Science

An international team of astronomers reports the discovery of a new super-Neptune exoplanet orbiting a solar-type star. The newly detected alien world, which received the designation TOI-5005 b, is about six times larger and more than 30 times more massive than Earth. The finding was detailed in a paper published September 26 on the pre-print server arXiv.

NASA’s Transiting Exoplanets Survey Satellite (TESS) is conducting a survey of about 200,000 of the brightest stars near the sun with the aim of searching for transiting exoplanets. So far, it has identified over 7,200 candidate exoplanets (TESS Objects of Interest, or TOI), of which 557 have been confirmed so far.

Recently, a group of astronomers led by Amadeo Castro-González of the Astrobiology Center in Madrid, Spain, confirmed another TOI monitored by TESS. They found a transit signal on the light curve of TOI-5005—a moderately bright solar-type star of spectral type G2V, located some 685 light years away. The planetary nature of this signal was confirmed by follow-up observations using ground-based facilities.

“In this work, we used TESS, HARPS, PEST, and TRAPPIST-South data to confirm the planetary nature of TOI-5005 b and characterize its orbital and physical properties,” the researchers wrote in the paper.

The newfound planet has a radius of 6.25 Earth radii and a mass of 32.7 Earth masses, which yields a density at a level of 0.74 g/cm³. It orbits its host every 6.31 days, at a distance of approximately 0.066 AU from it. The planet’s equilibrium temperature was derived to be 1,040 K.

Investigating the internal structure of TOI-5005 b, the astronomers estimated that its core mass fraction and envelope metal mass fraction are about 0.74 and 0.08, respectively. All in all, the overall metal mass fraction of this exoplanet was calculated to be 0.76, therefore slightly lower than that of Uranus and Neptune. These results suggest that TOI-5005 b was formed via core accretion.

Based on the obtained data, the authors of the paper classified TOI-5005 b as a super-Neptune near the ridge of the “Neptunian savanna.” The so-called Neptunian desert and savanna mark the dearth of Neptune-like exoplanets on the shortest-period orbits and their modest occurrence at larger orbital distances. They are separated by a recently identified overdensity (ridge) of Neptunes in the 3–5 day orbital period range.

The researchers noted that TOI-5005 b has become a new member of a generally rare population of low-density Neptunes in the Neptunian savanna, in contrast to the planets in the ridge, which typically show higher densities—above 1.0 g/cm³.

In concluding remarks, the scientists added that the brightness of TOI-5005 makes the newly detected planetary system a key target for atmospheric and orbital architecture observations.

© 2024 Science X Network

Phones can be useful tools in classrooms to remind students of deadlines or encourage more exchange between students and teachers. At the same time, they can be distracting. Students report using their phones for non-academic purposes as often as 10 times a day. Thus, in many classrooms, phones are not allowed.

Now, researchers in the US have investigated if letting students use their phones for very brief amounts of time—dubbed phone or technology breaks—can enhance classroom performance and reduce phone use.

“We show that technology breaks may be helpful for reducing cell phone use in the college classroom,” said Prof Ryan Redner, a researcher at Southern Illinois University and first author of the Frontiers in Education study. “To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation of technology breaks in a college classroom.”

The shorter, the better

Throughout a full term, the researchers experimentally evaluated the effectiveness of technology breaks, lasting one, two, or four minutes, respectively. In some of the bi-weekly sessions, the researchers introduced equally long question breaks as a control condition.

During these breaks, students were not allowed to use their phones, but were encouraged to ask questions. Both breaks occurred 15 minutes into the lecture element of class. In the study, phone use was defined as touching the phone.

The results showed that when technology breaks were implemented, students generally used their phones less often than during sessions with question breaks. During technology breaks lasting just one minute, phone use was at its lowest, making them most efficient at reducing the time students spent on their phones during class.

It is not yet fully understood why this might be. “One possibility is that one minute is enough to read and send a smaller number of messages. If they have more time to send many messages, they may be more likely to receive messages and respond again during class,” explained Redner.

