Research

Trouble in the developing world? Call the IMF

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:49:07 +0000

Trouble in the developing world? Call the IMF Rachel Sauer Tue, 04/29/2025 - 13:49

Bradley Worrell

In a recently published paper, CU Boulder political science Professor Jaroslav Tir highlights how intergovernmental organizations help end civil wars

There’s trouble in Africa, where a protracted civil war between government forces and rebels in the countryside threatens to undo years of hard work to raise the country’s standard of living and its prospects for future economic growth.

This is a job for the IMF.

No, not the Impossible Missions Force—the fictional U.S. covert government agency tasked with successfully completing next-to-impossible missions, as popularized by the Mission: Impossible film franchise helmed by Tom Cruise.

CU Boulder researcher Jaroslav Tir, a professor of political science, studies armed conflicts and how to stop them.

The other IMF—the International Money Fund. Yes, really, that IMF.

The role the IMF, the World Bank and other intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) have played in recent years to help broker peace agreements is highlighted in the research paper “Civil War Mediation in the Shadow of IGOs: the Path to Comprehensive Peace Agreements,” published earlier this year in the Journal of Peace Research, which was coauthored by Jaroslav Tir, �� Department of Political Science professor, and Johannes Karreth, a CU Boulder PhD political science major and former Tir graduate student.

Tir, whose research focus includes armed conflicts and how to stop them, recently spoke with Colorado Arts and Sciences Magazine about how IGOs can help resolve conflicts by offering or denying financial incentives to governments and rebels. His responses have been lightly edited for style and condensed.

Question: How did these international government organizations get into the conflict-resolution business?

Tir: That’s a very good question, right? Because the IMF, the World Bank and various regional development banks don’t have mandates to end civil wars.

One thing we do know from the study of international organizations is that they tend to broaden their mandates. They are bureaucracies—and bureaucracies like to grow, generally. They like more resources. They like to do things well, because if they look good, they get some more resources. So, the fact they are going beyond the original mandates is not that surprising.

The more narrow answer is that a lot of these organizations are financial, so they deal with things like development assistance. They’re trying to get these countries more economically developed, and they’re trying to get their economies functioning better to raise the standard of living for the local populations and things like that.

The bad news for all of these economic agendas are civil wars. So, for example, if the World Bank/IMF invests tens of millions of dollars or sometimes even hundreds of millions of dollars in a country, and that country then ends up in a civil war, a lot of this progress and money that’s been invested is put in jeopardy. Therefore, these organizations have a literally vested self-interest to try to see if they can do something about these civil wars in member countries, because they’re interested in protecting their investments.

Question: How does a bank enforce a peace treaty?

Tir: To clarify, these organizations do not do this (enforce treaties), and in the paper we do not claim that they directly partake in the peace process. This is not them sending in peacekeepers. Instead, this is all done through financial incentives—or denial of incentives. So, it’s carrot and stick, but it’s all financial.

General Soumaila Bakayoko, chief of Staff of the Ivorian Armed Forces, reviews the Ivorian troops during the First Ivorian Civil War in 2007. During the conflict, rebels particularly wanted access to voting rolls, notes CU Boulder researcher Jaroslav Tir. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

To answer your question more directly, how can they, quote unquote, enforce a peace process? For example, with these conflicting parties, the rebels and the governments, working toward peace, (IGOs) will essentially commit to put X amount of money into the country to deal with issues that are usually connected to economic development, but also maybe of interest to both the rebels and the governments. So, that’s the carrot.

And it’s a bit of a double-edged sword, because the idea is IGOs will give you these resources if you honor the commitments toward making peace. However, these resources will be denied or suspended if you fail to do so. Meaning, if you’re a bad actor or you’re backpedaling or acting in malfeasant ways, there are (financial) consequences.

Question: It seems like the IGO might have an easier time incentivizing a government than a rebel group?

Tir: I think they incentivize both, but I think it is easier for them to incentivize the government because the government is a member of the organization. It’s the government of Country X, for example, that actually has a seat at the IMF/World Bank. So, the contact there is pretty direct.

For the rebels, there is not necessarily direct contact with the IGO because they never have a seat at the organization. But rebellions take place typically because rebels need or want something, and whether these things are financial or not, usually money can help them achieve this.

For instance, in the Ivory Coast during its civil war in the early 2000s, one thing that the rebels really wanted was access to voting rolls, to assure that all citizens could vote in the elections. In a way that’s a political issue, but in other ways it’s a very logistical kind of issue. And money needs to be spent to basically go through the records and see who is eligible to vote, and these administrators who are going to do this need to be paid.

Then the other thing the rebels were really interested in was that they did not have very good health care access—for example, childhood vaccines and standard stuff that has been provided for decades around the world, but the government didn’t offer it in the rebel-held areas. The rebels said, ‘This is something that’s very important to us because our children are dying, and our people are getting sick. So, they said, ‘We want access to vaccinations and access to health care.’

The World Bank and the IMF essentially said, ‘If these are kinds of things that are meaningful to you, these things are good for the World Bank/IMF as well.’ And that makes sense, because if people are healthier, they’re more economically productive, right? So, there is your economic incentive, and once this leads to stability, stability is good for economic growth and development.

This is a way in which international organizations can incentivize rebels to come to the negotiating table. That’s the carrot for them.

Question: From reading the paper, it sounds like not all IGOs are created equal.

Tir: Definitely, they are not all created equal. But we’re not just looking at the issue of size of the IGO or how many countries belong to the IGO. We’re basically looking at a different kind of variance that occurs among international organizations, and that is how much leverage they have over member countries.

"(Syria) is a country that’s been internationally isolated for decades under the Assad regime, and part of that isolation is not having memberships in these (IGOs)," notes CU Boulder researcher Jaroslav Tir. "So, when the civil war broke out, there was not a lot of incentive-type influence from the international community that could bring the (factions) in Syria to the negotiating table." (Photo: Mahmoud Sulaiman/Unsplash)

Some organizations have very little leverage over member countries—meaning that the member countries tell the organization what to do and not the other way around. So, it’s a question of who is the boss. Is it the member country, or is it the organization that’s the boss? That’s one source of variation.

The other source is how many resources (IGOs) have. And this is very important in the context of civil wars, because the resources can then be used as carrots to basically get the governments and the rebels to work toward peace.

You have to have both: the institutional leverage that the organization can tell member countries what to do, and that has to be coupled with these material resources. So, it’s not just these organizations telling countries and rebels what to do, it’s actually incentivizing them to work toward peace.

Question: Are there cases in which IGOs are less effective in incentivizing peace? What do those look like?

Tir: One example would be Syria. This is a country that’s been internationally isolated for decades under the Assad regime, and part of that isolation is not having memberships in these (IGOs). So, when the civil war broke out, there was not a lot of incentive-type influence from the international community that could bring the (factions) in Syria to the negotiating table. …

Another example would be Uganda, which had a civil war and there’s been no peace agreement. And the reason there has been no peace agreement is the rebel group. The Lord’s Resistance Army was simply not interested in making any kinds of concessions. It seems like they’re more interested in having a rebellion than advancing any kind of policy or political objectives.

That was a case where international organizations were involved, where they observed the Ugandan government was willing to do its part, but the Lord’s Resistance Army was not serious about negotiating. So, what ended up happening there is that international organizations are just working with the Ugandan government and the LRA is cut out of the whole process.

