Search

Walking or running: for the same distance, which consumes more energy?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clement-lemineur-1529211">Clément Lemineur</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/universite-cote-dazur-2917">Université Côte d’Azur</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clement-naveilhan-1495411">Clément Naveilhan</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/universite-cote-dazur-2917">Université Côte d’Azur</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/francois-dernoncourt-1495410">François Dernoncourt</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/universite-cote-dazur-2917">Université Côte d’Azur</a> It’s Monday morning, the alarm goes off and it’s already 7:30 a.m. – and you’re 30 minutes late. Normally you need 45 minutes to walk the 3 kilometres to work, but this morning you’ll be running for 20 minutes. Yes, but by lunchtime you’re feeling more tired and you have the impression that you’ve expended more energy than usual on the trip. Yet you’ve covered the same distance as on the other days. How can this be? The calorie expenditure associated with any activity is called the “metabolic cost”, and corresponds to the energy consumed by our organs to cover a given distance. This metabolic cost can be determined by analysing the oxygen our bodies consume and the carbon dioxide they produce, we can estimate the amount of energy expended, and thus the metabolic cost. It was using this method that <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/692303/">researchers had already answered our question back in the 1970s</a>. Perhaps not surprisingly, running consumes more energy than walking for the same distance covered. But why? <h2>Energy lost when running</h2> Imagine you’re watching someone running. Now look closely at the vertical movement (up and down) of their pelvis and head. As you can see from the diagram below, when we run, the distance that our body moves up and down is greater than when we walk. To produce this vertical movement, the muscles of the lower limbs have to generate more force, and that consumes more energy, yet doesn’t bring us any closer to our destination. So when running, part of the energy expended is used to move our bodies <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16029949/">upward rather than forward</a>. The energy needed to cover those 3 km is therefore higher for running than for walking. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=287&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=287&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=287&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/602769/original/file-20240625-18-xilv63.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Illustration of the oscillations of running and walking" /></a><figcaption>Running involves much greater vertical oscillation of the centre of mass than walking. This is the main reason why running consumes more energy than walking for the same distance covered. François Dernoncourt, Fourni par l'auteur</figcaption></figure> This difference between walking and running is not confined to what happens during the activity itself. In fact, each physical exercise causes a delayed expenditure of energy, which is added to the expenditure during the activity. Taking this into account, it’s once again running that uses more energy than walking. Immediately after running your 3 km, the increased energy consumption (compared with resting) lasts for several minutes, mainly because of the increase in body temperature and the replenishment of energy reserves. This additional expenditure after running is <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22446673/">more than twice that observed after walking</a>, due to the difference in intensity between the two exercises. <h2>It all depends on speed</h2> Running therefore involves a higher calorie expenditure than walking for the same distance covered. But this is on condition that the walking speed considered is “normal” (around 5 km/h). So, if we walk very slowly, it will take us so long to cover the 3 km that the calorie expenditure will be greater in the end. This is because the body expends a certain amount of energy per unit of time no matter what, regardless of the activity performed (known as the “basal metabolic rate”). The same applies if the walking speed is very fast (<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29925582/">more than 8 km/h</a>): running is more energy-efficient. Here, the coordination required to walk at such a speed means that we need to activate our muscles more, without being able to take advantage of the elasticity of our tendons, as is the case with running. Moreover, we have a very precise intuitive perception of the energy efficiency of a particular style of movement. If we’re on a treadmill whose speed gradually increases, the point at which we spontaneously switch from walking to running coincides with the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096663622100120X">moment when it would become more energy-consuming to walk than to run</a>. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/604700/original/file-20240703-17-4dlrj.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption>Modelling of metabolic cost (kilocalories expended per kilogram per kilometre covered) as a function of speed (kilometres per hour) for walking and running. The curves cross at a certain speed (purple line; around 8 km/h): this means that above this speed, walking becomes more energy-intensive than running. It’s at around this threshold speed that people spontaneously switch from walking to running. François Dernoncourt, Adapted from Summerside et al, Fourni par l'auteur</figcaption></figure> In conclusion, because of greater oscillation of the centre of mass and increased energy expenditure after exercise, running to work is more energy-intensive than covering the same distance by walking. But remember, whether you choose to walk or run to work, the most important thing is that you’re already saving energy!<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/233943/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clement-lemineur-1529211">Clément Lemineur</a>, Doctorant en Sciences du Mouvement Humain, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/universite-cote-dazur-2917">Université Côte d’Azur</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clement-naveilhan-1495411">Clément Naveilhan</a>, Doctorant en Sciences du Mouvement Humain, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/universite-cote-dazur-2917">Université Côte d’Azur</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/francois-dernoncourt-1495410">François Dernoncourt</a>, Doctorant en Sciences du Mouvement Humain, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/universite-cote-dazur-2917">Université Côte d’Azur</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/walking-or-running-for-the-same-distance-which-consumes-more-energy-233943">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Plastic Free July is a waste of time if the onus is only on consumers