In addition, the researchers also found that in class sessions where one-minute breaks were in effect, students’ test performance peaked. Higher average test scores (over 80%) were consistently observed. “Our hope is that it means students were less distracted during lecture, which leads to better performance,” said Redner.

Used to phone use

The researchers said that it is unlikely that students behaved differently knowing their phone use was monitored—an effect called reactivity.

“Typically, reactivity occurs early in a study and its effects are reduced over time. We may see some in early sessions, but I am not convinced that we had much reactivity. At this point, students are probably used to using cell phones in the college classroom, also under the observation of the professor and other students,” Redner explained.

While their results point to the possible effectiveness of short technology breaks, the researchers said their data is hard to explain in its current state. For example, phone use data was highly variable among sessions, and it is not entirely clear why. This makes it more difficult to draw definite conclusions. Further studies are needed, the researchers said, to find the underlying reasons for high variability.

They also said that while phone use decreased in some of their experimental settings, it was not non-existent. “We are trying to find ways to reduce cell phone use and doing so without penalties. We hope our findings inspire researchers and teachers to try approaches to reducing cell phone use that are reinforcement-based,” concluded Redner.

Taking part in Parkrun events – a free weekly activity where people are encouraged to walk or run for 5 kilometres – appears to improve life satisfaction.

Parkrun is a charity that hosts events in 22 countries, including the UK, US and Australia. Previous studies have shown that taking part improves physical and mental health.

To learn more, Steve Haake at Sheffield Hallam University in the UK and his colleagues analysed 548 people, aged 18 to 83, who varied in exercise quantity. They were surveyed immediately after registering with Parkrun, which partly sponsored the study, and six months later. In the surveys, the participants ranked their life satisfaction from 0 to 10.

This revealed that taking part in Parkrun events was linked to an increase in life satisfaction of around 0.25 points, on average. For context, people in the UK generally reported a drop of 0.4 during the height of the covid-19 pandemic, says Haake, who is on Parkrun’s research board.

The participants estimated that Parkrun was responsible for about 25 per cent of their 0.25 point increase in life satisfaction, on average. While this is a small improvement, “one thing we say in terms of public health is that a tiny change in a lot of people is actually quite meaningful and worth having”, says Clare Stevinson at Loughborough University in the UK.

Each person took part in two Parkrun events, on average. This may have spurred other life changes, such as being more active in general, says Haake.

“Parkrun gives you that socially supportive, free environment – usually in nice parks – that’s very encouraging and which helps people stick to a regular exercise habit they perhaps wouldn’t otherwise,” says Stevinson. “That has knock-on benefits on health and weight, mental health and social well-being.”

Have you ever asked your child how school was today, only to be told it was “boring?”

It’s a conversation sadly all-too-familiar to a lot of parents. Many are left wondering why and what they can do to help.

It’s important to understand why your child may be feeling bored at school. Here are some possibilities to consider.

Not every aspect of school is engaging

Boredom at school isn’t uncommon. Remember, a child’s learning journey is jagged, not linear. Their learning may progress quickly during some periods, and less so at other times. Sometimes they will be bored.

Research has found Year 9 students reported feeling bored during nearly half of class time, on average, while younger students report feeling bored during about a third of class time.

Our own research, which involved surveying 412 students in Year 10 about their emotions, revealed boredom was the most commonly reported emotion among participants.

This is concerning because students need to be emotionally invested to learn well.

As we argued in our paper, it’s possible there’s a need for some teachers to develop more stimulating lesson plans, and work more with students to find ways to motivate and engage them. Collecting feedback and working with their students to minimize classroom boredom could help some teachers.

Young people are growing up in an era when—thanks to technology—boredom in spare time is rare. This can be quite challenging for teachers, who generally want to encourage their students to reflect, ponder and contemplate.

But research has found closer student-teacher relationships, creating safe and supportive classrooms, and linking learning to real-world contexts relevant to students can often mitigate negative emotions like boredom.

The greater the control the student has over their learning—and the better they see the value of it—the more motivated they’re likely to be.