Question: Your paper talks about IGOs in relation to comprehensive peace agreements. What, specifically, is a comprehensive peace agreement and how is it different from other types of peace agreements?

Tir: It is exactly what it sounds like: It’s a peace agreement that’s comprehensive—that tackles a multitude of issues, whereas partial peace agreements only resolve a subset of the contentious issues.

Civil wars are very complex, with disagreements over a variety of different issues, such as police reform, access to government power, representation, access to health care and who gets to serve in the military. In some countries, military service is ethnically based, depending upon if you are a member of a certain ethnic group.

"The two big benefits of these comprehensive peace agreements are: first, because they do tackle a multitude of issues, they’re much more likely to resolve a civil war; and second, they help ensure that the resolutions the rebels and the government make actually stick."

The two big benefits of these comprehensive peace agreements are: first, because they do tackle a multitude of issues, they’re much more likely to resolve a civil war; and second, they help ensure that the resolutions the rebels and the government make actually stick, which is important, because civil wars are notorious for recidivism. Once a country has a civil war, there’s a much higher likelihood of having a civil war recurrence down the road.

As we highlighted in the article, fewer than one in five conflicts are resolved by comprehensive peace agreements. So, they’re great, but they’re rare.

Question: It sounds like CPAs, or any peace agreements, require an extended commitment of time and resources by the IGOs if they are going to be successful.

Tir: (IGOs) have to write substantial checks … and these resources need to be provided over time. They are committing themselves to be involved in a country for many years. So, it’s not just offering a carrot (financial incentive) today but also in the future. The technical term for it is shadow of the future.

Basically, the idea is: We (the government and rebels, separately) want these future resources and because we want them, that essentially makes us think twice about reneging on the peace agreement. And if we (as a party to the peace process) are in a situation where we believe the other side has an incentive to abide by the agreement, we’re likely to uphold our end as well.

It’s kind of a puzzle, a Rubik’s Cube, how the pieces of the peace process come together, and if they do, we find the chances of these agreements being reached and maintained are substantially higher.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about political science? Show your support.

In a recently published paper, CU Boulder political science Professor Jaroslav Tir highlights how intergovernmental organizations help end civil wars.

Traditional

White

Women on trial speak clearly through their clothing

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 21:27:03 +0000

Women on trial speak clearly through their clothing Rachel Sauer Mon, 04/28/2025 - 15:27

Collette Mace

CU Boulder researcher Carla Jones finds that what Indonesian women wear in court can convey messages of piety and shame, or just the appearance of them

No matter who you are and what clothes you have on, you have probably, at some point, thought about how what you wear affects how you are seen.

Fashion is an important mode of self-expression, but it can also be a significant component of social communication. �� anthropology Professor Carla Jones’ recently published research focusing on fashion within the Indonesian criminal justice system illustrates how appearance can be a public and personal feature of social and political communication.

CU Boulder researcher Carla Jones, a professor of anthropology, noticed that when Indonesian women were accused of corruption, they faced intense scrutiny about their appearances, both before and during their trials.

Jones’ interest in Indonesia started when she visited the country in college, but her youth in Southeast Asia also played a part in her sustained interest in the culture there. As an anthropologist, she says, she is interested in diversity–in which Indonesian culture and social life is rich.

She also credits her interest in learning to speak Indonesian with her total immersion there. “Learning a new language can change your life,” she says. “Cultural anthropologists need to be able to ask questions and understand. You have to learn how to be an insider and an outsider at once.”

In the past two decades, public political culture in Indonesia has become increasingly focused on corruption. Although Indonesia is not unusually corrupt, many of the most visible corruption trials have captivated public attention through media focus on theft of public funds.

Jones noticed that when women were accused of corruption, they faced intense scrutiny about their appearances, both before and during their trials. Jones says she noticed that female defendants in corruption cases adjusted their clothing in ways that went far beyond the public norms for the majority-Muslim country.

Modesty was a particularly compelling visual strategy. Although modest styles are increasingly popular globally (think: trad-wife trends on TikTok), the styles that accused Indonesian women adopted for trials were especially visible when they appeared in court and were very different from their styles of dress prior to their trials, Jones says.

Many women, she says, would elect to wear facial coverings, called a niqab or cadar, when appearing before a judge. Wearing a niqab is not especially common in Indonesia. Jones argues in her paper that women choosing to express their religion so outwardly was also an effort to appear more pious and ashamed of their actions (or more innocent) to judges and to the public.

Niqab in court

So, does it work? According to Jones, yes, along with other factors. The women in these cases who wore a niqab to court tended to get shorter prison sentences than others did. “Their attorneys also did a really good job conveying that they are mothers, and their justification was to provide for their children,” she says.

However, that doesn’t mean these women on trial were received the same way all over the world. When Anniesa Hasibuan, an internationally famous modest-fashion designer who was charged with fraud, took the stand in West Java, the coverage expanded to all over the world, including the United States.

The international coverage of Hasibuan’s trial called additional attention to her choice to wear a niqab. Some Indonesians who were following her case closely viewed her choice to cover her face much as some Americans might: as an attempt to foreclose transparency about her appearance and therefore her finances. Many Indonesians viewed her appearance as a sign of dishonesty rather than piety.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about anthropology? Show your support.

CU Boulder researcher Carla Jones finds that what Indonesian women wear in court can convey messages of piety and shame, or just the appearance of them.

Traditional

White

Anniesa Hasibuan (center) and her husband leave court in West Java, Indonesia. (Photo: Antara Foto/Reuters)

How was it for you? Women are finally being asked

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 24 Apr 2025 20:10:57 +0000

How was it for you? Women are finally being asked Rachel Sauer Thu, 04/24/2025 - 14:10

Pam Moore

CU Boulder scientist Chelsea Kilimnik is one of a handful of researchers looking at the correlation between sexual trauma and ‘duty sex’

Driven by a long-held interest in the ways in which unwanted and nonconsensual sexual experiences can shape individuals’ future sexual experiences and overall well-being, Chelsea Kilimnik, a licensed clinical psychologist and assistant professor in the �� Department Psychology and Neuroscience and the Renée Crown Wellness Institute, teamed up with researchers at the University of Texas at Austin to study that very topic.

It’s not surprising that research has largely neglected how women’s trauma shapes their sex lives, considering that, as a culture, “we’ve only recently acknowledged that women are sexual beings,” says Kilimnik, who is the director of the Growth, Identity, and Sexual Trauma (GIST) Lab at CU Boulder.

CU Boulder researcher Chelsea Kilimnik, an assistant professor of psychology and neuroscience, notes that that, as a culture, "we’ve only recently acknowledged that women are sexual beings."

Kilimnik’s and her colleagues’ research, published recently in The Journal of Sexual Medicine, provides foundational insights into women’s motivations for sex—an area of study that has long been overlooked by the scientific community.

An overlooked area of research

Although the tides are beginning to turn, for many healthcare providers, the idea of prioritizing women’s sexual pleasure is still novel. Many times, when women come to the doctor reporting pelvic pain or pain during sex, their experiences are invalidated and their healthcare needs ignored, says Kilimnik. Not only is this frustrating, but the lack of belief, offered agency and validation can exacerbate mental health difficulties for those with past experiences of sexual trauma.