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bhavna-middha-1061611">Bhavna Middha</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ralph-horne-160543">Ralph Horne</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Every year, the <a href="https://www.plasticfreejuly.org/">Plastic Free July</a> campaign asks us to refuse single-use plastic. The idea is that making a small change in our daily lives will collectively make a big difference. And hopefully, better behaviour will stick and become a habit. The intent is good, but consumers shouldn’t have to bear full responsibility for plastic pollution. Individual sacrifices – particularly temporary ones – <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421509004728">won’t make a significant difference</a>. Governments, manufacturers and retailers need to get serious about tackling this problem. If Plastic Free July put pressure on the supply side of the equation, rather than demand, it could be more successful. Our research spans food packaging including plastics, waste, sustainable consumption and social practices. We know consumer demand is only one part of the picture. Eliminating plastic waste requires broader systemic changes. <h2>The cabbage dilemma</h2> Research shows consumers generally want to do the <a href="https://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/news/news-articles/the-conversation-on-sustainability-has-changed">right thing by the environment</a> but find it <a href="https://theconversation.com/households-find-low-waste-living-challenging-heres-what-needs-to-change-197022">challenging</a>. Coming out of a supermarket with no packaging is difficult. There are few unpackaged food items and even when there is a choice, the unpackaged item may be more <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/want-your-fruit-and-veg-without-the-plastic-you-ll-have-to-pay-more-20231107-p5eib4.html">expensive</a>. Have you ever been stuck in the supermarket, choosing between the large head of cabbage you know you won’t finish before it goes bad, or the plastic-wrapped half-cabbage you really need? Consumers should not be forced to choose between food waste (another huge problem) or plastic waste. Maybe there’s another way. For example, why not sell cabbages of different sizes? Why do we need to grow such large heads of cabbage anyway? Both plastic consumption and food waste can be addressed by changing how we produce and distribute certain foods. <h2>Governments, manufacturers and retailers must drive change</h2> The onus for reducing plastic consumption and waste should be placed firmly on those who make plastic and profit from selling their products, as well as those who make and sell products wrapped in plastic packaging. Research has shown just <a href="https://www.csiro.au/en/news/All/News/2024/April/Global-study-finds-more-than-half-of-branded-plastic-pollution-linked-to-56-companies?utm_source=pocket_shared">56 companies</a> globally are responsible for more than half of the branded plastic pollution that ends up in the environment. Companies profit from using plastics because it is cheaper to use than changing to alternatives, such as cardboard or compostable materials, or using less packaging. This means companies choosing to avoid using plastics face unfair competition. It’s a tough habit to kick. Industry-led <a href="https://productstewardship.us/what-is-epr/#:%7E:text=Stewardship%20can%20be%20either%20voluntary,product%20stewardship%20required%20by%20law">voluntary schemes</a> are <a href="https://www.insidewaste.com.au/91038-2-product-stewardship-schemes/">limited in terms of both participation and outcomes</a>. Many companies are failing to meet their own <a href="https://www.asyousow.org/report-page/2024-plastic-promises-scorecard">plastic reduction goals</a>. Governments need to step in and force companies to take responsibility for the plastic and packaging they manufacture. In practice, this could involve similar schemes to the container deposit scheme for beverage containers, or returning plastics to stores. Replacing voluntary schemes with mandatory regulations and increased producer responsibility means companies will have to <a href="https://www.insidewaste.com.au/91038-2-product-stewardship-schemes/">invest in long-term changes designed with care</a>. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UnXVU-06ciI?wmode=transparent&start=1" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><figcaption>What’s Plastic Free July?</figcaption></figure> <h2>Cities are built around plastic</h2> Our previous research has shown plastic performs an essential role in some, <a href="https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geoj.12457">constrained circumstances</a>. We found vulnerable householders often rely on plastic to make life manageable, such as using plastics to cover belongings on the balcony, or using plastic cutlery and plates in student apartments with minimal kitchen space. This includes people with accessibility needs, people relying on public transport to shop for groceries, or people who are financially constrained or living in small high-rise <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-keep-putting-apartment-residents-waste-in-the-too-hard-basket-200545">apartments</a>. Unsustainable lifestyles are not so much a choice as a product of poorly planned cities, housing and regulations. It is all very well if you are mobile and well-located, but if you live in a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-08/food-deserts-have-serious-consequences-for-residents-experts/6605230">poorly serviced</a> distant suburb and <a href="https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2023/01/are-you-living-in-a-food-desert--these-maps-suggest-it-can-reall">transport groceries or takeaway food</a> or buy things on the go, then plastic is perhaps the only current affordable way to make it work. So campaigns and solutions that do not consider how <a href="https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geoj.12457">everyday lives and economy</a> are intertwined with plastics can <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00149-w">exclude people and spaces</a> who can’t access the alternatives. For example, there are ways to make <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-5871.12464">convenience eating more sustainable</a> in education settings. We have shown how <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-5871.12390">canteens and microwaves</a> in shared spaces can enable people to access affordable food with their friends, as in <a href="https://www.charlesabroad.cz/post/german-university-canteens-why-do-they-beat-the-czech-ones">University Mensa in Germany</a>. Our <a href="https://cur.org.au/project/tackling-food-related-single-use-plastics-in-diverse-consumption-contexts/">new research</a> will explore how single-use food-related plastics and packaging form an integral part of our daily lives, including shopping, work, cooking and storage. Sometimes new policies inadvertently disadvantage certain groups and communities, such as the aged, less mobile, people living in apartments, or low socio-economic groups. Before we roll out new policies and regulations, we need to understand the roles these materials play and the kinds of services and value they provide. We aim to develop a framework to inform policies and strategies that enable a just and inclusive transition to reduced plastic use. <h2>What about after July?</h2> Plastic Free July and similar campaigns are based on idea that making a temporary change will lead to more permanent lifestyle changes. But research shows temporary shifts are <a href="http://www.demand.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/DEMAND2016_Full_paper_42-Shove.pdf">very different</a> to <a href="https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/32468813/FULL_TEXT.PDF">structural, permanent shifts</a> in <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315816494-1/introduction-social-practices-intervention-sustainability-beyond-behaviour-change-yolande-strengers-cecily-maller?context=ubx&refId=d608abad-39f9-4bb2-8754-56e9e2000c5e">practices</a>. Supermarkets will still wrap items in plastic and sell single-use plastic, even if we try to buy less during Plastic Free July. Ultimately, the focus should be on designing effective infrastructure and policy solutions for lasting results, considering how demand for plastic is produced in the first place. Some of these changes will require a shift in community expectations and food culture. Rather than pointing the finger at consumers, let’s get to work on redesigning our cities. We need to rethink how everyday practices, manufacturing and distribution systems are structured to eliminate plastic waste.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/233436/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bhavna-middha-1061611">Bhavna Middha</a>, ARC DECRA and Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ralph-horne-160543">Ralph Horne</a>, Associate Deputy Vice Chancellor, Research & Innovation, College of Design & Social Context, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/plastic-free-july-is-a-waste-of-time-if-the-onus-is-only-on-consumers-233436">original article</a>. </div>