But lesson content is only part of the picture.

Is your child bored some or all of the time?

If your child is feeling bored in just one class, or one subject, then it could be the lesson content.

But if your child is consistently complaining that all classes and all school is boring—and you’ve noticed their grades are declining—there may be more to consider, such as:

• the possibility of an underlying learning difficulty, such as dyslexia (which relates to reading) or dyscalculia (which relates to math and numbers)
• the possibility of hearing or vision impairment
• the possibility your child is “gifted,” meaning they learn much faster than their peers.

If you suspect any of these, talk to your GP, and to your child’s teacher.

Is boredom masking other emotions?

When children say they are bored, they might be struggling to identify and express more complex feelings such as sadness or anxiety.

So it’s worth considering if there are friendship issues happening in the playground, or if there is something else going on emotionally for your child.

These stressors can occupy your child’s thoughts in the classroom, taking attention away from learning.

By helping children to understand and articulate their emotions, we can provide them the tools to manage these experiences more effectively.

Some schools offer programs that help children identify their emotions and learn social, emotional and behavioral regulation skills.

Children with good social emotional skills are likely to do better on a range of interpersonal and academic outcomes, which can also benefit parents, teachers and the school in general.

So what should parents do?

Talk openly with your child. Ask more specific questions about their day, instead of just “how was school?”. Instead, you can try questions like:

• what was the most interesting thing you learned at school today?
• can you tell me about something you enjoyed doing at school today?
• was there anything that made you feel frustrated or bored today?
• what do you wish you could change about your day?
• who did you play with today?
• if you were the teacher for the day, what would you do differently?
• what feedback did you receive from your teacher on your work today?

Find out what they mean when they say they’re bored at school, and when they feel bored.

Consider having them assessed for possible learning difficulties, and their eyes and ears checked.

Find out if there are any problems with friends, or possible anxieties lurking below the surface.

If your child is particularly high achieving academically, discuss this with the school. Your child may be eligible for further assessment and extended support.

Find ways to relate what your child is learning in school to their own lives and interests.

Consider how you can strengthen your child’s relationship with their teacher, and talk to the teacher, too. They might be able to make simple adjustments to support your child’s motivation and engagement.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

“To get rich is glorious.” In the 1980s, this was one of the most famous sayings—unofficially, at least—to describe the ethos at the dawn of the opening-up period in post-Maoist China.

China’s paramount leader of the time, Deng Xiaoping, apparently justified this unorthodox situation for an ostensibly egalitarian Communist country by saying: “First you let some make money, then more will follow.”

And make money they did. One of the earliest examples was Nian Guangjiu, the founder of Chinese snack company Fool’s Melon Seeds, who went from being a poor farmer to a wealthy entrepreneur within a few years. But Nian’s story is something of a morality tale for those who followed.

He spent time in prison accused of embezzlement and other crimes in 1989, and his company was taken from him. To get rich in China was indeed possible, but it was a route that often led to jail and perdition.

Despite this, the scale and speed of growth in China—and the importance of business people, often in the private sector, in generating this—means the country now has a shared phenomenon with the developed world: a group of fabulously wealthy people.

When the first Chinese “rich list” was produced by Forbes in 1999, there was only one US dollar billionaire—a Hong Kong magnate based on the mainland called Rong Yiren.

By 2010, this number had risen, even by a conservative estimate, to over 60. And over the next decade, it soared to 389—a stunning example of how far China had come since the almost universal poverty of the Maoist years half a century earlier.

The Hurun Report’s wealth tracker, which uses a different methodology in calculating and valuing assets, has gone even further, suggesting China currently has the most billionaires in the world at 814, outpacing the US on 800.

Billionaires may have been a good indicator of China’s dynamic economy—but they are also an all-too-obvious symbol of its sharpening inequality. The Gini coefficient, an international standard of disparities between the richest and poorest in societies, had China in 2021 as significantly more unequal than the US or UK.