Meanwhile, the body of data on women’s mental health and its connection to sexual health and well-being is “still in its infancy,” says Kilimnik, who is part of a small community of researchers studying it.

“Sexual trauma affects women at disproportionately higher rates than men and has a significant influence on their sex lives, yet this connection to sexuality is something that was ignored by the literature for centuries, so we need to document it in the literature,” she explains.

While we may think of sex as something that doesn’t affect our lives beyond the bedroom, our sexuality affects many aspects of our day-to-day lives, says Kilimnik. That’s because psychological and sexual well-being are deeply linked.

Psychological well-being encompasses multiple factors, including the presence or absence of mental health disorders, general mood and overall quality of life, says Kilimnik. Sexual well-being, on the other hand, can include your sexual satisfaction, how you feel about yourself as a sexual person, the way your body operates in sexual encounters, body image and the presence or absence of sexual disorders, she says.

“While psychological and sexual well-being are two distinct constructs, they are almost always related,” says Kilimnik. For example, if you’re depressed, that will impact your sex life. And if your sex life is unsatisfying or you struggle to view yourself as a sexual being, that can impact your self-esteem, and in turn, your mental health, she explains.

What the data say

The team of researchers explored the relationships between the frequency of duty sex (the act of engaging in sex out of a sense of obligation or duty), sexual functioning and nonconsensual sexual encounters (NSEs).

"Sexual trauma affects women at disproportionately higher rates than men and has a significant influence on their sex lives, yet this connection to sexuality is something that was ignored by the literature for centuries."

While duty sex is consensual, it’s motivated not by desire but by “the feeling that you have to,” says Kilimnik. That might be for reasons ranging from not wanting your partner to be angry to the fear that they might leave you, or the sense that you have a responsibility to your partner to engage in sex.

The data revealed that people with NSE histories reported higher frequency of duty sex. They also found that people with lower levels of sexual satisfaction and higher levels of sexual pain reported more frequent duty sex.

“These relationships can be bidirectional,” Kilimnik points out, particularly with regard to duty sex and sexual pain and dysfunction. In other words, people may have more duty sex because they don’t enjoy sex due to pain or discomfort, but it’s also true that people may not find their sex lives satisfying because they’re frequently engaging in duty sex.

When the researchers controlled for sexual functioning, they found that NSEs “have this unique impact on engaging in duty sex above and beyond what sexual functioning can account for,” says Kilimnik. This is consistent with existing research that indicates those with NSE histories often have more difficulty asserting their sexual boundaries, she says.

While this paper alone can’t tell us how to improve our sex lives—and, consequently, our overall well-being—it does support the existence of an important pattern, says Kilimnik. “That pattern supports this idea that if the primary reason you’re engaging in sex is out of a sense of obligation, it can be harmful for your sex life and well-being.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about psychology and neuroscience? Show your support.

CU Boulder scientist Chelsea Kilimnik is one of a handful of researchers looking at the correlation between sexual trauma and ‘duty sex.’

Traditional

White

Top photo: iStock

This summer, where there's smoke there's probably fire

Rachel Sauer — Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:01:58 +0000

This summer, where there's smoke there's probably fire Rachel Sauer Wed, 04/23/2025 - 15:01

Laura Dee

Controlled burns reduce wildfire risk, but they require trained staff and funding—this could be a rough year

Red skies in August, longer fire seasons and checking air quality before taking my toddler to the park. This has become the new norm in the western United States as wildfires become more frequent, larger and more catastrophic.

As an ecologist at the ��, I know that fires are part of the natural processes that forests need to stay healthy. But the combined effects of a warmer and drier climate, more people living in fire-prone areas and vegetation and debris built up over years of fire suppression are leading to more severe fires that spread faster. And that’s putting humans, ecosystems and economies at risk.

To help prevent catastrophic fires, the U.S. Forest Service issued a 10-year strategy in 2022 that includes scaling up the use of controlled burns and other techniques to remove excess plant growth and dry, dead materials that fuel wildfires.

CU Boulder researcher Laura Dee is an associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology.

However, the Forest Service’s wildfire management activities have been thrown into turmoil in 2025 with funding cuts and disruptions and uncertainty from the federal government.

The planet just saw its hottest year on record. If spring and summer 2025 are also dry and hot, conditions could be prime for severe fires again.

More severe fires harm forest recovery and people

Today’s severe wildfires have been pushing societies, emergency response systems and forests beyond what they have evolved to handle.

Extreme fires have burned into cities, including destroying thousands of homes in the Los Angeles area in 2025 and near Boulder, Colorado, in 2021. They threaten downstream public drinking water by increasing sediments and contaminants in water supplies, as well as infrastructure, air quality and rural economies. They also increase the risk of flooding and mudslides from soil erosion. And they undermine efforts to mitigate climate change by releasing carbon stored in these ecosystems.

In some cases, fires burned so hot and deep into the soil that the forests are not growing back.

While many species are adapted to survive low-level fires, severe blazes can damage the seeds and cones needed for forests to regrow. My team has seen this trend outside of Fort Collins, Colorado, where four years after the Cameron Peak fire, forests have still not come back the way ecologists would expect them to under past, less severe fires. Returning to a strategy of fire suppression − or trying to “go toe-to-toe with every fire” − will make these cases more common.

Proactive wildfire management can help reduce the risk to forests and property.

Measures such as prescribed burns have proven to be effective for maintaining healthy forests and reducing the severity of subsequent wildfires. A recent review found that selective thinning followed by prescribed fire reduced subsequent fire severity by 72% on average, and prescribed fire on its own reduced severity by 62%.

But managing forests well requires knowing how forests are changing, where trees are dying and where undergrowth has built up and increased fire hazards. And, for federal lands, these are some of the jobs that are being targeted by the Trump administration.

Parts of Cameron Peak in north-central Colorado that burned in a severe fire in 2020 showed scant evidence of recovery four years later, when this photo was taken. (Photo: Bella Olesky/CU Boulder)

Some of the Forest Service staff who were fired or put in limbo by the Trump administration are those who do research or collect and communicate critical data about forests and fire risk. Other fired staff provided support so crews could clear flammable debris and carry out fuel treatments such as prescribed burns, thinning forests and building fire breaks.

Losing people in these roles is like firing all primary care doctors and leaving only EMTs. Both are clearly needed. As many people know from emergency room bills, preventing emergencies is less costly than dealing with the damage later.

Logging is not a long-term fire solution

The Trump administration cited “wildfire risk reduction” when it issued an emergency order to increase logging in national forests by 25%.

But private − unregulated − forest management looks a lot different than managing forests to prevent destructive fires.

Logging, depending on the practice, can involve clear-cutting trees and other techniques that compromise soils. Exposing a forest’s soils and dead vegetation to more sunlight also dries them out, which can increase fire risk in the near term.

In general, logging that focuses on extracting the highest-value trees leaves thinner trees that are more vulnerable to fires. A study in the Pacific Northwest found that replanting logged land with the same age and size of trees can lead to more severe fires in the future.

Research and data are essential

For many people in the western U.S., these risks hit close to home.

