Latest news with #SchoolofGlobal
Sydney Morning Herald
8 hours ago
- Health
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘It's not rocket science': How your neighbourhood could improve your mental health
In terms of wider mental health, though, the role of our neighbourhoods is less clear, although it is generally understood there are elements that successful communities share. One of the key elements is placing pedestrian activity at the heart of neighbourhood life, whether that's the ability to walk to school, the shops or leisure pursuits such as dining out or going to a park. In recent years, this has led to the popularity of the 15-minute city movement, an idea that has been around for more than a century which gained new traction in 2016 when French-Colombian scientist Carlos Moreno popularised it in the period before the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns. While the movement has attracted controversy, architects and mental health researchers insist the notion of minimising time spent in solo environments such as cars and larger, detached housing while maximising opportunities for engagement are sound pathways for happier neighbourhoods. Many people now also understand the importance of a connection to nature to nurture wellbeing, particularly parks and bushland, but tree-lined streets, laneway gardens or even verge gardens can serve a similar purpose. Initiatives like Sydney's GreenWay linking the Cooks River at Earlwood to Parramatta River at Iron Cove combine green corridors with universally accessible cycleways and footpaths to create practical routes and connections with nature. University of Wollongong senior lecturer in nursing Christopher Patterson says the evidence for the benefits of green spaces in all shapes and forms is clear, and they should be prioritised. 'With increased urbanisation and density, their utility needs to be at the forefront – for wellbeing, and broader sustainability,' he says. 'Accessibility is key, really. They should promote equitable access and be designed to promote activity, social connection and environmental features like green shade, biodiversity and even relief from urban noise.' Dr Amanda Alderton, a vice chancellor's postdoctoral research fellow in the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies at Melbourne's RMIT University, says creating easy access to a range of 'third spaces' – not work and not home – from parks and plazas to cafes and libraries through wide, well-maintained footpaths is an easy win for planners. 'Making it safe and easy and attractive to get outside and move is important,' she says. 'Footpaths and cycle paths need to be well maintained and useable.' Former national president-elect of the Australian Institute of Architects Adam Haddow says it boils down to one idea: simplicity of movement. 'It is not rocket science,' he says. 'How do we simplify people's lives? Can we simplify people's lives? I live 500 metres from my office, I finish work and I go to the supermarket and go home. It all happens in five minutes. But I know that is not necessarily easy for everyone.' He points to innovations like Sydney's Metro M1 rail line, which celebrated its first birthday this week, as an example of infrastructure that gets people where they need to go quickly, and with a minimum of fuss. For Sean Carter, keeping it simple is also about the style of housing. Freestanding houses on large blocks are not conducive to connection, he says, neither in terms of neighbours and people passing on the street nor the ability to quickly get to shops, parks and various activities. 'This has been the great failing of the suburbs, unlike an area like Ashfield [in Sydney] where tighter houses push more people together. Fine grain suburbs (where a range of smaller buildings are placed closer together) can make for stronger neighbourhoods – a lot of terrace housing is finer grain.' So while planners have pursued the larger block to create an idea of suburban bliss, Carter argues the model for good neighbourhoods already existed, even if it was almost accidental. 'You realise how radical in a contemporary planning sense the Victorians were,' he says. 'It was really around the strategy of not wasting land, but it made fantastic streets.' Loading Indeed, this has been reflected in lists like Time Out 's annual World's Coolest Neighbourhoods, which are judged on criteria including community life, walkability, street life and cultural attractions. In recent years, East Brunswick and Windsor in Melbourne and Marrickville, Enmore and Chippendale in Sydney have made the top 10. Each are characterised by vibrant main streets with extended use into the evening, good public transport with proximity to the city – and a celebration of diversity that fosters inclusion. 