Home & Garden

Why prices are so high – 8 ways retail pricing algorithms gouge consumers

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-tuffley-13731">David Tuffley</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828">Griffith University</a> The just-released report of the inquiry into <a href="https://pricegouginginquiry.actu.org.au/">price gouging and unfair pricing</a> conducted by Allan Fels for the Australian Council of Trades Unions does more than identify the likely offenders. It finds the biggest are supermarkets, banks, airlines and electricity companies. It’s not enough to know their tricks. Fels wants to give the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission more power to investigate and more power to prohibit mergers. But it helps to know how they try to trick us, and how technology has enabled them to get better at it. After reading the report, I’ve identified eight key maneuvers. <h2>1. Asymmetric price movements</h2> Otherwise known as <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/25593733">Rocket and Feather</a>, this is where businesses push up prices quickly when costs rise, but cut them slowly or late after costs fall. It seems to happen for <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140988323002074">petrol</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S105905601730240X">mortgage rates</a>, and the Fels inquiry was presented with evidence suggesting it happens in supermarkets. Brendan O’Keeffe from NSW Farmers told the inquiry wholesale lamb prices had been falling for six months before six Woolworths announced a cut in the prices of lamb it was selling as a “<a href="https://pricegouginginquiry.actu.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/InquiryIntoPriceGouging_Report_web.pdf">Christmas gift</a>”. <h2>2. Punishment for loyal customers</h2> A <a href="https://theconversation.com/simple-fixes-could-help-save-australian-consumers-from-up-to-3-6-billion-in-loyalty-taxes-119978">loyalty tax</a> is what happens when a business imposes higher charges on customers who have been with it for a long time, on the assumption that they won’t move. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has alleged a big <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-qantas-might-have-done-all-australians-a-favour-by-making-refunds-so-hard-to-get-213346">insurer</a> does it, setting premiums not only on the basis of risk, but also on the basis of what a computer model tells them about the likelihood of each customer tolerating a price hike. The insurer disputes the claim. It’s often done by offering discounts or new products to new customers and leaving existing customers on old or discontinued products. It happens a lot in the <a href="https://www.finder.com.au/utilities-loyalty-costing-australians-billions-2024">electricity industry</a>. The plans look good at first, and then less good as providers bank on customers not making the effort to shop around. Loyalty taxes appear to be less common among mobile phone providers. Australian laws make it easy to switch <a href="https://www.reviews.org/au/mobile/how-to-switch-mobile-carriers-and-keep-your-number/">and keep your number</a>. <h2>3. Loyalty schemes that provide little value</h2> Fels says loyalty schemes can be a “low-cost means of retaining and exploiting consumers by providing them with low-value rewards of dubious benefit”. Their purpose is to lock in (or at least bias) customers to choices already made. Examples include airline frequent flyer points, cafe cards that give you your tenth coffee free, and supermarket points programs. The purpose is to lock in (or at least bias) consumers to products already chosen. The <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/advertising-and-promotions/customer-loyalty-schemes">Australian Competition and Consumer Commission</a> has found many require users to spend a lot of money or time to earn enough points for a reward. Others allow points to expire or rules to change without notice or offer rewards that are not worth the effort to redeem. They also enable businesses to collect data on spending habits, preferences, locations, and personal information that can be used to construct customer profiles that allow them to target advertising and offers and high prices to some customers and not others. <h2>4. Drip pricing that hides true costs</h2> The Competition and Consumer Commission describes <a href="https://pricegouginginquiry.actu.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/InquiryIntoPriceGouging_Report_web.pdf">drip pricing</a> as “when a price is advertised at the beginning of an online purchase, but then extra fees and charges (such as booking and service fees) are gradually added during the purchase process”. The extras can add up quickly and make final bills much higher than expected. Airlines are among the best-known users of the strategy. They often offer initially attractive base fares, but then add charges for baggage, seat selection, in-flight meals and other extras. <h2>5. Confusion pricing</h2> Related to drip pricing is <a href="https://www.x-mol.net/paper/article/1402386414932836352">confusion pricing</a> where a provider offers a range of plans, discounts and fees so complex they are overwhelming. Financial products like insurance have convoluted fee structures, as do electricity providers. Supermarkets do it by bombarding shoppers with “specials” and “sales”. When prices change frequently and without notice, it adds to the confusion. <h2>6. Algorithmic pricing</h2> <a href="https://pricegouginginquiry.actu.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/InquiryIntoPriceGouging_Report_web.pdf">Algorithmic pricing</a> is the practice of using algorithms to set prices automatically taking into account competitor responses, which is something akin to computers talking to each other. When computers get together in this way they can <a href="https://www.x-mol.net/paper/article/1402386414932836352">act as it they are colluding</a> even if the humans involved in running the businesses never talk to each other. It can act even more this way when multiple competitors use the same third-party pricing algorithm, effectively allowing a single company to influence prices. <h2>7. Price discrimination</h2> Price discrimination involves charging different customers different prices for the same product, setting each price in accordance with how much each customer is prepared to pay. Banks do it when they offer better rates to customers likely to leave them, electricity companies do it when they offer better prices for business customers than households, and medical specialists do it when they offer vastly different prices for the same service to consumers with different incomes. It is made easier by digital technology and data collection. While it can make prices lower for some customers, it can make prices much more expensive to customers in a hurry or in urgent need of something. <h2>8. Excuse-flation</h2> <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-09/how-excuseflation-is-keeping-prices-and-corporate-profits-high">Excuse-flation</a> is where general inflation provides “cover” for businesses to raise prices without justification, blaming nothing other than general inflation. It means that in times of general high inflation businesses can increase their prices even if their costs haven’t increased by as much. On Thursday Reserve Bank Governor <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/inflation-is-cover-for-pricing-gouging-rba-boss-says-20240215-p5f58d">Michele Bullock</a> seemed to confirm that she though some firms were doing this saying that when inflation had been brought back to the Bank’s target, it would be "much more difficult, I think, for firms to use high inflation as cover for this sort of putting up their prices." <h2>A political solution is needed</h2> Ultimately, our own vigilance won’t be enough. We will need political help. The government’s recently announced <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/review/competition-review-2023">competition review</a> might be a step in this direction. The legislative changes should police business practices and prioritise fairness. Only then can we create a marketplace where ethics and competition align, ensuring both business prosperity and consumer wellbeing. This isn’t just about economics, it’s about building a fairer, more sustainable Australia.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223310/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-tuffley-13731">David Tuffley</a>, Senior Lecturer in Applied Ethics & CyberSecurity, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828">Griffith University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-prices-are-so-high-8-ways-retail-pricing-algorithms-gouge-consumers-223310">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

The 4 biggest gift-giving mistakes, according to a consumer psychologist

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/julian-givi-1395671">Julian Givi</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/west-virginia-university-1375">West Virginia University</a> A good gift can elicit a surge of happiness and gratitude in the recipient. It also feels great to give, <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-the-point-of-holiday-gifts-173306">with psychologists finding</a> that the joy of giving a gift is more pronounced than the pleasure of receiving one. Unfortunately, there are times when you receive a gift and you have to force a smile and fake your gratitude. I’m a consumer psychologist <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wjAq_TcAAAAJ&hl=en">who specializes in gift-giving research</a> – in particular, gift-giving mistakes. Here are four of the most common ones. <h2>1. Prioritizing the big reveal</h2> One way givers can err is by focusing too much on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416656937">the moment the recipient will open the gift</a>. Givers want their gift to be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/675737">desirable</a>. They hope <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.015">to surprise</a> the recipient and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2733341">put a smile</a> on their face. A chocolate fondue fountain might meet these criteria – it’s quirky and sure to elicit curiosity and smiles from onlookers. However, when people receive a gift, they care less about the moment the bow comes off, and instead think about the weeks and months ahead. People want gifts that are <a href="https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1023703/volumes/v45/NA-45">useful</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/675737">reliable</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.015">meet their needs</a>. How often would a chocolate fondue fountain realistically be used? Compare that to a new coffee maker, which could see action every day. Sure, it isn’t a novelty – and probably won’t elicit “oohs” and “ahhs” on Christmas Day – but the recipient will be quite happy to have it on hand when their alarm rings each morning. <h2>2. Unique and new are overrated</h2> Another factor that can lead givers to go wrong involves unwritten rules for what constitutes good gift-giving practices. Givers often focus on these rules more than they should. For example, they may <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.023">avoid giving the same gift</a> to someone in back-to-back years because this goes against the norm of giving a unique gift each year. Givers also often <a href="https://doi.org/10.1348/014466604x23428">refrain from giving used products</a> as gifts because this violates the unspoken rule that a gift should be brand new. In contrast, recipients are quite open to gifts that violate these norms. If someone loves a certain type of wine, they’re <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.023">more than happy to receive it</a> in subsequent years. And if one digital camera is lightly used but possesses several innovative features, while another is new but has fewer features, people <a href="https://doi.org/10.1348/014466604x23428">are happy to receive the used one</a>. <h2>3. Being risk-averse</h2> Givers can make missteps when they avoid gifts that they see as too risky. Consider sentimental gifts, like a scrapbook or a nostalgic memento. Studies have shown that recipients <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2017.06.002">love these gifts</a>; they <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000036">elicit happiness for extended periods of time</a>. Givers, however, tend to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2017.06.002">shy away from sentimental gifts</a> because they see them risky – sure, they could be a home run, but they could also whiff. Doubts can creep into shoppers’ heads as they consider sentimental gifts: What if it comes across as sappy? What if the recipient thinks I’m being cheap? And so people tend to opt for <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S105774081730044X">safer, superficial gifts</a> that they assume will be at least somewhat well-liked. Or, to continue with the baseball analogy, givers are happy to take the sure single. As another example, consider material goods versus experiences. When giving gifts, people often opt for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucy010">tangible objects over experiences</a> because material goods are on the safer side – almost everyone could use a new appliance or a new shirt. Experiences are trickier; they require a bit more of an understanding of who the recipient truly is – not everyone loves going to see the symphony. Yet recipients tend to be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1281">more open to experiences than givers anticipate</a> – and these gifts <a href="https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1017575/volumes/v42/NA-42">are actually more likely to make people happier</a> than material goods. <h2>4. Does the thought really count?</h2> Givers can also err by wanting their gift to appear especially thoughtful. Of course, recipients appreciate thoughtfulness – but not when it comes at the expense of receiving something that’s actually useful. This plays out when givers are shopping for multiple people. They’ll often <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/674199">choose unique gifts for each recipient</a>, rather than give the same gift to everyone, because a distinct gift for each person will make them feel as though they put more time and effort into gift selection. People do this even if they realize that some recipients will be receiving less desirable gifts. You’ll also see this happen with <a href="https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1020146/volumes/v43/NA-43">gift cards</a>. Givers often choose specific gift cards – to a particular clothing store or restaurant, for example – that reflect the interests or tastes of the recipient. But recipients are more open to gift cards that give them more flexibility and freedom – think an Amazon or Visa gift card. That way, they can decide whether to splurge on a new sweater, dine out at their favorite restaurant – or do both.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/195169/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/julian-givi-1395671">Julian Givi</a>, Assistant Professor of Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/west-virginia-university-1375">West Virginia University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-4-biggest-gift-giving-mistakes-according-to-a-consumer-psychologist-195169">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