I’ve seen neighborhoods burn and friends and family displaced, and I have contended with regular air quality warnings and red flag days signaling a high fire risk. I’ve also seen beloved landscapes, such as those on Cameron Peak, transform when conifers that once made up the forest have not regrown.

My scientific research group and collaborations with other scientists have been helping to identify cost-effective solutions. That includes which fuel-treatment methods are most effective, which types of forests and conditions they work best in and how often they are needed. We’re also planning research projects to better understand which forests are at greatest risk of not recovering after fires.

This sort of research is what robust, cost-effective land management is based on.

When careful, evidence-based forest management is replaced with a heavy emphasis on suppressing every fire or clear-cutting forests, I worry that human lives, property and economies, as well as the natural legacy of public lands left to every American, are at risk.

Laura Dee is an associate professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology.

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

Controlled burns reduce wildfire risk, but they require trained staff and funding—this could be a rough year.

Traditional

White

Top image: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Recognizing a century of boats against the current

Rachel Sauer — Wed, 23 Apr 2025 19:17:08 +0000

Recognizing a century of boats against the current Rachel Sauer Wed, 04/23/2025 - 13:17

Collette Mace

The Great Gatsby remains relevant for modern readers by shapeshifting with the times, says CU Boulder scholar Martin Bickman

“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

The final words of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel, The Great Gatsby—published 100 years ago this month—are among the most known and appreciated in American literature.

Martin Bickman, a CU Boulder professor of English, notes that the intentional vagueness of The Great Gatsby helps readers of all generations connect with the characters.

And according to Martin Bickman, a �� professor of English, this line and the novel’s conclusion reflect the age in which it was written and neatly ends a novel that seems to capture the American psyche.

But why is The Great Gatsby considered the Great American Novel? Not because it’s great or because it’s American, Bickman explains—although it is both. This novel has remained relevant from generation to generation because it shapeshifts with the times, continuing to carry themes that Americans are bred to notice.

Questions of the American dream, wealth, class standing and ambition are central to American values in both 1925 and today. And while these themes look very different to the modern American, Bickman says the intentional vagueness of the novel helps readers of all generations connect with the characters.

To understand this, Bickman, a CU President’s Teaching Scholar who has taught a course called American Novel, cites “reader response theory,” a framework he emphasizes is critical in the study of literature. According to reader response theory, the reader of a text to take must take an active role in constructing the meaning within the text; if readers look only at a novel through the perspective of the author, that neglects much of the text’s meaning.

For this reason, no text can be interpreted the exact way by two different people. Readers approach texts differently as a result of their position in the world, and the experiences that have shaped them inform their understanding of what they read. The text then becomes a blank canvas for what readers project onto it, Bickman says

Seeing ourselves in Gatsby

What does this have to do with Gatsby? According to Bickman, the title character is just two-dimensional enough to serve as a perfect projection screen for readers of the novel. He’s mysterious, allowing the narrator, Nick Calloway, to cast his own assumptions about the world and the wealthy onto him, as well as vague enough to allow the reader to project their own internal thoughts and biases onto him.

As well as having characters that reflect the reader in personality and perceptions, The Great Gatsby also reflects classic American messages that are relevant today.

Because of his intentional ambiguity, Gatsby as a character can reflect what the reader thinks of many different things, including the elite, the rich and even the quintessential American dreamer.

This is how The Great Gatsby becomes a chameleon, remaining relevant in era, despite its age, Bickman says. As well as having characters that reflect the reader in personality and perceptions, the novel also reflects classic American messages that are relevant today.

The green light on Daisy’s dock, for example, represents the unattainable hopes for the future that stem from the inability to transcend the past. This feeling is still present, and most likely always will be in a country that believes in the possibility of a glowing future as long as we just work hard enough to get there—such is, in essence, the American dream, Bickman says.

It also showcases the all-to-frequent pain of the American dream. Although Bickman says the billionaires of today had no equal in Fitzgerald’s time, the uneasiness surrounding the callousness of the rich is on full display in Gatsby. Daisy, for example, named for the beautiful and delicate flower that Gatsby sees her as, is just as cruel and selfish as any of the men around her. She was the one driving the car, after all.

However, as she comes from “self-earned” money, and as someone who has seemingly “won” at the American dream, does she get a pass for her selfishness? In a way, she seems to, at least for the moment. And as time moves on, and the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer, it seems that the original questions of whether the rich can be callous changes to whether the rich can be cruel—a key difference in how the world works, according to Bickman.

“It’s a real pathology now,” he says, “I mean, these people are cruel. The richest of the rich in the 1920s were nothing like today’s billionaires.”

So the lessons of The Great Gatsby remain relevant, Bickman says, suggesting that modern readers should take a deep look between the lines and wonder what Gatsby can show us about ourselves.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about English? Show your support.

'The Great Gatsby' remains relevant for modern readers by shapeshifting with the times, says CU Boulder scholar Martin Bickman.

Traditional

White

Top image: Warner Bros.

How we can, why we must transform food systems

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 21 Apr 2025 19:07:24 +0000

How we can, why we must transform food systems Rachel Sauer Mon, 04/21/2025 - 13:07

Laura Vang Rasmussen , Ingo Grass , Claire Kremen and Zia Mehrabi

Evidence shows that diversified farming is key

If you had to pick the single most important thing driving the overshooting of multiple planetary boundaries, it would be the food we eat and how we produce that food. The environmental grand challenges of our day—biodiversity loss, climate change, freshwater use and pollution—all tie back to our food systems.

So also do our social challenges: As of writing, one in four people around the world does not have reliable access to nutritious food. Our food systems need transformation. They must become environmentally safe and socially just.

For years, ecologists have advocated for designing our food systems to be diverse, like ecosystems, to help bring the planet into a safe operating space for humanity. And despite clear examples of both innovative farmers and more traditional ones around the world doing this in practice, governments have remained skeptical due to the opposition this idea poses to mainstream agricultural-development policy.

As we undertook our published research, we set out to explore if mainstream thinking surrounding agricultural development was wrong and, if so, what adding diversity back into agricultural systems might do to correct farming systems around the world.

We worked with more than 50 researchers, who in turn worked with thousands of farmers across 11 countries covering five continents, to test the idea. We covered vastly different food systems, from maize production in Malawi to silvopastoral cattle farming in Colombia, winter wheat production in Germany, strawberry cultivation in the United States and more.

One unique feature of our approach was that all co-authors participated actively in the study design to interweave the many data sets spread across the world. Our project was far from a standard research initiative; it was highly interdisciplinary, involving the co-production of knowledge among researchers from various fields and farmers.

Further, a stakeholder committee, including representatives from different levels of government, U.N. organizations, NGOs and various national farmers’ organizations, was involved in co-production through workshops and engagement activities.

We all worked together to answer a basic question: If more diversity is added into, or kept on, farms, what happens to the environmental and social outcomes we care about? Do we create a better world for people and nature?

CU Boulder scientist Zia Mehrabi and his research colleagues found that across systems, a general rule emerged: the more diversification done at a farm, the better. (Photo: California Strawberry Commission)

The outcomes we looked at were directly related to planetary boundaries on reducing environmental pollution, land use, biodiversity loss and the disruption of biogeochemical flows.