'The balanced-diet analogy speaks to the need for a little bit of everything,' says Haddow. 'We want people from different walks of life. We don't want places filled just with wealthy people.' Alex Haslam, a professor of social and organisational psychology at the University of Queensland, says feeling like you belong in your neighbourhood is crucial to ensuring any sense of isolation is diminished. 'The phrase we use to describe that process is identity impresarioship,' he says. 'You want designers and builders to be identity impresarios that create buildings and structures that allow people to live out these shared identities.' He says neighbourhoods that support mental health don't have to be architectural wonders to be successful. His mother-in-law knew everyone in the area she grew up and 'liked the vibrancy of it and she liked the disorder of it. She had zero interest in architecture and design; she just wanted to be able to find her way through her community and say hello to people.' Loading Her experience taps into another essential element: a sense of ownership. Haslam says it's a point sometimes lost on planners. 'Feeling at home in a space is incredibly important.' UNSW professor of planning Susan Thompson says that is unlikely to happen where people don't enjoy secured tenancy. 'If you are unable to afford renting and you have to move every six months, that is not going to be conducive to embedding a sense of belonging or attachment to a place,' she says. Haslam says the ultimate sense of belonging and connection comes from knowing you have influence and ownership about the neighbourhood you call home. 'Co-design and people's ability to have input into the process is critical,' he says. 'It is not just about doing a survey and asking people what they want; it is about engaging with groups of people who are going to use that space.' For those communities and governing bodies prepared to make that leap, Haslam says the pay-offs extend beyond creating desirable places to live. 'I was at a conference in London a couple of weeks ago about neighbourhood policing. The realities in communities where people are connected is that they have much lower levels of mental distress, they have less crime, they have much more thriving structures and they are places where people want to live and work. 'If you are not able to create meaningful connections and feel a part of it, it is going to be bad for you and the people in your life.'
The Age
8 hours ago
- Health
- The Age
‘It's not rocket science': How your neighbourhood could improve your mental health
In terms of wider mental health, though, the role of our neighbourhoods is less clear, although it is generally understood there are elements that successful communities share. One of the key elements is placing pedestrian activity at the heart of neighbourhood life, whether that's the ability to walk to school, the shops or leisure pursuits such as dining out or going to a park. In recent years, this has led to the popularity of the 15-minute city movement, an idea that has been around for more than a century which gained new traction in 2016 when French-Colombian scientist Carlos Moreno popularised it in the period before the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns. While the movement has attracted controversy, architects and mental health researchers insist the notion of minimising time spent in solo environments such as cars and larger, detached housing while maximising opportunities for engagement are sound pathways for happier neighbourhoods. Many people now also understand the importance of a connection to nature to nurture wellbeing, particularly parks and bushland, but tree-lined streets, laneway gardens or even verge gardens can serve a similar purpose. Initiatives like Sydney's GreenWay linking the Cooks River at Earlwood to Parramatta River at Iron Cove combine green corridors with universally accessible cycleways and footpaths to create practical routes and connections with nature. University of Wollongong senior lecturer in nursing Christopher Patterson says the evidence for the benefits of green spaces in all shapes and forms is clear, and they should be prioritised. 'With increased urbanisation and density, their utility needs to be at the forefront – for wellbeing, and broader sustainability,' he says. 'Accessibility is key, really. They should promote equitable access and be designed to promote activity, social connection and environmental features like green shade, biodiversity and even relief from urban noise.' Dr Amanda Alderton, a vice chancellor's postdoctoral research fellow in the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies at Melbourne's RMIT University, says creating easy access to a range of 'third spaces' – not work and not home – from parks and plazas to cafes and libraries through wide, well-maintained footpaths is an easy win for planners. 