New panel places the voice of aged care consumers at the centre

The voice of aged care consumers and their families is vitally important for the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission to hear and understand. This is the message from Aged Care Quality and Safety Commissioner, Janet Anderson, as the Commission establishes its first ever Consumers and Families Panel. “People receiving aged care, and their experience of that care, are central to the Commission’s purpose - ensuring their wellbeing underpins all of our efforts,” Ms Anderson said. “They must be front and centre of everything aged care providers do, and also in the work of the Commission, placing the needs of those receiving care at the forefront at all times.” To better understand what’s important to people who use aged care services, the Commission is establishing a Consumers and Families Panel made up of people receiving Australian Government funded aged care services, their family members and representatives. The Commission wants the panel to reflect the diversity of people who access aged care across Australia. “It is very important that the panel is as diverse as the people who use Australian Government funded aged care,” Ms Anderson said. “We are inviting anyone living in residential aged care or receiving home care or using Commonwealth- funded aged care services in the community to share their ideas and opinions with us. We’re also interested in hearing from family members and carers of aged care recipients, and people who are considering using aged care services within the next 12 months.” The Consumers and Families Panel will help the Commission, as the national aged care regulator, in its work overseeing the quality of aged care services and resolving complaints about these services. “It will improve the way we regulate aged care services and resolve complaints and help make sure that the information we produce is fit for purpose and easy to understand for everyone,” Ms Anderson said. The Commission will invite panel members to share their ideas and opinions about things such as: <ul> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> issues that are of most concern to people receiving care that the Commission should know about </li> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> how the Commission can reach people better </li> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> how people can be better supported to interact with the Commission </li> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> videos or other resources prepared by the Commission. </li> </ul> Panel members will be able to provide input and engage in different ways, including by email or telephone, or by taking part in online or in-person meetings. The CEO of the Older Persons Advocacy Network (OPAN), Craig Gear OAM, welcomes the Commission’s new Consumers and Families Panel. “Older people must be consulted at every step of the aged care journey to ensure their rights, needs and preferences are being met,” Mr Gear said. “The Consumers and Families Panel will enable older people and their families to better engage with, and inform, the aged care regulator. Their lived experience is critical to ensuring all older people receive the care and services they deserve.” People wishing to be part of the Commission’s Consumers and Families Panel can register their interest via the Commission’s website at: <a href="http://www.agedcarequality.gov.au/consumer-panel" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.agedcarequality.gov.au/consumer-panel</a> or call the Commission on 1800 951 822. For more information about the Commission and its work, please visit the Commission’s website at: <a href="http://www.agedcarequality.gov.au" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.agedcarequality.gov.au</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Retirement Life

ACCC says consumers need more choices about what online marketplaces are doing with their data