But, unlike earlier studies, we also assessed social outcomes at the same time, including human well-being, crop yields and food security. This integration allowed us to assess whether both positive environmental and social outcomes can be achieved at the same time, something that had never been done before in this way.

What we produced was novel: the first-ever cross-continental, multi-farming system and culturally contextual evidence from real food systems that diversifying agricultural systems helps move agriculture toward where we want it to be. We found that the benefits of diversification differed depending on the practices and farming systems they were tied to. But saliently, we found that across systems, a general rule emerged: the more diversification done at a farm, the better.

And even more promisingly, this was especially true when it came to improving food security and biodiversity at the same time—two outcomes that have previously been juxtaposed in policy and that need the world’s urgent attention now more than ever.

Critically, our study was not theoretical or abstract, nor was it run on field stations or in laboratories. It was conducted with farmers on real-world farms. The main effects we identified held up to a range of different analyses.

We even came up with a list and typology of on-farm interventions, all clearly defined, for practical implementation and support by governments, NGOs, research for development organizations and civil society groups. Importantly, the significance of these interventions is already recognized as a possible pathway toward change and was a key focus of the U.N. Food Systems Summit.

Our work provides robust evidence that investment in these areas will yield the desirable outcomes, bolstering ongoing initiatives by governments and the private sector to support these transformative actions.

Our research demonstrates that diversification represents a significant, tangible and policy-relevant step towards achieving more sustainable food systems globally: one not just grounded in theory or anecdotes but also supported by rich data, covering a vast range of farming systems across the world.

Other observations made during our research project include the insight that farmers in many locations have already been actively working against the odds, finding ways past barriers to diversification. We’ve found this in Malawi, Brazil and the United States, where grass-roots communities of farmers and social networks are mobilizing knowledge, land, seeds, equipment, processing infrastructure and markets to support this movement. Policymakers and practitioners can now support these groups by lowering the structural barriers that have limited their growth and the growth of diversified farming to date.

We are now at a critical juncture where agricultural-development policy requires urgent attention. While the action will be location dependent—diversifying systems that have been made far too simple to function properly and retaining diversity in systems where it is threatened—the time has come, and the options exist, to ensure that the damages and losses done in the past do not continue into the future.

Laura Vang Rasmussen is associate professor of geosciences and natural resource management at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. Ingo Grass is professor and head of the Department of Ecology and Tropical Ecological Systems at the University of Hohenheim in Germany. Claire Kremen is the president’s excellence chair in biodiversity at the University of British Columbia in Canada. Zia Mehrabi is an associate professor of environmental studies at the ��.

Did you enjoy this op-ed? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about environmental studies? Show your support.

Evidence shows that diversified farming is key.

Traditional

White

Farm-diversification research wins high kudos

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 21 Apr 2025 19:03:22 +0000

Farm-diversification research wins high kudos Rachel Sauer Mon, 04/21/2025 - 13:03

Clint Talbott

CU Boulder’s Zia Mehrabi and an international group of researchers are named national champion of the Frontiers Planet Prize for research that finds environmental and social benefits of agricultural diversification

Widespread agricultural diversification could improve the health of the world’s environment and that of its people, a landmark study published last year found.

Zia Mehrabi, assistant professor of environmental studies at the ��, alongside a large group of international researchers, has been named the U.S. national champion for the Frontiers Planet Prize, the Frontiers Research Foundation announced today.

As one of 19 national champions, Mehrabi and team are in contention to be named one of three international champions, each of whom will receive $1 million in funding to advance their research. The international champions will be announced at the Frontiers Planet Prize ceremony in Switzerland in June.

Zia Mehrabi, a CU Boulder assistant professor of environmental studies, has been named the U.S. national champion for the Frontiers Planet Prize.

The Frontiers Planet Prize celebrates breakthroughs in Earth system and planetary science that “address these challenges and enable society to stay within the safe boundaries of the planet’s ecosystem.” The prize puts scientific rigor and ingenuity at its heart, helping researchers worldwide accelerate society toward a green renaissance, the Frontiers Research Foundation says.

Professor Jean-Claude Burgelman, director of the Frontiers Planet Prize, said the planet faces immense threats that require bold, transformative solutions rooted in evidence and validated by science.

“Innovative yet scalable solutions are the only way for us to ensure healthy lives on a healthy planet,” Burgelman said. “By spotlighting the most groundbreaking research, we are helping scientists bring their work to the international stage and provide the scientific consensus needed to guide our actions and policies.”

Mehrabi, who leads the Better Planet Laboratory, was recognized, alongside his co-authors, for an article published last year in the journal Science titled “Joint environmental and social benefits from diversified agriculture.”

Laura Vang Rasmussen of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark and Ingo Grass of the University of Hohenheim in Germany were lead authors of the paper, which had 58 co-authors. Claire Kremen of the University of British Columbia was a senior author and co-principal investigator on the study.

The researchers found that diversifying crops and animals and improving habitat, soil and water conservation on individual farms can improve biodiversity while improving or, at a minimum, not coming at a cost to yields. Additionally, diversified farming can yield social benefits and improve food security—showing improved food access or a reduced number of hungry months, for example, particularly in smallholder systems.

The more diversification measures farms employed, the more benefits accrued, researchers observed. Essentially, the team found evidence to move toward agriculture that more closely reflects natural systems.

“If you look at how ecosystems operate, it’s not just plants growing alone. It’s not just animals or soil,” Mehrabi said last year. “It’s all of these things working together.”

Using data from 2,655 farms across 11 countries and covering five continents, the researchers combined qualitative methods and statistical models to analyze 24 different datasets. Each dataset studied farm sites with varying levels of diversification, including farms without any diversification practices. This allowed the team to assess the effects of applying more diversification strategies.

Diversified farming differs from the dominant model of agriculture: growing single crops or one animal on large tracts of land. That efficient, “monoculture” style of farming is a hallmark of agriculture after the Green Revolution, which reduced global famine by focusing on high-yield crops that rely on fertilizers and pesticides.

“The Green Revolution did many, many great things, but it came with a lot of costs,” Mehrabi says, noting that synthetic fertilizers and pesticides harm the environment.

Also, to increase labor productivity, large farms rely on mechanization, which tends to “replace people with machines.”

“If you look at how ecosystems operate, it’s not just plants growing alone. It’s not just animals or soil. It’s all of these things working together,” says Zia Mehrabi.

“So, the idea of trying to engineer nature into our agricultural systems is somewhat antithetical to the whole way we think about agricultural development,” Mehrabi says.

Making a case for a different way of doing agriculture is one thing. Implementing it on a widespread basis is something else. The dominant view, fostered by “big ag” (short for agriculture), is that “if you want to do ag, you’ve got to do it this way,” Mehrabi says.

“Our work challenges that idea, but it’s a bit of a David-and-Goliath situation,” he adds. “We have the stone, but it hasn’t yet landed.”

But it’s necessary to confront Goliath, Mehrabi contends, noting that agriculture affects all the things people care about environmentally, including climate change, water security, biodiversity, pollution, land use and habitat destruction.

A third of the Earth’s land is used for agriculture, and about a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions stem from agriculture, he notes. Climate change has reduced agricultural yields by as much as 5% to 10% in the last four decades, research has shown.

“If we want to do something about environmental issues, agriculture is one of the big buckets that we need to really, really start in.”

