given by Russia’s chief of the general staff, Valery Gerasimov, in August, shows the two countries divided by a thick black line. On the Russian side of the line are not only the five publicly claimed regions of Ukraine but also the territories of Odesa and Mykolaiv.

These areas, which hug the coastline of the Black Sea, are of considerable geostrategic significance. Russian occupation of Odesa and Mykolaiv would go a long way towards fulfilling one of Russia’s longstanding ambitions: domination of the Black Sea region.

Control of this territory would give Russia a land corridor to Transnistria, a breakaway region in eastern Moldova with strong pro-Russian sympathies. The leaders of Transnistria declared independence from Moldova following a civil war in the early 1990s. In a 2006 referendum, 97% of respondents supported Transnistria joining Russia. Russia currently has approximately 1,500 troops stationed there, and the territory has long been discussed in the west as a possible platform for a Russian invasion of Moldova.

Like Ukraine, Moldova was formerly part of the Soviet Union but is now orienting itself more towards western Europe and is currently seeking EU membership.

In addition to putting Russia in a strong position to exert pressure on Moldova, a more significant Russian presence in the Black Sea would increase Moscow’s ability to project power in neighbouring regions. This includes the Mediterranean, the Middle East and Africa.

Black Sea strategy

The Black Sea is also a vital site for east-west transport and communications. So much so that the European Union announced a Black Sea strategy in May 2025. The strategy recognises the region’s significance for different forms of security, including its importance for the environment, access to energy and other forms of trade and economic links. The EU plans to address these security issues by developing mutually beneficial partnerships with countries in the region.

Russian control of Ukraine’s Black Sea coast would be disastrous for Ukraine. It would mean the loss of Ukraine’s naval assets, which make extensive and effective use of maritime drones to target Russian ships and targets in occupied Crimea.

Being cut off from direct access to the Black Sea would also severely restrict Ukraine’s ability to export agricultural produce, an important source of income for an economy that has been hit hard by the war. Re-establishing and expanding Ukraine’s role as a producer of food for the world also forms the centrepiece of Kyiv’s efforts to build stronger relationships with Africa and other developing regions.

Putin’s hunger for ‘Novorossiya’

In addition to its strategic importance, these regions along Ukraine’s Black Sea coast also have special historical and symbolic significance for Putin’s Russia. Putin himself has described Odesa as a “Russian city” and claimed that the entire coastal area rightfully belongs to Russia as spoils of its war with Turkey in the 18th century.

The Black Sea coast also plays an important role in Putin’s use of Russian imperial history to justify his war against Ukraine. Empress Catherine the Great significantly expanded the Russian empire into southern Ukraine and Crimea. For more than a decade, Putin has presented his own actions in Ukraine as a continuation of Catherine’s legacy in increasing the territory controlled by Russia.

An important example of this practice came in April 2014, just weeks after Russia’s annexation of Crimea, when Putin used the phrase “Novorossiya” on Russian television. This is a term dating from Catherine the Great’s reign that refers to a large part of southern Ukraine, including Crimea. By invoking this historical term, Putin was signalling his intention to follow in the footsteps of the 18th century ruler and claim these lands for Russia.

In 2014, Moscow not only made a rhetorical claim on the city of Odesa and its surrounding region – it took active steps to turn that claim into reality. In the spring of that year, Russia used disinformation to persuade local people in eastern parts of Ukraine that the government in Kyiv did not have their best interests at heart and even posed a danger to them. At the same time, Russia provided money, weapons and training to local militant groups looking to stir up trouble.

These efforts were not limited to areas of the Donbas region, where they met with some success. They were also attempted in Odesa, where they were rebuffed.

More than a decade later, a map on the walls of Russia’s ministry of defence showing Odesa region as part of Russia demonstrates that Moscow has not abandoned its ambition to gather up lands that were once part of the Russian empire. As Kyiv’s European allies debate the extent of their involvement in providing security guarantees for Ukraine, there are still plenty of unanswered questions about the precise nature of the reassurance force being planned by the “coalition of the willing”.

But there is no question about the need for Ukraine’s international supporters to provide Kyiv with the strongest possible security guarantees.

Jennifer Mathers 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. Russia has provided fresh evidence of its territorial ambitions in Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/russia-has-provided-fresh-evidence-of-its-territorial-ambitions-in-ukraine-264592

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tom Harper, Lecturer in International Relations, University of East London

While Beijing has been showing off its latest military hardware to an array of international leaders, Chinese cultural icons are making their mark with a very different audience.