Consumers using online retail marketplaces such as eBay and Amazon “have little effective choice in the amount of data they share”, according to the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/serial-publications/digital-platform-services-inquiry-2020-2025/digital-platform-services-inquiry-march-2022-interim-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">latest report</a> of the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) Digital Platform Services Inquiry. Consumers may benefit from personalisation and recommendations in these marketplaces based on their data, but many are in the dark about how much personal information these companies collect and share for other purposes. <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/concerning-issues-for-consumers-and-sellers-on-online-marketplaces" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb</a> said: <blockquote> We believe consumers should be given more information about, and control over, how online marketplaces collect and use their data. </blockquote> The report reiterates the ACCC’s earlier calls for amendments to the Australian Consumer Law to address unfair data terms and practices. It also points out that the government is considering <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/integrity/consultations/review-privacy-act-1988" target="_blank" rel="noopener">proposals for major changes to privacy law</a>. However, none of these proposals is likely to come into effect in the near future. In the meantime, we should also consider whether practices such as obtaining information about users from third-party data brokers are fully compliant with existing privacy law. Why did the ACCC examine online marketplaces? The ACCC examined competition and consumer issues associated with “general online retail marketplaces” as part of its <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/inquiries-ongoing/digital-platform-services-inquiry-2020-2025" target="_blank" rel="noopener">five-year Digital Platform Services Inquiry</a>. These marketplaces facilitate transactions between third-party sellers and consumers on a common platform. They do not include retailers that don’t operate marketplaces, such as Kmart, or platforms such as Gumtree that carry classified ads but don’t allow transactions. The ACCC report focuses on the four largest online marketplaces in Australia: Amazon Australia, Catch, eBay Australia and Kogan. In 2020–21, these four carried sales totalling $8.4 billion. <figure class="align-center "><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460716/original/file-20220502-18-4pvx0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /><figcaption>Online marketplaces such as Amazon, eBay, Catch and Kogan facilitate transactions between third-party buyers and sellers. <a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/new-york-usa-november-1-2018-1219079038" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Shutterstock</a></figcaption></figure> According to the report, eBay has the largest sales of these companies. Amazon Australia is the second-largest and the fastest-growing, with an 87% increase in sales over the past two years. The ACCC examined: <ul> <li>the state of competition in the relevant markets</li> <li>issues facing sellers who depend on selling their products through these marketplaces</li> <li>consumer issues including concerns about personal information collection, use and sharing.</li> </ul> Consumers don’t want their data used for other purposes The ACCC expressed concern that in online marketplaces, “the extent of data collection, use and disclosure … often does not align with consumer preferences”. The Commission pointed to surveys about <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Consumer%20Policy%20Research%20Centre%20%28CPRC%29%20%2818%20August%202021%29.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Australian consumer attitudes to privacy</a> which indicate: <ul> <li>94% did not feel comfortable with how digital platforms including online marketplaces collect their personal information</li> <li>92% agreed that companies should only collect information they need for providing their product or service</li> <li>60% considered it very or somewhat unacceptable for their online behaviour to be monitored for targeted ads and offers.</li> </ul> However, the four online marketplaces analysed: <ul> <li>do not proactively present privacy terms to consumers “throughout the purchasing journey”</li> <li>may allow advertisers or other third parties to place tracking cookies on users’ devices</li> <li>do not clearly identify how consumers can opt out of cookies while still using the marketplace.</li> </ul> Some of the marketplaces also obtain extra data about individuals from third-party data brokers or advertisers. The <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3432769" target="_blank" rel="noopener">harms from increased tracking and profiling</a> of consumers include decreased privacy; manipulation based on detailed profiling of traits and weaknesses; and discrimination or exclusion from opportunities. Limited choices: you can’t just ‘walk out of a store’ Some might argue that consumers must not actually care that much about privacy if they keep using these companies, but the choice is not so simple. The ACCC notes the relevant privacy terms are often spread across multiple web pages and offered on a “take it or leave it” basis. The terms also use “bundled consents”. This means that agreeing to the company using your data to fill your order, for example, may be bundled together with agreeing for the company to use your data for its separate advertising business. Further, as my research has shown, there is <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3905693" target="_blank" rel="noopener">so little competition on privacy</a> between these marketplaces that consumers can’t just find a better offer. The ACCC agrees: <blockquote> While consumers in Australia can choose between a number of online marketplaces, the common approaches and practices of the major online marketplaces to data collection and use mean that consumers have little effective choice in the amount of data they share. </blockquote> Consumers also seem unable to require these companies to delete their data. The situation is quite different from conventional retail interactions where a consumer can select “unsubscribe” or walk out of a store. Does our privacy law currently permit all these practices? The ACCC has reiterated its earlier calls to amend the Australian Consumer Law to prohibit unfair practices and make unfair contract terms illegal. (At present unfair contract terms are just void, or unenforceable.) The report also points out that the government is considering proposals for major changes to privacy law, but <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-proposed-privacy-code-promises-tough-rules-and-10-million-penalties-for-tech-giants-170711" target="_blank" rel="noopener">these changes</a> are uncertain and may take more than a year to come into effect. In the meantime, we should look more closely at the practices of these marketplaces under current privacy law. For example, under the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2004A03712" target="_blank" rel="noopener">federal Privacy Act</a> the four marketplaces <blockquote> must collect personal information about an individual only from the individual unless … it is unreasonable or impracticable to do so. </blockquote> However, <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3905693" target="_blank" rel="noopener">some online marketplaces</a> say they collect information about individual consumers’ interests and demographics from “<a href="https://www.ebay.com.au/help/policies/member-behaviour-policies/user-privacy-notice-privacy-policy?id=4260&mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=705-53470-19255-0&campid=5338596835&customid=&toolid=10001#section4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">data providers</a>” and <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=202075050&ref_=footer_iba" target="_blank" rel="noopener">other third parties</a>. We don’t know the full detail of what’s collected, but demographic information might include our age range, income, or family details. How is it “unreasonable or impracticable” to obtain information about our demographics and interests directly from us? Consumers could ask online marketplaces this question, and complain to the <a href="https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-complaints" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Office of the Australian Information Commissioner</a> if there is no reasonable answer.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182134/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/katharine-kemp-402096" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Katharine Kemp</a>, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414" target="_blank" rel="noopener">UNSW Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/accc-says-consumers-need-more-choices-about-what-online-marketplaces-are-doing-with-their-data-182134" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: Getty Images

Technology

New food database to help consumers understand nutrition

A new food data base to help consumers understand the nutritional value of food they eat is currently in the works and will simplify understanding the nutritional value behind foods we love to eat. Do we really know and understand what is healthy and what isn’t when filling up the cart during your weekly shop? Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has begun developing a database to help consumers understand the nutritional value of the food they consume. FSANZ General Manager of Science and Risk Assessment, Christel Leemhuis, says the new Branded Food Database will work alongside the Health Star Rating system (HSR) and was requested by the department of Health. "It will allow us to track changes in the nutrient profile of foods over time, the database is targeted at providing a reliable source of information for modelling any future HSR changes." Consumers will be able to access the database online by entering a barcode to see the product’s health information. No scanning app will be available as of yet, but FSANZ hoped to add this consumer friendly feature to the database in time. Despite FSANZ's goal to include 85 per cent of food products available in Australia by 2023, it was up to food producers to opt-in, Ms Leemhuis said. "But by providing information to the database manufactures and retailers will contribute to industry transparency," she said. "We will compare that to our existing food composition databases, so that will allow us to identify if there are any products with a nutrient profile that doesn't look quite right [if we suspect a company is supplying inaccurate information]." Recent changes to the HSR system that prioritise sugar content as an assessment criteria have received harsh criticism from those who grow fruit, as juices are now ranked below diet soft drinks in terms of high sugar content. Agriculture Minister David Littleproud had also previously dubbed the labelling process as “madness” due to the emphasis on sugar content. Ms Leemhuis promises the new database will provide a more thorough breakdown of food’s nutrients.

Food & Wine

New food database to help consumers understand nutrition

Image: Shutterstock A new food data base to help consumers understand the nutritional value of food they eat is currently in the works and will simplify understanding the nutritional value behind foods we love to eat. Do we really know and understand what is healthy and what isn’t when filling up the cart during your weekly shop? Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has begun developing a database to help consumers understand the nutritional value of the food they consume. FSANZ General Manager of Science and Risk Assessment, Christel Leemhuis, says the new Branded Food Database will work alongside the Health Star Rating system (HSR) and was requested by the department of Health. "It will allow us to track changes in the nutrient profile of foods over time, the database is targeted at providing a reliable source of information for modelling any future HSR changes." Consumers will be able to access the database online by entering a barcode to see the product’s health information. No scanning app will be available as of yet, but FSANZ hoped to add this consumer friendly feature to the database in time. Despite FSANZ's goal to include 85 per cent of food products available in Australia by 2023, it was up to food producers to opt-in, Ms Leemhuis said. "But by providing information to the database manufactures and retailers will contribute to industry transparency," she said. "We will compare that to our existing food composition databases, so that will allow us to identify if there are any products with a nutrient profile that doesn't look quite right [if we suspect a company is supplying inaccurate information]." Recent changes to the HSR system that prioritise sugar content as an assessment criteria have received harsh criticism from those who grow fruit, as juices are now ranked below diet soft drinks in terms of high sugar content. Agriculture Minister David Littleproud had also previously dubbed the labelling process as “madness” due to the emphasis on sugar content. Ms Leemhuis promises the new database will provide a more thorough breakdown of food’s nutrients.

