Category: The Conversation

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Joseph Mellors, Research Associate in Management and Marketing, University of Westminster

If you ask an AI service like ChatGPT or Google Gemini to recommend a destination for your next summer holiday, it will happily provide you with a list of attractive destinations. But many of them will be very familiar.

Paris, Venice, Santorini and Barcelona are all likely to feature, because the AI algorithm is nudging you towards the same old places. The illusion of personalised advice is what makes people less likely to question it – and why AI risks intensifying overtourism.

And the use of AI for holiday inspiration is growing fast. A recent survey found it has doubled in the past year, with uptake strongest among younger travellers. Nearly one in five Britons aged 25–34 now turn to AI tools to plan their trips.

In my own research, I analysed ChatGPT’s travel recommendations and found that it gravitates towards the most visited destinations by default. Lesser-known or more sustainable locations only tend to appear when travellers explicitly ask for them.

This could easily exacerbate the overtourism which is already testing the limits of many residents in highly visited places. In Mallorca, locals are demanding limits on flights and holiday rentals, while Venice introduced a day-tripper fee in an attempt to manage visitor pressure.

AI will quickly add to that pressure if millions of holiday makers make plans using the same online filters and tips. These algorithms are trained on what’s most visible online – reviews, blogs and social media hashtags – so quickly focus on what’s already popular.

And if travellers simply accept the defaults, the result will be more of the same, and more strain on places already under pressure.

But consumers aren’t entirely powerless. With a bit more intent, AI research can yield different and fascinating destinations.

My research suggests that discerning travellers need to start by asking better and more searching questions. Generic prompts such as “the best beaches in Europe” or “beautiful city” lead straight to the same results.

Instead, try something like: “Which towns are reachable by train but overlooked in most guides?” Or maybe: “Where can I go in July that’s not a major tourist hotspot?”

Push the system, ask follow-up questions and scroll past the first few results. That’s where the surprises often lie.

You could also change your timings. AI tends to focus on peak season because that’s when the most online reviews are posted and the most travel content is published.

Asking about off-peak months is a simple way to beat this built-in bias, so perhaps specify the Italian lakes in October or the Greek islands in May.

Or ask AI to dig a little deeper for its source material. AI draws heavily on English-language content, which favours international hot spots, but is also capable of finding independent travel blogs or local tourism cooperatives.

Type in something like “Spanish-language blogs about Asturias” or “community-run agritourism in Slovenia” and you could unearth something rewarding and off the beaten track. This is the kind of thing that can really unearth the vast potential benefits of AI and its capabilities.

The road less travelled

It could also easily help you to compare the costs and timings of various travel options, and assess the carbon footprint of your journey. It just requires a little bit of digging to get past the surface layer.

After all, these systems are designed to serve up the most obvious and well-documented suggestions, not what’s diverse or sustainable. (Although the same technology could just as easily be coded slightly differently to show rail travel before air for example, or to prioritise locally run independent businesses.)

So while the convenience of AI is seductive, it can also be predictable. If your holiday plans could be copy-pasted from Instagram, any sense of adventure can easily get left behind.

Consider using AI as a starting point, not the final word. Guidebooks, local media and conversations with residents restore the unpredictability that makes travel memorable.

By asking sharper questions, shifting their timing, checking footprints and seeking local voices, travellers can use AI as a tool for discovery rather than congestion. Every prompt is a signal to the system about what matters.

The next time you ask ChatGPT where to go, make it work a bit harder. Test it, argue with it and use its extraordinary capabilities to find somewhere new – or settle for the same crowded itinerary as everyone else.

Joseph Mellors 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 to use AI to guide your holiday plans – by a tourism expert – https://theconversation.com/how-to-use-ai-to-guide-your-holiday-plans-by-a-tourism-expert-267277

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

---

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

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

He added:

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

Reporting on Gaza

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Hard to find’ populations

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why counting matters

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

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

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

---

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How we found the sexy gene

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

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

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

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

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

Creating an unsexy moth

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

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

Pest control with insect genes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. Difficulty finding words

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

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

2. Brain fog

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

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

---

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

---

3. Numbness or tingling

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

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

4. Visual disturbance

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

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

5. Messy handwriting

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

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

6. Personality changes

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

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

7. Headaches

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

---

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

---

Improving diagnosis

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

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

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

Laura Standen receives funding from Barts Charity.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Six pillars

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

---

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

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