Since China’s current president, Xi Jinping, came to power in 2012, his stated ethos has been to “serve the people” and deliver “common prosperity.” That means more wealth, but more equitably shared out. “Common prosperity” was an almost ubiquitous slogan plastered across walls in Beijing and Shanghai when I visited both cities in late August 2024.

However, China’s economy is currently undergoing turbulence as a result of the residual effects of the pandemic and ongoing tensions with the US. The downturn has been severe enough to prompt the country’s central bank into announcing a major stimulus package which has, at least, sparked a rally on China’s stock market.

So, these days, ostentatious wealth and billionaires appearing like they are above the law are unwelcome. According to the Hurun Report data, China lost about 155 members of this elite group between 2023 and 2024, down to its current estimate of 814 billionaires.

Wealth comes at a cost

Beyond the fact that China’s economy has been slowing over the past two years, and the situation in terms of cost of living generally has grown tougher for everyone, there are some other factors that lie behind this chilling of the atmosphere for China’s super-rich.

Some of China’s best-known billionaires, including Alibaba founder Jack Ma Yun, have reportedly left the country after experiencing a political backlash for making statements regarded as disloyal and too critical of the Chinese government and official regulators. And other super-rich individuals may have taken such high-profile cases as good reason to preempt possible trouble by moving out of China.

While not in the class of the absolute richest of the rich, 13,800 millionaires departed China in 2023 according to one report, mostly to the US, Canada and Singapore. The people in this group that I know of seem to be motivated by a mixture of worries about the economics and politics of their home country. The fact it is increasingly difficult to get assets and cash out of China underlines how badly these people want to be based somewhere else.

We shouldn’t overstate the issue, though. It is still OK to be rich in China, if a bit less so than in the past. But it’s probably more advisable to be low profile and very loyal in public to the Communist party—and to get rich working in high-tech sectors that the government favors.

For example, Wang Chuanfu, founder of Chinese electronic vehicle manufacturer BYD, has doubled his wealth in the space of a few years. According to Forbes, he is now worth US$20 billion (£14.9 billion). The environmental and strategic value of his company, and what it makes, means he is relatively safe to continue living in Shenzhen, where he is currently based.

Ironically, though, the richest person in China since 2021 is Zhong Shanshan, who produces very non-technical bottled mineral water under the Nongfu brand. Ultimately, a key factor in keeping out of trouble if you are super-rich in China is either to be in super-high or very low-technology businesses.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Generation Z has been called “the sustainability generation.”

Born between 1997 and 2013, 58% of this consumer cohort seek to buy products that are sourced sustainably. Australian Gen Zs say they are willing to pay more for brands that have a positive impact on society.

Yet, at the same time, we have witnessed the meteoric rise of ultra-fast fashion from online, direct-to-consumer retailers such as Shein, Temu and Boohoo. Shein alone generated US$32.5 billion (A$48.3 billion) in revenue in 2024—a 43% increase from 2022.

There are complexities surrounding Gen Z’s shopping habits and how these often fail to align with their values.

On one hand, they covet a brand-new clothing item that is markedly more affordable when purchased from an ultra-fast fashion brand. On the other hand, they are aware of the environmental harms.

What explains this cognitive dissonance?

Caring about the environment …

Different from their predecessors, Gen Z has grown up with climate change as an urgent issue. Being chronically online means these concerns are not limited to their local environment.

Recent research revealed a pattern of stronger emotions of fear, guilt and outrage about the impacts of climate change among younger people, compared with older groups. These emotions could well be a driver of their activism and engagement with climate change.

They expect companies—those they buy from and work for—to prioritize sustainability in their business practices.

However, Gen Z crave more engaging ways to receive sustainability-related content. This is a worthy consideration for key players in the fashion industry.

… vs. the temptation of fast fashion

Gen Z consumers are plugged into social media trends that appear with every scroll and swipe on TikTok and Instagram. Social media have spiked cultural trends that accelerate fast fashion.

Influencers promote “reps” (slang for replicas) and “dupes” (duplicates): cheaper, imitation versions of high-end fashion items. This is a way to democratize luxury by normalizing “superfake” products and making luxury more accessible to a broader audience.