Food & Wine

“Unacceptable”: Consumers rage as they’re left without phone or internet for days on end

Aussie users are fed up with the lack of service on their phones and internet services and have flooded Australia’s telco providers with nearly half a million complaints over just three months. The data was found in a new report done by the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s <a href="https://acma.gov.au/theACMA/telecommunications-complaints-handling">Telecommunications complaints handling report</a>. Telecommunications companies received 448,470 complaints between October and December last year. That number represents a 12.7 per cent increase in the amount of complaints made to telcos compared to the previous three months. The average time it took for telcos to resolve complaints ranged from one to 13 days, with an average time of six days, ACMA said. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) described the figures as disappointing. “When people buy a product or service, they rightly expect it to work as promised,” ACCAN chief executive Teresa Corbin said to <a href="https://thenewdaily.com.au/life/tech/2019/07/10/telco-consumer-complaints/">The New Daily</a>. “It’s simply unacceptable for the millions of Australians who are connected to essential communications services to be left waiting for days on end without the service they have paid for. “Consumers should have a right to reliability.” RMIT university professor in network engineering Mark Gregory said that the figures show that Aussie consumers are being let down. “The number of faults and service interruptions experienced by Australian consumers remains far higher than what is reasonable and reflects the need for the telecommunications industry to do more to provide consumers with an improved experience,” Dr Gregory said. Many complaints tend to be related to the NBN. Dr Gregory said that the government’s “failure” to roll out fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) is “costing consumers more and this operations and maintenance cost is expected to grow over time, making FTTP a far cheaper and more reliable technology in the short term,” Dr Gregory said. However, a spokesman for the NBN said that the firm has made “significant investments to work with the telco industry to improve customer experience and we are starting to see the early signs of that”. “But we are quickly learning how to improve our processes and customer experience, as acknowledged in the ACMA report which noted the rate of FTTC complaints over the September to December quarters fell 33 per cent”.

Technology

5G health risks: Should consumers be worried?

Scientists are working hard to quash the rumours of ill-effects to your health that could be linked to the rollout of 5G technology. Potential health effects from 5G technology range from cancers to “allergies”. These are based around radiofrequency electromagnetic energy, which is how mobile phones send and receive information. Dr Ken Karipidis from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency told journalists that the fear “doesn’t hold weight”. “(Millimetre waves) don’t travel very far, so because of that there’s going to be a lot more base stations around and I think that’s one of the reasons why a lot of people are worried,” Dr Karipidis explained to <a href="https://thenewdaily.com.au/life/tech/2019/07/16/5g-network-health-risks/">The New Daily</a>. “There is going to be a lot of infrastructure that’s near their house, for example.” Millimetre waves are already used in technology that has been around for sometime, with no proven health effects in the long or short term. Dr Sarah Loughran said that there is a misunderstanding around 5G technology. As it runs at a higher frequency, people assumes it also emits higher energy levels. “While there will be more antennas and infrastructure needed to run the 5G network, it will run at a lower power level, and therefore its energy will not penetrate as deeply into the body as older technology,” Dr Loughran said, who is at the Australian Centre for Electromagnetic Bioeffects Research out of the University of Wollongong. One thing the two doctors agreed on was that any energy penetration into a human body will only be skin deep. Dr Karipidis was involved in an Australian study that sought to compare any increase in brain tumour incidences over the past 30 years with the growing popularity of mobile phones. Dr Karipidis and his team found that there was no increase in brain tumour rates during this period as well as finding no link in the long or short-term between radiowaves and cancer. “There are some people who believe they are sensitive to, or ‘allergic’, to electromagnetic energy,” Dr Loughan said. “This is actually a self-diagnosis … with no medical or scientific evidence,” she said. The 5G network has begun to be switched on in test sites around the country with a full complete roll out sometime next year.

Technology

What consumers need to know about Facebook’s new cryptocurrency

Cryptocurrencies have become a global phenomenon in the past few years. Now Facebook is launching it’s own cryptocurrency, in association with Visa, MasterCard, Uber and others. The stated aim of <a href="https://libra.org/en-US/">Libra</a> is to “enable a simple global currency and financial infrastructure that empowers billions of people”. The announcement has sparked fears that Libra could be <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebooks-libra-plan-talk-of-the-demise-of-central-banks-is-greatly-exaggerated-119165">a threat to traditional banks</a>, warnings to be <a href="https://theconversation.com/libra-four-reasons-to-be-extremely-cautious-about-facebooks-new-currency-119123">cautious</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebook-claims-libra-offers-economic-empowerment-to-billions-an-economist-is-skeptical-118982">sceptical commentary</a> of claims that it will help developing countries. But let’s go back to the basics and look at what Libra is, how it compares to other cryptocurrencies and whether you should be concerned about using it when it eventually arrives. What is a cryptocurrency? Currency is a system of money that is commonly used in exchange for goods and services and, as a result, holds value. Cryptocurrencies are digital currencies that are secured using cryptography. The more popular recent cryptocurrencies are based on blockchain technology which uses a cryptographic structure that is difficult to change. One of the key properties of this structure is a distributed ledger that keeps account of financial transactions, which anyone can access. What is Libra? Libra is a new currency that is being proposed by Facebook. It’s considered a cryptocurrency because cryptography will be used to help protect the value of the currency from tampering – such as double spending – and to protect the payment process. Libra has the potential to become successful because of the backing from the <a href="https://libra.org/en-US/association-council-principles/#overview">Libra Association</a>, which is made up of large international corporations such as Facebook, Uber and Vodafone. MasterCard and Visa have also thrown their hats in the ring, but no traditional banks are on the list. What’s different about Libra compared with other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin? Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum are quite egalitarian in nature. That’s because there is no single authority that verifies transactions between parties, so anyone could potentially do it. To authorise a Bitcoin transaction you would have to prove that you have done the work, known as a “<a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work">proof of work</a>”. For Bitcoin, the proof of work is to solve a mathematical puzzle. People who successfully solve the puzzle (proving they have done some work), can add transactions to the blockchain distributed ledger and are rewarded with Bitcoins. The process is known as mining. The good thing about this is that it reduces fraud. Since anyone can potentially mine Bitcoins, it’s harder to collude as you wouldn’t know who the next person to mine a coin would be. And it’s simple to verify that the person is authorised because anyone can check that the puzzle has been solved correctly. Based on the <a href="https://mashable.com/article/facebook-libra-deep-dive/">initial descriptions of the currency</a>, it sounds like the difference with Libra is that it will verify transactions using a consensus system known as “<a href="https://blockgeeks.com/guides/proof-of-work-vs-proof-of-stake/">proof of stake</a>”, or a variation of this method. Under this system, transactions would be authorised by a group of people who have a stake or ownership in the currency. This makes it easier to predict who the next person to authorise a transaction might be (since there are a relatively small number of authorising group members), and then collude to launder funds without other group members knowing. It <a href="https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/06/18/how-to-become-a-founding-member-of-the-libra-association/">appears</a> the criteria to become a founding member of the Libra Association is to contribute a minimum of US$10 million entrance fee, have a large amount of money in the bank and be able to influence a large number of people. What are banks and regulators worried about? Cryptocurrencies affect governments and tax systems since they have little to no transaction costs when money is transferred across borders. So while the low transaction costs would be good for everyday users, the advent of a new cryptocurrency with a potentially very large user base has governments and traditional banks very concerned. While Libra is open source – meaning the source code is available for all to view, use and modify – it’s the members of the association who will be overseeing the currency. Libra could herald a shift away from traditional government taxes and banking fees to a new international monetary system controlled by corporate entities like Facebook and Uber. That’s a concern because of the lack of oversight from regulatory bodies. What should everyday people expect from Libra? The backing of software giants means it’s likely that the user interface for Libra coins would be smooth and simple to use. Low transaction costs would benefit users and the Libra Association promises to control the value of the currency so that it does not fluctuate as much as other cryptocurrencies. It’s unclear how they plan to do this. But value stability would be a great advantage in times of uncertainty. What are the risks? The everyday consumer probably wouldn’t know the difference between the “proof of work” and the “proof of stake” mechanisms. But since Facebook has a large database of users that are known to use Libra, it may be able to link Libra transactions to individuals. This could be a privacy concern. (Bitcoin transactions are anonymous because account numbers used in Bitcoin transactions are not linked to an individual’s identity.) Recent cybersecurity <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/australians-private-details-exposed-in-attack-on-westpac-s-payid-20190603-p51u2u.html">breaches</a> have contributed to a growing awareness of the vulnerabilities of IT systems. As with all software, the Libra implementation and management could be vulnerable to attack, which in turn could mean users could lose their money. But that is a risk that all cryptocurrency users face, whether they are aware of it or not. What steps could consumers take to protect themselves? No matter what cryptocurrency you choose to use, your funds are still accessible through the same interfaces: a web page or a mobile app. And the way you control access to your personal funds is by authenticating with a password. Make sure you keep your password safe by making sure it is complicated and hard to guess. Look for applications that allow you to use two-factor authentication and make sure it’s turned on. Libra is yet to prove its claims of making financial transactions safe and convenient. Only time will tell if its uptake will become widespread following its expected launch next year. Written by Ernest Foo. Republished with permission of <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/the-lowdown-on-libra-what-consumers-need-to-know-about-facebooks-new-cryptocurrency-119391" target="_blank">The Conversation.</a>