At Naomi Osaka’s opening match at the US Open, she had a Labubu attached to her racket bag as she walked on to court which attracted a lot of attention. After the match she told reporters that the doll was a tribute to Billie Jean King (it has big BJK trademark glasses and she calls it Billie Jean Bling).

One of the most notable symbols of the increasing global reach of China’s popular culture is the popularity of the Labubu, a collectable toy with rabbit ears and a grin. Rihanna, David Beckham and Blackpink’s Lisa are among the celebrities photographed with a Labubu doll.

While the doll has been on the market for a few years, sales really took off in 2025. The doll’s Chinese manufacturer, Pop Mart, saw toys from The Monsters franchise, primarily the character Labubu, create US$670 million (£498 million) in revenue in the first six months of 2025, a 668% increase compared to the same period in 2024. And about 40% of its toy sales were outside China.

There have even been fights over the doll in the UK, which led to Pop Mart temporarily suspending sales of the doll at its UK stores.

Xinhua, the Chinese state news agency, said that Labubu “shows the appeal of Chinese creativity, quality and culture in a language the world can understand”.

Chinese pop culture is also starting to be more influential in the video game industry. For instance, Black Myth Wukong, a retelling of the classic Chinese novel Journey to the West, sold 10 million copies within three days of its 2024 launch. A follow up, Black Myth Zhong Kui, was quickly announced by developer Game Science.

Changing global images

The popularity of these cultural trends could have benefits for China’s soft power, a theory of how countries can influence other nations, or change their international image, by using culture, rather than military power or conflict.

This concept was first detailed by the late US academic Joseph Nye in the late 1980s. China may be looking to follow in the footsteps of soft power titans such as Japan and South Korea, which have had some success creating a different, more modern international image by exporting their pop culture.

Since 2010, the Japanese government has encouraged the spread of its pop culture outside its national borders under the “Cool Japan” initiative. A particular style of Japanese comics (manga) and stylised cartoons (anime) gained international popularity, spreading a different image of what modern Japan was, while delivering significant economic benefits.

These kinds of modern icons went some way to creating a more attractive image of the country, moving it away from the western concept of Japan, often based on its role as a hostile power in the second world war.

Soft power superstars

South Korea, another Asian soft power superstar, has been exporting its popular culture since the removal of censorship in the 1980s allowed for greater creativity in its cultural industries. The most notable examples have been the global popularity of K-pop, with streams of K-pop songs (online listens) exceeding 90 billion in 2023.

South Korea has also used its K-pop music in its relationship with North Korea, with artists such as Girls’ Generation and Bigbang gaining popularity in the communist state through recordings smuggled over the border.

Meanwhile, South Korean dramas, such as Squid Game, won large worldwide audiences, with the first season receiving 265 million views.

These initiatives have allowed Japan and South Korea to increase their influence in global affairs, to connect with huge audiences and to reshape and modernise their national image.

What’s changed?

Labubu and Black Myth Wukong have marked a break with more traditional forms of Chinese soft power influence, such as its programme to lend its pandas to zoos around the world.

---

Read more:
Panda diplomacy: what China’s decision to send bears to the US reveals about its economy

---

Meanwhile, the share of people with a favourable view of China has increased since last year in 15 of the 25 countries surveyed by Pew Research. Overall 54% still have an unfavourable opinion (down from 61% in 2024), compared with 36% having a favourable view (31% in 2024).

Other Pew data shows that younger Americans (aged 18 to 29) are less likely to view China as an enemy (19%), compared to those aged 65 and older (47%). Overall, the percentage of Americans who see China as an enemy has fallen to 33% in 2025 from 42% in 2024.

What this means for Taiwan

Chinese pop culture is also making inroads into the self-governing island of Taiwan, which China sees as part of its territory.

Taiwanese pop culture was popular in mainland China in the 1990s and early 2000s, with music from Jay Chou and S.H.E. being regularly featured on Chinese radio. More recently, the Chinese dance craze Subject Three, inspired by a traditional Chinese wedding dance, took off in Taiwan as well as on global TikTok and YouTube. There is also growing use of Chinese social media platforms, such as Douyin and Xiaohongshu, among younger Taiwanese.

This has coincided with a wider push by Beijing to make China more attractive to younger Taiwanese people, including offering them financial incentives to move to China to work.