Social media tactics such as “hauls” and get-ready-with-me (“GRWM”) videos entice Gen Zs to get stuck on the treadmill of overconsumption. The idea is for content creators to show off massive amounts of new, trendy clothing. This in turn fuels the desire for consumers to continuously buy what they are seeing online—in bulk.

Fast fashion giants such as Zara and H&M have based their business models on translating what is on catwalks into cheap clothing, produced in mass quantities. Now, ultra-fast fashion brands such as Shein speed up the production cycle, the trend churn and consequently the volume.

Having seven trending items, over two high-quality outfits, makes more sense to Gen Z consumers in the digital age.

The cost-of-living crisis plays a part too. A recent survey of Australian Gen Zs revealed at least 77% are experiencing money concerns.

The biggest demographic to pull back on spending due to economic stress are 18–26-year-olds. Young people typically earn the lowest wages and enjoy less job security. These financial constraints are challenging to Gen Zs seeking to consume more sustainably.

Fast fashion becomes a cheap option for them to stay trendy without breaking the bank.

The ‘attitude–behavior gap’

Gen Z are Shein shoppers, haul lovers, micro-trend followers, and repeat outfit shamers. This stands starkly against their eco-conscious values.

While this seems hypocritical, it is what is referred to as the attitude–behavior gap—the incongruence between what people say and what they actually do. This is a phenomenon noted across multiple generations.

The attitude–behavior gap has been widely documented in social psychology and ethical consumerism studies. These underscore that consumer intentions are not reliable predictors of behavior.

Even ethically minded consumers do not always walk their talk. But we can’t expect individual consumers to be entirely responsible for things like the carbon footprint of fast fashion, or the exploitation of workers in factories.

The clothing industry lacks transparency in business practice and Gen Z consumers often lack information about the products they are buying.

The responsibility to shop sustainably should not fall solely on consumers, but on governments, policymakers and corporations to be more ethical.

Unsurprisingly, 88% of Gen Z shoppers do not trust companies’ sustainability claims.

What does this mean for the sustainability movement?

Despite climate change being a major stressor for Gen Z, the attitude–behavior gap continues to exist when it comes to hunting for a new outfit.

Being bombarded with persuasive tactics from brands and influencers, the ease of access to new items at the click of a button, and the allure of affordable pricing amid a cost-of-living crisis makes it very difficult for even the most committed Gen Z consumer to buy ethically.

The fashion industry is one of the biggest dangers to the environment in terms of its carbon and raw material footprint, and truckloads of clothing ending up in landfills.

While most young people know and respect Greta Thunberg’s environmental mission, she is not the one they are watching on TikTok or liking on Instagram.

It is time to re-engage with social media content creators in different ways that educate consumers, promote responsible behavior and advocate for changed regulations and business practices. This might include tried-and-true tactics such as influencer endorsements and haul videos that are refocused on more sustainable options—like online second-hand retailers.

The emergence of “underconsumption core” on TikTok in recent months, as well as “deinfluencing,” where influencers call on their followers to buy less, is promising.

While sustainable clothing has a “bad rap” for being expensive, fast fashion brands are trying to adapt by offering options such as H&M Conscious. Any fashion offering must be convenient, accessible and trendy to capture Gen Z’s attention and wallet.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Social structures in schools perpetuate inequalities against children with developmental disabilities, a new study says.

Ways of defining age-level expectations and the way schools are organized position these children as “atypical.” Instead, they should get quality support and teachers who are able to listen to their views and value their experiences, according to the research.

It says a school culture that focuses on progress and attainment can prevent the successful inclusion of all children, including those with disabilities. This “adult-centric view of education quality” does not consider children’s experiences and perspectives of what happens in mainstream primary education.

The study is four case studies showing children’s experience of education in different English primary schools. The work is published in the British Educational Research Journal.

Dr. Katherine Gulliver, from the University of Exeter and the University of Plymouth, used a range of photography activities, guided tours and interviews during a week spent with each pupil to collect details about the experiences and views of young children with developmental disabilities, whose voices have tended to be excluded from research.