Money & Banking

Consumers in shock: Iconic Aussie brand shunned by Woolworths

Woolworths has removed the much-loved brand of Uncle Tobys from its shelves amid rumours of a price increase that the supermarket giant wasn’t willing to pay. In a <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.nestle.com.au/media/newsandfeatures/breakfast-cereal-price-increases" target="_blank">media release</a> from Nestle, who own Uncle Tobys, the price increase is due to the drought affecting their farmers in Victoria. pHowever, experts have warned that fresh food including fruit and vegetables could be next. The National Retail Association chief executive Dominique Lamb has suggested similar cost pressures and explained to <a rel="noopener" href="https://7plus.com.au/weekend-sunrise" target="_blank">Weekend Sunrise</a> that suppliers are under a huge amount of pressure as costs continue to rise. “We know a lot of businesses are finding it difficult with increases in utilities prices. “Also with the cost of labour ... all businesses are going through these things so I think we will see this continue from time to time.” Ms Lamb also explained her thoughts as to what will happen to the fresh food market. “I think it will happen ... but hopefully everyone can maintain their relationships, because as consumers we will all suffer. <img style="width: 0px; height: 0px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7825665/uncle-tobys.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/617e0760d1e3484693479389e45a0ca4" /> “It is the consumer who bears the difficulties around this where they can't get their product if there are big price hikes.” Nestle spokeswoman Margaret Stuart confirmed that the supplier had encountered issues with Woolworths. Stuart told <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6894909/Uncle-Tobys-beloved-oat-brands-disappear-Woolworths-shelves.html" target="_blank">The Daily Mail</a>: “We have a supply issue with Woolworths which we’re both working hard to resolve to make sure that our breakfast cereal products are available again there soon.” Stuart also mentioned that the supply issue hasn’t impacted Coles. “We can confirm that Uncle Tobys and Nestlé breakfast cereals are available at Coles.” Have you noticed this cereal disappearing from Woolworths? Let us know in the comments.

Food & Wine

Popular travel company misleading consumers by falsely claiming to offer “best prices”

Hotel comparison site Trivago has been accused of misleading customers by falsely claiming to offer the “best price” when the website is instead favouring businesses who pay the most. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has taken the company to Federal Court, saying that the travel website has been prioritising advertisers who are paying the highest per click. ACCC chairman Rod Sims told the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/">ABC</a> that Trivago’s advertising claims to offer the best priced-hotels on its site, which he says is “deliberately designed” to be misleading. Mr Sims said Trivago gave “the impression they're there to help consumers when in fact they're there to help suppliers who pay them the most money”. “We looked at Trivago algorithm and formed the view that it was misleading in terms of the way it presented options to consumers,” he said. The ACCC started an investigation into the company after they received complaints from hotel operators who said their prices were cheaper, yet they were not being prioritised on the website. Mr Sims said Trivago’s prices were often misleading because they compared the cost of a ‘luxury’ room with a ‘basic’ room. “By not making genuine room price comparisons, consumers would likely have paid more than they otherwise would have for the same hotel. Further, hotels may have lost potential business as a result of this alleged conduct,” he said. Speaking with the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au">Sydney Morning Herald</a>, Mr Sims said Trivago was focused on servicing the needs of suppliers, rather than those of consumers. “We would allege it's all to do with Trivago making their site look more attractive to the suppliers. Not the consumers, the suppliers,” Mr Sims said. “(The hotels were) looking at the fact that they figured they had the best price, but they could see that advertiser payments had the dominant role in the search.” Trivago’s ads an on TV from 2013 until April this year and claimed that the website had the “best price” for hotel rooms. A spokesman for Trivago said the company would be “vigorously” defending the allegations and was “disappointed by the action the ACCC had chosen to take”. “We agree with the ACCC's earlier public statement that 'comparator websites can assist consumers to make more informed purchasing decisions when comparing what are often quite complex products, and can promote healthy competition by assisting small or new service providers to compete more effectively,” he said. “Our priority is to enable Australian travellers to find their ideal hotel.” Do you use Trivago? Let us know in the comments below.

Travel Tips

Popular travel company misleading consumers by falsely claiming to offer “best prices”

Travel Tips

Popular travel company misleading consumers by falsely claiming to offer “best prices”

Travel Tips

The new scheme ripping off consumers

Consumers are being ripped off by as much as $100 million under the government’s new cash-for-cans recycling scheme. <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/consumers-ripped-off-as-much-as-100m-in-cashforcans-recycling-scheme/news-story/947181f80d3bf86a16ce3c1b16ad62ed" target="_blank">The Daily Telegraph</a> has reported that in the first 10 weeks of the recycling scheme, just $8.3 million has been returned to customers in container refunds. This is despite the public being forced to pay up to $110 million in higher beverage prices by suppliers who started including the cost of recycling once the scheme started. This is not the first shortcoming the scheme has encountered, as when it started on December 1, only half of the promised bottle and can return points were ready. Under the new scheme, shoppers are paying up to $4 extra for a carton of beer or soft drink and can be refunded 10c per bottle if they find a recycling collection point. Since December 83 million cans and bottles have been returned, which is less than 10 per cent of eligible containers sold. Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton said the “scheme was never designed to capture all the drink containers purchased in NSW". She said the number of drink containers returned at the beginning of the scheme was an estimate and that it would become more predictable later. Ms Upton also said the scheme’s co-ordinator Exchange for Change, which collects the money, are “tightly controlled” and there was “no scope for profiteering”. Opposition environment spokeswoman Penny Sharpe said the scheme was impacting families. “The Minister’s bungling of this scheme has hit the hip pocket of every consumer in NSW,” she said. Many families are paying up to $30 a week more for drinks but struggling to get refunds.