'Making it safe and easy and attractive to get outside and move is important,' she says. 'Footpaths and cycle paths need to be well maintained and useable.' Former national president-elect of the Australian Institute of Architects Adam Haddow says it boils down to one idea: simplicity of movement. 'It is not rocket science,' he says. 'How do we simplify people's lives? Can we simplify people's lives? I live 500 metres from my office, I finish work and I go to the supermarket and go home. It all happens in five minutes. But I know that is not necessarily easy for everyone.' He points to innovations like Sydney's Metro M1 rail line, which celebrated its first birthday this week, as an example of infrastructure that gets people where they need to go quickly, and with a minimum of fuss. For Sean Carter, keeping it simple is also about the style of housing. Freestanding houses on large blocks are not conducive to connection, he says, neither in terms of neighbours and people passing on the street nor the ability to quickly get to shops, parks and various activities. 'This has been the great failing of the suburbs, unlike an area like Ashfield [in Sydney] where tighter houses push more people together. Fine grain suburbs (where a range of smaller buildings are placed closer together) can make for stronger neighbourhoods – a lot of terrace housing is finer grain.' So while planners have pursued the larger block to create an idea of suburban bliss, Carter argues the model for good neighbourhoods already existed, even if it was almost accidental. 'You realise how radical in a contemporary planning sense the Victorians were,' he says. 'It was really around the strategy of not wasting land, but it made fantastic streets.' Loading Indeed, this has been reflected in lists like Time Out 's annual World's Coolest Neighbourhoods, which are judged on criteria including community life, walkability, street life and cultural attractions. In recent years, East Brunswick and Windsor in Melbourne and Marrickville, Enmore and Chippendale in Sydney have made the top 10. Each are characterised by vibrant main streets with extended use into the evening, good public transport with proximity to the city – and a celebration of diversity that fosters inclusion. 'The balanced-diet analogy speaks to the need for a little bit of everything,' says Haddow. 'We want people from different walks of life. We don't want places filled just with wealthy people.' Alex Haslam, a professor of social and organisational psychology at the University of Queensland, says feeling like you belong in your neighbourhood is crucial to ensuring any sense of isolation is diminished. 'The phrase we use to describe that process is identity impresarioship,' he says. 'You want designers and builders to be identity impresarios that create buildings and structures that allow people to live out these shared identities.' He says neighbourhoods that support mental health don't have to be architectural wonders to be successful. His mother-in-law knew everyone in the area she grew up and 'liked the vibrancy of it and she liked the disorder of it. She had zero interest in architecture and design; she just wanted to be able to find her way through her community and say hello to people.' Loading Her experience taps into another essential element: a sense of ownership. Haslam says it's a point sometimes lost on planners. 'Feeling at home in a space is incredibly important.' UNSW professor of planning Susan Thompson says that is unlikely to happen where people don't enjoy secured tenancy. 'If you are unable to afford renting and you have to move every six months, that is not going to be conducive to embedding a sense of belonging or attachment to a place,' she says. Haslam says the ultimate sense of belonging and connection comes from knowing you have influence and ownership about the neighbourhood you call home. 'Co-design and people's ability to have input into the process is critical,' he says. 'It is not just about doing a survey and asking people what they want; it is about engaging with groups of people who are going to use that space.' For those communities and governing bodies prepared to make that leap, Haslam says the pay-offs extend beyond creating desirable places to live. 'I was at a conference in London a couple of weeks ago about neighbourhood policing. The realities in communities where people are connected is that they have much lower levels of mental distress, they have less crime, they have much more thriving structures and they are places where people want to live and work. 'If you are not able to create meaningful connections and feel a part of it, it is going to be bad for you and the people in your life.'