2025 was the year that Chinese pop culture reached big new audiences. China’s most successful exports, such as Labubu, may now join anime and K-pop as enduring global phenomena with lasting cultural influence.

Tom Harper 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. Labubu is not the only Chinese cultural icon to be making a big hit in 2025 – https://theconversation.com/labubu-is-not-the-only-chinese-cultural-icon-to-be-making-a-big-hit-in-2025-263872

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Abigail Parrish, Lecturer in Languages Education, University of Sheffield

Australia and England are both multicultural countries where hundreds of languages are spoken. However, in both, levels of language learning at school are worryingly low.

Australia has seen a major downturn in language learning. In 2021, fewer than 10% of students in year 12 – the final year of compulsory education – were studying a language.

Exam entry figures for England show the numbers of young people taking languages at GCSE is stabilising to some degree. However, since 2004, when a language subject was made optional after the age of 16, there has been a decrease of 35%.

In both countries, the lack of a strong language learning culture contributes to low enrolment and achievement rates in foreign language education. That both countries are English-speaking also leads to the idea that there is limited use in learning additional languages, because English is so widely spoken worldwide.

This has resulted in the perception that inhabitants of both Australia and England are poor language learners.

Appetite to learn

Our research suggests this is not necessarily true. There is an appetite for language learning among young people in both countries, along with support from their parents. However, challenges such as harsh grading and teacher recruitment problems have meant this doesn’t always translate into full classrooms.

As fewer young people take languages after the ages of 14 and 16, there is a knock-on effect at degree level and beyond. This affects the supply of new language teachers.

Australian educators consistently argue that making language learning compulsory for longer is vital to increasing participation in language subjects. However, research by one of us (Abigail) in England indicates that students who choose to study a language are more motivated than those for whom it is compulsory.

European languages have traditionally dominated language teaching in both countries. However, in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, GCSE entries in “other modern languages” – any language other than French, German, Irish, Spanish and Welsh – are rising. In Wales, government initiatives are attempting to secure the Welsh language learning pipeline from early years all the way to university, in addition to making Welsh more visible in media and daily life.

Numerous attempts have been made to improve Australia’s Asian language capacities, in an effort to strengthen regional ties. Despite over $337 million AUD (adjusted for inflation) of investment in government programs, the past 20 years have seen a continued decline in numbers studying Asian languages there. Only Korean has seen any growth – but this can mostly be attributed to the rise of K-pop, rather than any Australian government initiative.

This musical phenomenon, along with other cultural exports such as the Netflix series Squid Game and the film Parasite, has seen interest in the Korean language grow globally.

Both England and Australia could use these successes to capitalise on language learning potential. Some Australian schools are already making the most of this wave of Korean popularity, called hallyu, to entice as many students as possible to the subject – but the language is not available as a school subject in England.

Australia is also taking steps to revitalise the teaching of Indigenous languages and to ensure their survival with future generations. Prior to colonisation, more than 250 Indigenous languages and 800 dialects were spoken throughout Australia. But a 2013 survey found only approximately 123 were in use, with only 12 being considered “strong”.

---

Read more:
‘It’s about making our children feel proud’: how schools can learn about local Indigenous language and culture

---

Australian primary students in particular have expressed a desire to learn Indigenous languages. This desire was also reflected in Louisa’s PhD data collection, with one university student saying: “If we have a look [at the languages spoken] internally, before we look externally, I think we’ll find a lot more answers, because there’s a wealth of resources here.”

This reflects a growing appetite among young people in Australia to learn Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages as part of a more locally grounded education.

Through our work, we feel strongly that educators should listen more closely to what students are saying they want, rather than taking the well-worn route of telling them to learn a language for economic or strategic reasons.

By listening more closely to the interests and goals of young people in schools, we can start to provide teaching which supports their need for autonomy – even if, in the short-to-medium term, systemic problems such as the supply of teachers and resources also need to be addressed.

Students need to see the benefits of learning a language for themselves, and have the opportunity to connect with a language on their own terms. Louisa’s PhD thesis asked language students in Australia about improving language participation. As one participant answered, students need to realise “what a cool life they’re going to have from knowing a language”.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Young people in England and Australia are supposedly poor at learning languages – our research shows this isn’t true – https://theconversation.com/young-people-in-england-and-australia-are-supposedly-poor-at-learning-languages-our-research-shows-this-isnt-true-237249

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonatan Pinkse, Professor of Sustainable Business, Centre for Sustainable Business, King’s College London

We extract more than 100 billion tonnes of raw materials from Earth each year, then throw most of them away. The “circular economy” offers a different approach: instead of the linear “take-make-waste” model, we could reuse, repair and recycle materials. But despite growing enthsiasm for a circular lifestyle, we’re actaully moving backwards – and using more virgin resources than ever.