Retirement Income

Revealed: The winners of Australia's top consumer product awards

Australia’s top consumer products have been revealed, with <a href="https://www.productreview.com.au/i/awards" target="_blank">Productreview.com.au</a> releasing its annual list of winners across appliances, services, electronics and more. Data and editorial experts have mulled over more than 110,000 reviews over the last 12 months to determine which products performed the best across a range of categories. To be eligible, the product or service must be: <ul> <li>Listed in a selection of the most popular categories on ProductReview.com.au,</li> <li>Full retail availability to the Australian public for most of 2017,</li> <li>A minimum Star Score of 4.1 stars on 31st October 2017, and</li> <li>8 or more approved reviews written and approved between November 1st 2016 to October 31st 2017.</li> </ul> So, which products came out on top? We provided a rundown of the top performers in a few of the more interesting categories in the gallery above. What are your thoughts? Think you’ll go with any of these products?

Home & Garden

Nurofen settles for $3.5 million after misleading consumers over pain relief

The manufacturers of pain relief drug Nurofen will pay $3.5 million compensation to consumers after a class action against their “misleading” Specific Pain Range packaging. The company said in a statement it had made an offer to settle. “Nurofen has offered to settle the Specific Pain Range class action in Australia to ensure that consumers who may have been misled are appropriately and swiftly compensated,” a spokeswoman said. “It was never our intention to mislead, but we recognise that we could have done more to assist our consumers in navigating the Nurofen Specific Pain Range in Australia.” “We have taken the Nurofen Specific Pain Range cases seriously, and have taken steps to ensure that future marketing campaigns are sensitive to the risk of misinterpretation and confusion, while providing consumers with an informed choice.” Law firm Bannister Law, which brought the class action, said Nurofen maker Reckitt Benckiser Australia had agreed to a settlement of $3.5 million. The money will go into a fund to be administered by an independent third party, and distributed eligible group members. “We anticipate Settlement Notices will soon be published in newspapers in every Australian state, calling for consumers who purchased the Nurofen Specific Pain Range products between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2015 to come forward and register their claim for compensation from the settlement fund,” the law firm said in a statement. The original class action was brought against Reckitt Benckiser for misleading and deceiving customers by claiming the “Specific Pain Range” was specially formulated to treat separate ailments. “However, each product contained the same active ingredient and could not specifically treat one pain as opposed to another,” the claim said. Bannister Law’s founder and Principal Charles Bannister said the advertising “exploited” customers who were “duped” into paying more for basic products. “None of these costly tablets actually targeted these specific pain symptoms. Australians have a right to feel duped by the deceptive marketing and selling of these expensive pain tablets which were sold at a premium price,” he said.

Legal

Consumer NZ advises drivers to challenge parking tickets

Anyone given a parking ticket they think is unreasonable should "duke it out" with parking companies, the head of Consumer NZ says. Speaking after Wilson Parking admitted handing out <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/95035738" target="_blank">two tickets to a campervan in a free Wellington car park</a>, Sue Chetwin said the cost of any breach notice had to be reasonable, and people should always challenge them. "We say people should only pay what they think is reasonable, and let them chase you for the rest. Keep duking it out with them." A Wilson spokeswoman said the notices given to Shane Leach for parking in a free lot off Karo Dr in central Wellington were issued accidentally, and it was a human mistake. "The matter has been addressed and the notices cancelled." The company had not ticketed vehicles in any other Wellington city car parks it did not own. "However, there was one other incident in Kapiti Coast. All five breach notices were cancelled, and the oversight was addressed with the issuing officer." Chetwin, the chief executive of Consumer NZ, said on Tuesday that people ticketed by parking companies should contest the charges. "They consider them as fines, as if there's some authority over it. Car parking companies have no legal authority to impose fines." Notices were enforceable, but the charges were debatable, and the cost had to be "reasonable". "If the parking costs $3 an hour, then it's unreasonable to be charged $65 for being a few minutes late." Many companies charge a $65 flat rate for anyone who parks longer than they have paid for. Wilson said the company did not issue fines or infringements for damages, but sought to recover the cost of patrolling and checking parks for compliance. "You will be surprised to learn that 50 per cent of breaches issued are for 'parkers' who have made no attempt to pay any part of the parking fee. "Due to this, Wilson has to monitor its car parks to prevent and minimise revenue loss. "Patrolling car parks is a very manual process performed by licensed and trained security officers. Most require vehicles and specialised monitoring and safety equipment." Written by Virginia Fallon. First appeared on <a href="http://Stuff.co.nz" target="_blank">Stuff.co.nz</a>.

Money & Banking

Shocking amount of calories we consume during a flight revealed

Nobody looks forward to eating airline food. It doesn’t look good and it rarely tastes good either. But now there’s another reason to dislike in-flight meals. A new book has revealed just how many calories we consume during a flight – and we’re shocked by just how high the number is. Although we were under no illusions that the food was healthy, apparently the average passenger consumes 3400 calories during a flight. Oxford University Professor Charles Spence, who wrote Gastrophysics: The New Science of Eating, said many of those calories come from alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks, but approximately 1900 of those calories are in the food. So how does a tiny tray of food pack so many calories in it? Professor Spence said that as our sense of taste is diminished in high altitudes, a lot of sugar and salt is added to airline food to boost flavours. “Loud engine sounds and other kinds of background noise will suppress sweet and salty,” he told news.com.au. “Because sound suppresses sweetness perception, you have to add about 15 to 20 per cent more sugar to the foods we eat while in the air to give the same taste perception.” Passengers also tend to overeat during flight, said Professor Spence. “One thing might be the stress that many of us feel while in the air,” he said. “When we’re stressed we tend to eat more.”

Travel Tips

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Walking or running: for the same distance, which consumes more energy?

Plastic Free July is a waste of time if the onus is only on consumers

Why prices are so high – 8 ways retail pricing algorithms gouge consumers

The 4 biggest gift-giving mistakes, according to a consumer psychologist

New panel places the voice of aged care consumers at the centre

ACCC says consumers need more choices about what online marketplaces are doing with their data

New food database to help consumers understand nutrition

New food database to help consumers understand nutrition

“Unacceptable”: Consumers rage as they’re left without phone or internet for days on end

5G health risks: Should consumers be worried?

What consumers need to know about Facebook’s new cryptocurrency

Consumers in shock: Iconic Aussie brand shunned by Woolworths

Popular travel company misleading consumers by falsely claiming to offer “best prices”

Popular travel company misleading consumers by falsely claiming to offer “best prices”

Popular travel company misleading consumers by falsely claiming to offer “best prices”

The new scheme ripping off consumers

Revealed: The winners of Australia's top consumer product awards

Nurofen settles for $3.5 million after misleading consumers over pain relief

Consumer NZ advises drivers to challenge parking tickets

Shocking amount of calories we consume during a flight revealed

Our Partners