The study demonstrates ways in which young children can develop self-advocacy through opportunities to share their voice and understanding of education.

Dr. Gulliver said, “My aim was to listen to young children with developmental disabilities to understand what is important and valuable to them. Unfortunately, the school system as it is does not consider the real lived experiences of children with developmental disabilities. Children’s views are required to explore what is important to them, to help increase understanding of how to support them in a mainstream primary school.

“Children with developmental disabilities have complex and subtle ways in which they shared their views and asked for support in managing things like self-regulation and anxiety.”

Children described difficulty with navigating spaces and sounds as causing them discomfort and anxiety. They also shared that they require support in understanding the change between one class to the next class.

The case studies record how children with developmental disabilities learn to be a primary school pupil, managing transitions between classes or activities, and the different spaces and objects that can cause challenges.

They described their experiences as following the classroom rules and routines, such as transitioning from one activity to another or waiting for the teacher to stop talking before they could talk. At times they required support through prompts or accessed interventions to build attention and concentration skills to help them participate.

The study says focusing on following classroom instructions could limit possibilities for children with developmental disabilities to share their ideas and views, which could prevent opportunities for self-advocacy.

Dr. Gulliver said, “Within the mainstream classroom, children are less able to go at their own pace. This is amplified among a school culture in England that focuses on improving education outcomes through closing achievement gaps for disadvantaged pupils rather than focusing on the quality of child-centered education.”

The study described teaching assistants as playing an important role in helping children celebrate their own achievements and work at their own pace in a safe, secure, supportive and non-pressured environment.

A recent study finds that Black high-school students tend not to believe that their teachers are adequately prepared to teach them math in appropriate ways, have negative perceptions of their math ability, and lack awareness about the intersection between math and their desired careers.

Published in the American Educational Research Journal, the study, “‘He’s Probably the Only Teacher I’ve Actually Learned From’: Marginalized Students’ Experiences With and Self-Perceptions of High School Mathematics,” was led by researchers at Vanderbilt Peabody College of education and human development and included student interns from the University of Puerto Rico and Fisk University.

The research team emphasizes the need for inclusive and equitable teaching practices to support the math development of marginalized students, especially Black girls.

“One of the key takeaways is that students were generally committed to their learning and vocal about their needs but were often ignored or silenced,” said Ashli-Ann Douglas, Ph.D., now a research associate at WestEd and the study’s lead author.

“This was particularly true for Black girls who face unique, added barriers in their math classes. As such, eliciting, listening to, and addressing all students’ concerns and suggestions is a useful and practical way for teachers to gather feedback and work toward improving the effectiveness of their instruction and learning environment.”

The study engaged 67 focus groups with 251 predominantly Black high-school students experiencing economic marginalization.

Key findings:

• Many students felt their teachers lacked the skills and knowledge to teach them math effectively and support their mathematical development. 71% of Black girls and 43% of Black boys in general math classes shared negative experiences with a teacher’s instruction.
• Black girls, especially, had difficulty developing positive math identities and misunderstood the utility of math for their future careers. 71% of Black girls, compared to only 14% of Black boys, reported having a negative math identity.
• Many students did not understand that proficiency in advanced math would be required of their desired future careers. 99% of students identified basic math as useful for future careers, but only 58% said the same of advanced math, reflecting a lack of knowledge about the math proficiency required of STEM fields that many hoped to pursue. This disconnect was greater for Black girls (86%) than Black boys (67%).

Based on the study’s findings, the researchers recommend these strategies for educators and schools to develop more inclusive and equitable math teaching practices:

• Invest in developing relationships with students and create supportive classroom environments that foster joyful learning.
• Engage in positive interactions, explicitly recognize all students’ math abilities and learning efforts, and solicit and acknowledge the contributions of all students, especially Black girls.
• Build a collaborative classroom culture by implementing practices that share power with students, such as group work, peer help, and allowing students to share their work and ideas with the class. These practices can promote learning and engagement by recognizing students’ efforts.
• Offer teachers professional development focused on improving their ability to provide math instruction and to support all students’ math development.
• During math instruction, discuss with students the importance of math proficiency to their career goals and envisioned futures.