Separate from the research published in Science, Mehrabi has done modeling of the future state of agriculture globally if the world continues business-as-usual farming. He found that in the next century, the number of farms is likely to be cut in half and the average size of farms would likely double.

Given that, along with what scientists know about the loss of natural ecosystems as farm sizes increase, “the future looks a little bit bleak,” Mehrabi says. But this new research shows it could be different.

Though he does not suggest that all farms must be small farms, he does advise that agriculture strive to diversify systems that have been “massively depleted and massively simplified.”

�� the Frontiers Planet Prize, Mehrabi says he’s gratified to be recognized as one of 19 national champions. Additionally, he underscores the importance of the Frontiers Research Foundation’s financial commitment to this kind of research, calling it a “signal” to other funding entities that might follow suit.

Launched by the Frontiers Research Foundation on Earth Day 2022, the prize encourages universities worldwide to nominate their top three scientists working on understanding and putting forward pathways to stay within the safe operating space of nine planetary boundaries that are outlined by the Stockholm Resilience Center.

These nominations are then vetted at the national level, and the top scientists face an independent jury of 100—a group of renowned sustainability and planetary health experts chaired by Professor Johan Rockström—who vote for the National and International Champions.

Read a guest opinion by Zia Mehrabi and co-authors at this link. See a Q&A with Mehrabi about adding carbon-footprint labels on food at this link.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about environmental studies? Show your support.

Traditional

White

Climate change is transforming how scientists think about their roles

Rachel Sauer — Fri, 18 Apr 2025 15:08:35 +0000

Climate change is transforming how scientists think about their roles Rachel Sauer Fri, 04/18/2025 - 09:08

Sarah Kuta

CU Boulder researcher Pedro DiNezio emphasizes solving the problems of climate change in the here and now

When Pedro DiNezio began studying El Niño and La Niña roughly 20 years ago, human-caused climate change was still a future problem. At that time, researchers spent much of their energy trying to show that humans were, in fact, influencing the world’s climate.

Flash forward two decades, and climate change is no longer some far-off, eventual phenomenon—it’s happening now. Communities and businesses are factoring climate change into their yearly, monthly and even weekly decisions.

Against this backdrop, climate scientists are starting to transition away from purely theoretical research and pivot toward more applied work and consulting. DiNezio, a �� associate professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences, for example, is embarking on a new partnership with WTW, a global insurance broker and risk advisor—an exciting prospect for putting research into practice.

“We can’t stop the drought and the heatwaves, but we can do things to become more resilient, so they don’t affect us as badly—at least for a while,” says Pedro DiNezio, a CU Boulder associate professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

“I’m going through a career transformation right now because I’m more and more interested in solving problems in the here and now,” says DiNezio. “Because we now know so much about the climate system and about the impact it could have on society, many of us in academia are feeling that it’s time to act.”

Resilience is key

As global temperatures continue to rise, world leaders are taking steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Whether their actions will be enough to stave off catastrophic warming remains to be seen. But, in the meantime, communities and businesses must prepare for and adapt to the unprecedented extremes caused by climate change.

Drought, heatwaves, wildfires, rising sea levels, coastal erosion and other ripple effects are already causing big problems—and scientists like DiNezio might be able to help solve them.

“We can’t stop the drought and the heatwaves, but we can do things to become more resilient, so they don’t affect us as badly—at least for a while,” DiNezio says. “And hopefully we can win that time we need to stabilize the climate.”

For example, research has linked hot weather with an increased risk of accidents and injuries in the workplace. Employees are more likely to suffer heat-related illnesses on hot days. But they’re also more likely to be involved with other seemingly unrelated accidents, too.

From an ethical perspective, companies want to keep their workers safe and healthy. But, from a business perspective, they also want to keep costs down—and workers-compensation insurance is a major expense.

“We’re only starting to learn the full extent of the impact of heatwaves and how we can mitigate them,” says DiNezio. “This is having a huge impact on businesses. So, how do we prevent these accidents?”

As the climate shifts, supply chains are also becoming increasingly vulnerable. When vital waterways like the Panama Canal’s Gatun Lake dry up during droughts, ships cannot reach their intended destinations on time. And those delays cost money.

“You cannot avoid these things, but at least you can know there’s a risk and plan an alternative shipping route,” DiNezio says.

Reinsurance companies are particularly interested in anticipating disasters because they already take a long-term, big-picture view of risk. While a company in one part of the world might be worried about drought and another might be focused on sea level rise, global reinsurance companies see what’s happening around the world and connect the dots.

“Reinsurance companies look for our knowledge because their scale makes them more sensitive to the aggregated effect of climate change over large swaths of the world,” says DiNezio. “They are some of the first businesses to think, ‘How do we anticipate this new climate that is continually changing and prepare for it?’”

Why now?

Climate science is a relatively new field. But, in recent years, it’s matured enough to allow researchers to make predictions that are applicable to communities and businesses.

When vital waterways like the Panama Canal’s Gatun Lake (above) dry up during droughts, ships cannot reach their intended destinations on time. And those delays cost money. (Photo: Valiant/Shutterstock)

“We are starting to see these climate events happening, we have the tools to better predict them, and the climate sector is recognizing this as a problem, as a need,” says DiNezio. “As academics, we cannot ignore them because this is no longer a theoretical exercise.”

Teaching has played an important role in DiNezio’s transformation. After joining the CU Boulder faculty four years ago, DiNezio began teaching an introductory-level class on climate change for non-science majors.

Every semester, DiNezio updated the curriculum because the climate was changing so fast. That process has been a bit of a reality check.

“When you talk about it with students, especially non-science majors, they are interested in what effect this could have on their lives and their careers,” says DiNezio. “You have to think about these things more concretely.”

Concrete problems

DiNezio, like other climate scientists who are experimenting with consulting, is approaching this new career chapter with a mix of enthusiasm and anticipation.

“I’m diving into something that I haven’t done before,” DiNezio says. “Sometimes, I describe it to my friend like I’m doing another PhD. … A lot of people in my field are going through this transformation and is entirely new.”

But, in some ways, DiNezio suspects solving real-world problems may be easier than solving theoretical ones. Either way, DiNezio is looking forward to the new challenge.

“When you move away from the purely academic, the problems become really concrete,” DiNezio says. “It’s really simple: How do you prevent heat deaths or help farmers mitigate drought? For me, the new thing is the action. The transformation is, how do we act with all this information about weather and climate? It’s very different from the academic approach. Now, we have a goal.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about atmospheric and oceanic sciences? Show your support.

CU Boulder researcher Pedro DiNezio emphasizes solving the problems of climate change in the here and now.

Traditional

White

Don’t fear the fungi

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 17 Apr 2025 13:30:00 +0000

Don’t fear the fungi Rachel Sauer Thu, 04/17/2025 - 07:30

Bradley Worrell

CU Boulder mycologist Alisha Quandt says there’s little reason to fear a fungi-zombie apocalypse like the one imagined in the HBO hit TV series ‘The Last of Us’

Alisha Quandt prepared herself in advance to be asked by students and others about Sunday’s season 2 premier of “The Last of Us”—the hit HBO series that imagines a post-apocalyptic future where a fungal infection on a massive scale turns the majority of humanity into zombie-like creatures seeking to infect the last pockets of civilization.