7NEWS
13-07-2025
- Politics
- 7NEWS
Does Donald Trump deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? We asked 5 experts
This article first appeared in The Conversation. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has formally nominated US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. He says the president is 'forging peace as we speak, in one country, in one region after the other'. Trump, who has craved the award for years, sees himself as a global peacemaker in a raft of conflicts from Israel and Iran, to Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. With the conflict in Gaza still raging, we ask five experts – could Trump be rewarded with the world's most prestigious peace prize? Emma Shortis Adjunct Senior Fellow, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University. NO Nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize is like entering a hyena in a dog show. Of course Trump does not deserve it. That we're being forced to take this question seriously is yet another indication – as if we needed one – of his extraordinary ability to set and reset the terms of our politics. There is no peace in Gaza. Even if Trump announced another ceasefire tomorrow, it would not last. And it would not build genuine peace and security. Trump has neither the interest nor the attention span required to build long term peace. His administration is not willing to bear any of the costs or investments that come with genuine, lasting diplomacy. And he is not anti-war. There is no peace in Iran. Trump's bombing of Iran simply exacerbates his decision in 2018 to end nuclear negotiations with Tehran. It pushes the world closer to, not further from, nuclear catastrophe. Under the Trump administration, there will be no peace in the Middle East. Both the US and Israeli governments' approach to 'security' puts the region on a perpetual war footing. This approach assumes it is possible to bomb your way to peace – a 'peace' which both Trump and Netanyahu understand as total dominance and violent oppression. The Trump administration is deliberately undermining the institutions and principles of international and domestic law. He has deployed the military against American citizens. He is threatening the United States' traditional allies with trade wars and annexation. His administration's dismantling of USAID will result, according to one study, in the deaths of 14 million people, including 4.5 million children, by 2030. Indulging Trump's embarrassing desire for trophies might appease him for a short time. It would also strip the Nobel Peace Prize of any and all credibility, while endorsing Trump's trashing of the international rule of law. What kind of peace is that? Ali Mamouri Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University NO The nomination of Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize by a man who is facing charges of war crimes is an unprecedented and deeply dark irony that cannot be overlooked. Trump's role in brokering the Abraham Accords was hailed as a diplomatic breakthrough. It led to the normalisation of relations between Israel and several Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. But this achievement came at a significant cost. The accords deliberately sidelined the Palestinian issue, long recognised as the core of regional instability, and disregarded decades of international consensus on a two-state solution. Trump's administration openly supported Israeli policies widely considered to violate international law, including the expansion of illegal settlements and the proposed annexation of Palestinian territory. His silence in the face of a growing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza was equally telling. Perhaps most disturbing was the tacit or explicit endorsement of proposals to forcibly relocate Palestinians to neighbouring Arab countries, a position that evokes ethnic cleansing and fundamentally undermines principles of justice, dignity and international law. In addition, there is Trump's unconditional support for Israel's military campaigns across the region, including his authorisation of attacks on Iranian civilian, military and nuclear infrastructure. The strikes lacked any clear legal basis, contributed further to regional instability and, according to Tehran, killed more than a thousand civilians. His broader disregard for international norms shattered decades of post-second world war diplomatic order and increased the risk of sustained and expanded conflict. Against this backdrop, any serious consideration of Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize seems fundamentally at odds with its stated mission: to honour efforts that reduce conflict, uphold human rights and promote lasting peace. Whatever short-term diplomatic gains emerged from Trump's tenure are eclipsed by the legal, ethical and humanitarian consequences of his actions. Ian Parmeter Research Scholar, Middle East Studies, Australian National University. NO Netanyahu's nomination of Donald Trump for one of the world's most coveted awards was clearly aimed at flattering the president. Trump is clearly angling for the laurel, which his first term predecessor, Barack Obama, won in his first year in office. Obama was awarded the prize in 2009 for promotion of nuclear non-proliferation and fostering a 'new climate' in international relations, particularly in reaching out to the Muslim world. Given neither of these ambitions have since borne fruit, what claims might Trump reasonably make at this stage of his second term? Trump has claimed credit for resolving two conflicts this year: the brief India–Pakistan clash that erupted after Pakistani militants killed 25 Indian tourists in Kashmir in May; and the long-running dispute between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi disputes Trump brokered peace. He says the issue was resolved by negotiations between the two countries' militaries. With