“Our research illustrates the value of asking questions of and listening to your students, as they have many insights to share,” said Bethany Rittle-Johnson, professor of psychology and the Anita S. and Antonio M. Gotto Chair in Child Development at Peabody College.

“This includes asking about their experiences in math classrooms, perceptions of their math abilities, and the usefulness of the math they are learning. It is especially important to listen to students who may not typically be vocal or centered in math classrooms.”

Recently, the US ambassador to the United Nations announced America’s support for the creation of two new permanent UN security council seats for African states. Gary Wilson, a scholar of international law and relations—specifically issues related to the United Nations—argues that although Africa’s time may have come, there are still hurdles to overcome.

What’s wrong with the way the UN security council is currently constructed?

One of the most damning criticisms continuously leveled at the United Nations security council concerns its perceived lack of legitimacy. Its composition is increasingly seen as unrepresentative of the international community.

In particular, the identity of the privileged veto-wielding permanent members is frequently seen as at odds with modern global political realities.

The UK and France in particular are widely regarded as having undergone a decline in their global status. Their permanent membership is seen as a relic of having been among the victorious allied powers at the end of the Second World War. Since that time, other states have emerged as global powers.

Japan and Germany are often touted as leading candidates for UN permanent membership on account of their economic status. But regional powers have emerged in the world’s under-represented regions who can also lay a claim to permanent membership.

The UN security council’s ten non-permanent members are elected in accordance with a formula which ensures they represent the world’s different regions. Three seats are reserved for African states, but only for two-year terms. There is no sustained, coherent African voice.

A further criticism of the council is that it has been inconsistent or even partial in its response to international crises.

African states have long felt neglected by the body’s leading powers. The legacy of its weak response to the Rwandan genocide, for example, continues to cast a shadow over its legitimacy in Africa’s eyes.

What reforms would be in order?

Membership reform has been on the agenda since the UN’s early years. The non-permanent members were expanded from six to ten in 1963.

Pressure for change gathered momentum with the establishment of the Working Group on Security Council Reform in the early 1990s. It has generated a series of reports but there’s been no change.

Broad consensus exists upon the need for reform, but not on the shape that should take.

It is widely acknowledged that the size of the council will need to grow. Most see it having 22 to 25 member states.

There are some different views about the balance between permanent and non-permanent members. But it’s widely accepted that there ought to be new permanent seats for states from Africa, South America and Asia, as well as Germany and Japan.

Other proposals present greater difficulty. For instance, the abolition or reform of the power of veto seems unlikely given the need for the current permanent members to approve this change.

It is conceivable that any newly created permanent members won’t get the power of veto. So there would be two tiers of permanent membership.

Suggestions for new categories of seats, for example, which would rotate among states within a region or be held by regional organizations, are also problematic. There is currently no legal mechanism within the UN Charter framework for this to happen.

Where do two permanent seats for Africa fit into this picture?

Although Africa is not the only continent with no permanent members on the security council, it is a striking case. Conflict within Africa occupies a disproportionate amount of the council’s time.

A mere glance over the past decade or so will reveal regular appearances on its agenda of Sudan, South Sudan, the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of Congo, all current locations of deployed UN peacekeeping operations.

African states are also playing an increasingly important role in supporting the international peace and security agenda.

Over half of the biggest 20 contributors to UN peacekeeping operations, for example, are African states. The African Union has undertaken a number of peace operations of its own, too, sometimes with the UN.

The diversity of the African continent makes the case for two seats more persuasive. There is a risk that a sole African permanent member may fail to represent more than one strand of the continent’s demographic makeup.

What are the hurdles in the process of determining which African countries should occupy two permanent seats?

Nigeria, South Africa and Egypt have all been touted as potential aspiring permanent members.

Resolving such competing claims is tied to questions about what qualifies a state for permanent membership.