It’s not that Quandt is a super-fan of the TV show (“I’m not into zombies, honestly,” she confesses), but as a mycologist—a scientist who studies fungi—she is used to getting asked about the TV show, specifically whether the grim future it imagines is anything people need to be worried about, or whether it’s simply harmless entertainment.

“I’m happy if it gets people excited about fungi. They’re so incredible,” says Alisha Quandt, a CU Boulder assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology.

“Especially when the TV show first debuted, it was definitely a topic people wanted to discuss,” says Quandt, a �� Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology assistant professor.

“And it seems like the topic (of infectious fungi) comes up in popular culture every five to 10 years. When I was starting my PhD, people were fascinated by the ‘Planet Earth’ TV series by David Attenborough, where this ant infected by Ophiocordyceps unilateralis staggers around, being controlled by the fungus. Then later, the Last of Us videogame came out, which really got people excited about (zombie) fungi.”

Quandt did her PhD research studying Cordyceps-like fungi, which is the type of pestilence the TV show identifies as the culprit for turning civilization into a hellscape populated by zombies controlled by the spiky fungi tendrils sprouting from their heads. For the record, Quandt finds that scenario very unlikely, for a variety of reasons.

No need to panic

For starters, the TV show imagines a worldwide outbreak is caused by Cordyceps-contaminated food. However, Quandt says most fungal infections in humans are caused by inhaling spores or through contact with the eyes or skin—and not through the digestive tract. She notes that in many parts of the world, people have been ingesting Cordyceps fungi for decades without incident, because they believe they contain beneficial properties.

“I’ve eaten Cordyceps in Asia, in Korea and China,” says Quandt, who remains unzombified. “It’s considered a part of traditional Chinese medicine, especially certain species. Even here in the U.S., you can find Cordyceps in coffees and teas, for example. They sell them at stores in Boulder.”

Quandt says another reason not to be overly concerned about Cordyceps is that many of them are “specialists” that have a very narrow range of hosts that they infect, down to a specific family of ant or spider. While some Cordyceps can transition from infecting one type of arthropod to another, or to jump from infecting an insect to another fungus, she says making the leap to a healthy human being is remote.

What’s more, the average human body temperature of 97 to 99 degrees Fahrenheit is not an environment that’s hospitable for many fungi, although Quandt acknowledges there are exceptions. “The Last of Us” imagines a future in which global warming has raised Earth temperatures to a point where mutated Cordyceps zombie fungi could live comfortably in human hosts, but Quandt notes that ambient temperatures of even 90 degrees Fahrenheit are still cooler than the human body.

“That’s a hard path for me to follow,” she says of an environmental change that would allow Cordyceps to evolve in such a way. “There’s a lot of assumptions that would go into that trajectory.”

CU Boulder scientist Alisha Quandt finds the scenario from "The Last of Us" in which a Cordyceps-like fungi causes worldwide zombification very unlikely, for a variety of reasons. (Photo: HBO)

Beyond those arguments, Quandt says there is an even more important one as to why humans don’t need to start doom prepping for a fungi apocalypse.

“My argument about why we shouldn’t be worried about a fungal pandemic is that our bodies, when fully immunocompetent—meaning healthy human bodies—are extremely well equipped to deal with fungal propagules (spores) that come into contact with our bodies, mostly through our lungs,” she says. “Fungi have this cell wall that is made up of stuff that our bodies do not make. So, our bodies are really good identifying and dealing with that.”

Quant says fungal infections do pose a risk to people whose immune systems are compromised—particularly if they have taken a heavy dose of antibiotics, because those can kill off good bacteria, which can lower resistance to harmful fungi.

“Once our immune system goes away, which could handle those types of (fungi), we have so few antifungal drugs to treat fungal infections compared to the myriad of antibiotics that we have to treat bacterial diseases,” she says.

For the immunocompromised, Quandt says one of the most concerning fungi—which just cropped up in recent years and has spread worldwide—is Candida auris.

“It is a really concerning human pathogen because it is what we call nosocomial, meaning it is hospital related. People get these infections in hospitals, and once it’s in a hospital, it can be almost impossible to get rid of it,” she says.

“People will use all kinds of bleach and ethanol but it’s very hard to get rid of the yeast once it gets into a hospital room. And the fully immunocompetent, like nurses and doctors who are not sick, can end up spreading it from room to room to sick, often elderly, patients. Unfortunately, there’s not a good defense on the ground, so to speak, once Candida auris takes hold.”

But while “opportunistic pathogens” like Candida auris can pose a risk to the immunocompromised, the number of fungal diseases that could be described as “primary pathogens”—meaning they can infect and potentially cause serious health issues for healthy individuals—is less than a handful, Quandt says.

One primary pathogen that can be found in the United State is Valley Fever, which is primarily located in New Mexico, Arizona and southern California. Farming, construction or other practices that disrupt the soil can release the fungi’s spores, which people can then breathe into their lungs. Once inhaled, Valley Fever can potentially cause fever, cough, tiredness, shortness of breath and, in limited cases, serious conditions such as pneumonia and meningitis.

“But those are the rarer things, and I’m still not worried about them becoming common because they’re still not being spread from person to person,” she says.

In contrast with the way “The Last of Us” portrays fungi as an existential threat, Quandt sees a type of virus that’s already well-known to the scientific community and the public alike as a much greater risk for causing a global pandemic. The World Health Organization estimates the COVID-19 pandemic killed 14.9 million people worldwide between January 2020 and December 2021.

“As we’ve recently seen, unfortunately, there are a lot of other places to look for more likely suspects for (global pandemics). Things that were predicted by a lot of great investigative journalists and epidemiologists, like coronavirus and other zoonotic diseases (which jump from animals to humans), pose a much greater threat to mankind,” she says.

“As we’ve recently seen, unfortunately, there are a lot of other places to look for more likely suspects for (global pandemics). Things that were predicted by a lot of great investigative journalists and epidemiologists, like coronavirus and other zoonotic diseases (which jump from animals to humans), pose a much greater threat to mankind.”

And now, back to the show

Even beyond the fact she’s not into zombies, Quandt says her training as a mycologist can get in the way of her enjoyment of “The Last of Us” as entertainment, based upon the few episodes she has watched.

“I’m probably a little too close to watch the show—especially the fruiting bodies,” she says. “Sometimes they would show a person who is dead up against a wall, and the fruiting structures look life shelf fungi,” she says.

“Those are related to mushrooms—they’re not related to (fungi) that are molds, like Cordyceps. The artistry was beautiful, so they did a good job visually, but it’s just completely inaccurate. So, it does take you out of it a little bit to watch as an expert; you have to really suspend belief.”

Another scene that inspired disbelief for Quandt was a flashback episode—prior to the fungal pandemic—when a mycologist in Jakarta is asked by representatives of the country’s military to provide guidance on how to proceed after a group of workers in a building are found to be infected with early cases of the Cordyceps contagion. After surveying the infected, the mycologist gives the military members a chilling one-word answer: “Bomb!” (As in, bomb the entire country to try to prevent the infection from spreading.)