regards to the Rwanda–DRC conflict, the countries signed a peace agreement in the Oval Office in June. But critics argue Qatar played a significant role which the Trump administration has airbrushed out. Trump can legitimately argue his pressure on Israel and Iran forced a ceasefire in their 12-day war in June. But his big test is the Gaza war. For Trump to add this to his Nobel claim, he will need more than a ceasefire. The Biden administration brokered two ceasefires that enabled the release of significant numbers of hostages, but did not end the conflict. Trump would have to use his undoubted influence with Netanyahu to achieve more than a temporary pause. He would have to end the war definitively and effect the release of all Israeli hostages. Beyond that, if Trump could persuade Netanyahu to take serious steps towards negotiating a two-state solution, that would be a genuine Nobel-worthy achievement. Trump isn't there yet. Jasmine-Kim Westendorf Associate Professor of Peace and Conflict and Co-Director of the Initiative for Peacebuilding, The University of Melbourne. NO The Nobel Peace Prize recognises outstanding contributions to peace globally. Although controversial or politicised awards are not new, awardees are generally individuals or groups who've made significant contributions to a range of peace initiatives. They include reducing armed conflict, enhancing international cooperation, and human rights efforts that contribute to peace. Inspiring examples include anti-nuclear proliferation organisations and phenomenal women peacemakers. And Nadia Murad and Denis Mukwege, who won in 2011 for their work trying to end the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war. Trump has declared his 'proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier'. But he is neither. The president has fuelled escalating insecurity, violent conflict and human rights violations globally, and actively undermined international cooperation for peace. This includes the decision to sanction judges of the International Criminal Court. There has been a concerning trend towards using the Nobel Peace Prize to encourage certain political directions, rather than reward achievements. Barack Obama's 2008 Prize helped motivate his moves toward diplomacy and cooperation after the presidency of George W. Bush. Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's 2018 award was for efforts to resolve the 20-year war with Eritrea. The peace prize encouraged Ahmed to fulfill his promise of democratic elections in 2020. Embarrassingly, within a year Ahmed launched a civil war that killed over 600,000 people and displaced 3 million more. This week's nomination follows efforts by global leaders to flatter Trump in order – they hope – to secure his goodwill. These motivations explain why Netanyahu has put forward Trump's name to the Nobel Committee. It comes at the very moment securing Trump's ongoing support during ceasefire negotiations is critical for Netanyahu's political survival. Trump has also been nominated by the government of Pakistan and by several Republican figures. Flattery is the currency Trump trades in. These nominations pander to a president who has bemoaned They will never give me a Nobel Peace Prize […] It's too bad. I deserve it, but they will never give it to me. Prizes to genuine peacemakers amplify their work and impact. 1984 winner Desmond Tutu said: 'One day no one was listening. The next, I was an oracle.' A Nobel can be a powerful force for peace. Trump is no peacemaker, he doesn't deserve one. Shahram Akbarzadeh Director, Middle East Studies Forum (MESF), Deakin University NO Benjamin Netanyahu would have us believe Donald Trump is a peacemaker. Nothing could be further from the truth. His record is stained with blood and misery. The fact Trump believes himself to be worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize only attests to his illusions of grandeur in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The war in Gaza has gone into its 20th month because Trump did not use the levers at his control to bring the senseless war to a close. Some estimates put the true Gaza death toll at 100,000 people, and counting. They have been killed by American-made bombs Israel is dropping across the densely populated strip; from starvation because Israel has enforced a blockade of the Gaza Strip and prevented UN food delivery with the blessings of America; and from gunshots at food distribution centres, set up with US private security. All under Trump's watch. Trump could do something about this. Israel is the largest recipient of US aid, most of it military support. This has multiplied since Israel commenced its attack on Gaza in response to Hamas terrorism on October 7 2023. Trump has approved the transfer of US military hardware to Israel, knowing full well it was being used against a trapped and helpless population. This is not the act of a peacemaker. Now the Israeli government is planning to 'facilitate' population transfer of Gazans to other countries – a euphemism for ethnic cleansing. This is the textbook definition of genocide: deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of people. Trump legitimised this travesty of decency and international law by promising a Gaza Riviera. The outlandish extent of Trump's ideas would be laughable if their consequences were not so devastating. When Israel attacked Iran in the middle of nuclear talks, Trump had a momentary pause, before jumping to Netanyahu's aid and bombing Iran. He then claimed his action paved the way for peace. Trump's idea of peace is the peace of the graveyard. Disclosure statement: Emma Shortis is Director of International and Security Affairs at The Australia Institute, an independent think tank. Ali Mamouri and Ian Parmeter 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. Jasmine-Kim Westendorf has received funding from the Australian Research Council. Stream free on