Given the UN security council’s primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and the qualifications expected of states standing for election as non-permanent members, it seems reasonable to assess states’ ability to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security.

Even these criteria generate different outcomes dependent upon how they are interpreted. How is a state’s contribution to international peace and security quantified? By reference to defense expenditure, participation in UN peace operations, or something else? Many of the largest contributors to UN peacekeeping operations, for example, are not typically seen as likely permanent members. This includes the likes of Ethiopia and Rwanda.

Representation is also a problematic concept. Nigeria and Egypt, for example, have the largest and third largest populations on the African continent; South Africa falls a few places lower down on this criterion. But does a state’s population size make it representative of its continent?

Africa is hardly a homogeneous region and each potential permanent member only represents a particular demographic.

What do you think the future holds for the security council?

The council has undergone some divisive experiences in recent years. This is borne out by a recent resurgence in the exercise of the veto power over situations such as the Ukraine-Russia and Israel-Hamas conflicts.

Expanding the permanent membership does not resolve such issues in itself, but may foster a more general re-balancing and more consistency in its approaches in those situations where the veto threat is not in play.

Although there is wide support for the creation of African permanent seats, this cannot be treated in isolation. It must be considered as part of a wider reform package, including:

• permanent seats for other regions
• the size of the council
• expansion of the non-permanent membership
• new categories of membership.

It is unlikely that one single reform would be made on its own while other issues were left on pause.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The rise of authoritarian populism in Brazil has weakened structures that stabilize democracy—mirroring trends in wider global society and potentially making it harder for the country to strengthen its democracy in future, a new study reveals. The findings are published in the journal Direito Público.

The experiences of Brazilians in recent years under the administration of former President Jair Bolsonaro highlight the weakening of welfare systems and human rights protections critical in maintaining democratic stability.

This, in turn, contributed to the rise of militarism in government, a pattern seen in other populist regimes, with the absence of warfare during Brazil’s democratic transition in the 1980s reducing the capacity of its institutions to resist militarization.

Researchers from the Universities of Birmingham and Manchester say that polarization on welfare policies and rejection of international human rights severely weakened these foundational elements.

Co-author Professor Chris Thornhill, from the University of Birmingham, commented, “Brazil’s experience reflects global trends of democratic erosion and resilience, highlighting the crucial role of welfare systems and human rights protections in maintaining democratic stability. Strong democracies are built on inclusive welfare provision and broad access to international human rights, but authoritarian populism undermined these foundations, creating an exclusionary view of citizenship and intensifying social conflicts.

“The intricate “wiring” of welfare and human rights systems that contribute to democracy by reducing polarization remains a crucial safeguard. The future of democracy in Brazil—and other countries like it—is likely to rest on the restoration of these essential elements.”

The researchers pose critical questions about the broader relationship between militarism and democracy, suggesting that democracies established in peacetime may be more vulnerable to authoritarian populism and militarization than those founded in the aftermath of war.

Unlike most countries in Western Europe, whose democratic institutions emerged from warfare, Brazil’s democracy was established in the 1980s without the backdrop of war. One result of this was that patterns of consensus regarding welfare provision instilled in society by military conflict did not provide societal support for constitutional rule.

Co-author Lucas Delgado, who wrote his Ph.D. with Thornhill at the University of Manchester, commented, “It remains to be seen whether Brazil will prove to be a resilient or a failing democracy, since rebuilding welfare systems and restoring human rights protections will be far more difficult than the process of dismantling them. Meanwhile, Brazil’s recent tendency to associate the defense of democracy with criminal prosecution does not seem to produce promising outcomes.”

Under the administration of former President Jair Bolsonaro, the intensification of controversies surrounding welfare policies and increased polarization regarding human rights law created fertile ground for populist authoritarianism. This led to marginalization of individuals and groups aligned with the Workers’ Party, limiting their influence in political life, and in some cases, affecting their full rights as citizens.

Broader democratic outcomes typically supported by welfare and human rights protections were further undermined, creating an environment where societal divisions deepened, and partisanship dominated political behavior.