Over the past decade, the idea of a circular economy gained significant traction, inspiring some to aim for a zero-waste lifestyle. It has become a cornerstone of the broader transition to net zero, as the production of oil-based plastics continues to generate waste and carbon emissions.

The reality paints a far less optimistic picture. According to the latest Circularity Gap report, the use of “secondary” materials like recycled plastic or reclaimed wood is declining, while reliance on virgin resources continues to rise.

This raises the question why – with all the enthusiasm for a circular economy – are we still struggling to make meaningful progress towards it?

In our recent research, my colleagues and I argue that progress is being held back by two distinct narratives. One paints a utopian vision – arguing that, with enough innovation, we can eliminate waste and regenerate ecosystems, all while continuing to grow the economy.

The opposite narrative is less hopeful and fixates on the obstacles – high costs, consumer resistance and the lack of government support. It concludes that meaningful change is simply unrealistic.

Trapped between these extremes of utopia and paralysis, people may often find themselves unable to move forward. Our research explores the roots of this impasse and identifies three reasons people struggle to adopt more circular lifestyles – too much talk, too little support and the hard limits of physics.

Beyond recycling

It’s easier to talk about circularity than to practise it. While consumers may embrace the idea of circularity in principle, they often stop short of making the fundamental changes to their consumption habits that it requires.

Part of the appeal lies in its simplicity as a concept. But achieving it is anything but simple.

For example, to jumpstart recycling in the UK plastics sector, the idea of One Bin to Rule Them All was introduced as a trial project in 2021. The framework outlined a single collection system for all plastic waste. While the vision was bold and appealing in its simplicity, research showed that many industry representatives viewed it as idealistic and disconnected from people’s daily realities.

The initiative struggled to gain traction due to concerns about its feasibility in practice. It would require changing the entire waste collection system and investing in digital tracking for plastic waste. Industry support remained limited, as companies were reluctant to invest beyond trials without clearer guidance from the government on legal requirements.

Building a circular economy requires collective effort. To offer another example, some fashion brands have begun to offer to collect clothes for recycling. It’s a promising initiative, but the support systems are not always in place. Even when items are returned, much of what is collected cannot be recycled because the materials are difficult to identify.

To make recycling effective, product labels would need to be standardised to state clearly the composition of each item. Yet many brands have been slow to embrace full transparency.

And some of the problem comes down to our changing shopping habits, which are also affecting efforts to reduce waste. When the UK introduced a 5p charge for single-use plastic bags in 2015 (later increased to a 10p minimum), their usage steadily declined.

But in England, this progress has recently reversed, with the shift blamed on more people shopping for groceries online or ordering food from delivery apps. In the push for convenience, people seem to have less support for initiatives to reduce plastic waste.

Ultimately, the limits of circularity are grounded in the laws of physics. The concept of a circular economy assumes that materials can be reused indefinitely without any degradation. Terms like “upcycling” may sound promising, but for many products this simply isn’t realistic.

Materials naturally degrade over time. While we might value an upcycled product for its vintage appeal, the underlying materials may be of lower technical quality. In other words, circularity faces a fundamental challenge. It’s possible to slow down material degradation, but it’s not possible to eliminate it.

While circular economy efforts often fall short, there are ways to move forward. The first lesson is simple – less talk, more action. Consumers shouldn’t just opt for recycled or refurbished products when it’s convenient. They should critically examine everything they use in daily life and look for products that are easier to repair, recycle or upgrade. Clearly, lots of people just don’t have this kind of knowledge, so support from government and industry in helping them make better purchases will be essential.

But people also need to be more realistic about what circularity can achieve. Even with the best intentions, items cannot be recycled indefinitely. Still, we can be more ambitious. There’s nothing wrong with starting small, as long as things keep moving in the right direction. Most people can do more than they think. Reusing, repairing and developing habits that gradually reduce waste can have a meaningful impact over time. Circularity isn’t about perfection, it’s about consistent progress.

Jonatan Pinkse 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. The hard truth about the circular economy – real change will take more than refillable bottles – https://theconversation.com/the-hard-truth-about-the-circular-economy-real-change-will-take-more-than-refillable-bottles-261810