“My husband was watching the show with me. He paused it there and he’s like, ‘What should they do?’ I was like, ‘Get all the antifungals that you can. Get all the major ones and then get the rare ones—and start pumping these people with IVs, or all the people that you think might be exposed and get going on it.’ But the fact she said ‘bomb!’ I almost found it funny, but I was also like, ‘Oh, my God, that’s so dramatic.’ Still, it’s a TV show, and I acknowledge that.”

While Quandt may opt not to watch more episodes of “The Last of Us,” she says if the TV show raises public awareness about fungi—even if the details in the show are not entirely correct—she is all for it.

“I’m happy if it gets people excited about fungi,” she says. “They’re so incredible.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about ecology and evolutionary biology? Show your support.

CU Boulder mycologist Alisha Quandt says there’s little reason to fear a fungi-zombie apocalypse like the one imagined in the HBO hit TV series ‘The Last of Us.'

Traditional

White

Top image: HBO

In the archaeological record, size does matter

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 14 Apr 2025 15:24:57 +0000

In the archaeological record, size does matter Rachel Sauer Mon, 04/14/2025 - 09:24

Rachel Sauer

CU Boulder archaeologist Scott Ortman and colleagues around the world explore relationships between housing size and inequality in PNAS Special Feature

If the archaeological record has been correctly interpreted, stone alignments in Tanzania’s Olduvai Gorge are remnants of shelters built 1.7 million years ago by Homo habilis, an extinct species representing one of the earliest branches of humanity’s family tree.

Archaeological evidence that is unambiguously housing dates to more than 20,000 years ago—a time when large swaths of North America, Europe and Asia were covered in ice and humans had only recently begun living in settlements.

Between that time and the dawn of industrialization, the archaeological record is rich not only with evidence of settled life represented by housing, but also with evidence of inequality.

CU Boulder archaeologist Scott Ortman partnered with colleagues Amy Bogaard of the University of Oxford and Timothy Kohler of the University of Florida on a PNAS Special Feature focused on housing size in the archaeological record and inequality.

In a Special Feature published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), scholars from around the world draw from a groundbreaking archaeological database that collects more than 55,000 housing floor area measurements from sites spanning the globe—data that support research demonstrating various correlations between housing size and inequality.

“Archaeologists have been interested in the study of inequality for a long time,” explains Scott Ortman, a �� associate professor of anthropology who partnered with colleagues Amy Bogaard of the University of Oxford and Timothy Kohler of Washington State University to bring together the PNAS Special Feature. (Special Features in PNAS are curated collections of articles that delve into important topics.)

“For a long time, studies have focused on the emergence of inequality in the past, and while some of the papers in the special feature address those issues, others also consider the dynamics of inequality in more general terms.”

Kohler notes that "we use this information to identify the fundamental drivers of economic inequality using a different way of thinking about the archaeological record—more thinking about it as a compendium of human experience. It’s a new approach to doing archaeology.”

Patterns of inequality

Ortman, Bogaard and Kohler also are co-principal investigators on the Global Dynamics of Inequality (GINI) Project funded by the National Science Foundation and housed in the CU Boulder Center for Collaborative Synthesis in Archaeology in the Institute of Behavioral Science to create the database of housing floor area measurements from sites around the world.

Scholars then examined patterns of inequality shown in the data and studied them in the context of other measures of economic productivity, social stability and conflict to illuminate basic social consequences of inequality in human society, Ortman explains.

“What we did was we crowdsourced, in a sense,” Ortman says. “We put out a request for information from archaeologists working around the world, who knew about the archaeological record of housing in different parts of world and got them together to design a database to capture what was available from ancient houses in societies all over world.”

Undergraduate and graduate research assistants also helped create the database, which contains 55,000 housing units and counting from sites as renowned as Pompeii and Herculaneum, to sites across North and South America, Asia, Europe and Africa. “By no stretch of the imagination is it all of the data that archaeologists have ever collected, but we really did make an effort to sample the world and pull together most of the readily available information from excavations, from remote sensing, from LiDAR,” Ortman says.

The housing represented in the data spans non-industrial society from about 12,000 years ago to the recent past, generally ending with industrialization. The collected data then served as a foundation for 10 papers in the PNAS Special Feature, which focus on the archaeology of inequality as evidenced in housing.

Housing similarities

In their introduction to the Special Feature, Ortman, Kohler and Bogaard note that “economic inequality, especially as it relates to inclusive and sustainable social development, represents a primary global challenge of our time and a key research topic for archaeology.

In the PNAS Special Feature published Monday, researchers from around the world describe evidence of inequality found in archaeological data of housing size. (Cover image: Johnny Miller/Unequal Scenes)

“It is also deeply linked to two other significant challenges. The first is climate change. This threatens to widen economic gaps within and between nations, and some evidence from prehistory associates high levels of inequality with lack of resilience to climatic perturbations. The second is stability of governance. Clear and robust evidence from two dozen democracies over the last 25 years that links high economic inequality to political polarization, distrust of institutions and weakening democratic norms. Clearly, if maintenance of democratic systems is important to us, we must care about the degree of wealth inequality in society.”

Archaeological evidence demonstrates a long prehistory of inequality in income and wealth, Ortman and his colleagues note, and allows researchers to study the fundamental drivers of those inequalities. The research in the Special Feature takes advantage of the fact “that residences dating to the same chronological period, and from the same settlements or regions, will be subject to very similar climatic, environmental, technological and cultural constraints and opportunities.”

Several papers in the Special Feature address the relationship between economic growth and inequality, Ortman says. “They’re thinking about not just the typical size of houses in a society, but the rates of change in the sizes of houses from one time step to the next.

“One thing we’ve also done (with the database) is arrange houses from many parts of the world in regional chronological sequences—how the real estate sector of past societies changed over time.”

The papers in the Special Feature focus on topics including the effects of land use and war on housing disparities and the relationship between housing disparities and how long housing sites are occupied. A study that Ortman led and conducted with colleagues from around the world found that comparisons of archaeological and contemporary real estate data show that in preindustrial societies, variation in residential building area is proportional to income inequality and provides a conservative estimator for wealth inequality.

“Our research shows that high wealth inequality could become entrenched where ecological and political conditions permitted,” Bogaard says. “The emergence of high wealth inequality wasn’t an inevitable result of farming. It also wasn’t a simple function of either environmental or institutional conditions. It emerged where land became a scarce resource that could be monopolized. At the same time, our study reveals how some societies avoided the extremes of inequality through their governance practices.”

The researchers argue that “the archaeological record also shows that the most reliable way to promote equitable economic development is through policies and institutions that reduce the covariance of current household productivity with productivity growth.”

GINI Project data, as well as the analysis program developed for them, will be available open access via the Digital Archaeological Record.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about anthropology? Show your support.

CU Boulder archaeologist Scott Ortman and colleagues around the world explore relationships between housing size and inequality in PNAS Special Feature.

Traditional

White

Research

Trouble in the developing world? Call the IMF

Related Articles

Women on trial speak clearly through their clothing

Related Articles

How was it for you? Women are finally being asked

Related Articles

This summer, where there's smoke there's probably fire

Related Articles

Recognizing a century of boats against the current

Related Articles

How we can, why we must transform food systems

Related Articles

Farm-diversification research wins high kudos

Related Articles

Climate change is transforming how scientists think about their roles

Related Articles

Don’t fear the fungi

Related Articles

In the archaeological record, size does matter

Related Articles