Tag: new study

One simple step can boost garden butterfly numbers by up to 93%, new study reveals

  • New six-year study proves that leaving areas of grass to grow long in gardens can increase butterfly numbers by up to 93%
  • This the first scientific evidence that wildlife-friendly gardening practices, such as having long grass and flowering ivy, boost the numbers and types of butterflies, particularly in urban areas and near farmland
  • The research is great news for gardeners and non-gardeners alike, proving the free and easy action of letting an area go wild can make a positive impact for butterflies

Letting parts of your garden grow wild with long grass can increase butterfly numbers by up to 93% and attract a wider range of species, according to new research from leading wildlife charity Butterfly Conservation.

The study, published in the journal Science of the Total Environment, provides the first scientific evidence that having long grass in your garden increases butterfly abundance and diversity. Creating such wild spaces may help to reverse the decline of these beautiful insects.

Undertaken by Butterfly Conservation scientists Dr Lisbeth Hordley and Dr Richard Fox, the research analysed butterfly sightings from more than 600 gardens across the UK, collected by members of the public over six years through the charity’s Garden Butterfly Survey.

The results show that gardens with long grass had a significantly higher number of butterflies recorded, with a greater variety of species, than those without.

Importantly, the biggest benefits of these wild spaces were found in urban areas and intensively farmed landscapes. In highly arable areas, gardens with long grass saw up to 93% more butterflies, and those in urban areas showed an increase of 18%.

The potential to provide wild spaces for butterflies and moths to thrive is huge. Gardens make up more than 728,000 hectares in Great Britain – the equivalent of over a million football pitches.

If each of these gardens had a space that was allowed to go a little wild, with grass growing long, it would make a huge difference for butterflies and moths, providing spaces for them to feed, breed and shelter.

While the research specifically studied gardens, the benefits to butterflies of long grass and wild spaces are likely to extend beyond the garden gate. Public green spaces such as parks, school grounds, allotments, and road verges, could also provide vital spaces for wildlife, and enable more people to see more butterflies if allowed to go a little wild.

Dr Richard Fox, Head of Science at Butterfly Conservation and co-author of the study, said: “Nature is in crisis; 80% of butterflies have declined since the 1970s, so we need to take action now to protect them.

“We wanted to be able to give tried and tested gardening advice that will benefit butterflies as we know lots of people want to help. This study proves, for the first time, that allowing a patch of grass to grow long will attract more butterflies into your garden.”

The study also found that the presence of flowering ivy in gardens increased the number of certain butterfly species, such as the Holly Blue, Red Admiral and Comma, which use ivy as a breeding habitat or nectar source.

Butterfly Conservation is calling for everyone to create their own Wild Space, no matter how big or small, to help butterflies survive and thrive. Through its Wild Spaces programme, the charity aims to transform 100,000 areas across the UK to help support butterfly populations.

Dr Fox added: “The simple act of creating wild spaces by allowing a patch of grass to grow long, or a border edge to go wild is free and easy to do, and can significantly boost butterfly numbers, especially in urban and agricultural settings where they are most under pressure. The benefits of each individual wild space are small, but if thousands of people get involved the boost to butterflies could be huge.

“Whether you have a large garden, a small patch of grass, a community or school space, or a balcony or window box, anyone, anywhere can help. We hope that our Wild Spaces programme will inspire people across the UK to take action and help to create a national network of butterfly-friendly habitats.”

Wild Spaces can be created by anyone, anywhere – from gardens to shared community spaces, balconies, terraces, or patios. No matter the size or location, every Wild Space can contribute to the recovery of butterfly populations and support biodiversity.

To create your own Wild Space visit www.wild-spaces.co.uk

EMBARGOED_-Hordley-Fox-Gardening-for-butterflies-For-media-reference-onlyDownload

Theft and violence costing retailers hundreds of thousands of pounds per year

Shopkeepers step up measures to combat rising crime

  • Almost three-quarters of retailers surveyed have suffered from crime in the last 12 months
  • Crime costing retailers nearly £60,000 per year on average – with some losing more than £500,000
  • Retailers forced to adopt protective measures like bodycams, panic alarms and self-defence training
  • British Retail Consortium says ‘scourge in retail crime must be stamped out’
  • NFU Mutual issues key prevent and protect advice

New figures lay bare the true cost of crime to the UK’s high-street, as retailers look to take desperate measures in the face of an alarming rise in theft and violence.

The research* from commercial insurer NFU Mutual shows that nearly three-quarters of retailers (74%) surveyed have suffered from crime over the past 12 months – costing shops an average of almost £60,000 in that time. Shockingly, NFU Mutual found that one in 20 retailers had lost half a million pounds to crime over the same time period.

In a bid to try and combat the costly and widespread issue, almost two-thirds of retailers say they have had to take security measures in the last year alone. That includes a variety of physical and technological protection, with a quarter employing full-time security and 66% installing CCTV.

Some businesses have resorted to more drastic measures to protect staff, with 32% training employees on safety and self-defence, and just shy of a quarter giving staff both bodycams (24%) and nearly as many giving staff panic alarms on their person and on counters (23%).

The rise in crime is felt beyond monetary loss alone, with more than a third of retailers (37%) saying it’s impacted their mental health and three in 10 admitting they live in fear of theft or violence on their store.

Zoe Knight, Head of Commercial at NFU Mutual, said: “Our study shows a worrying number of our retailers are falling victim to crime, which continues to plague our shops, and more than eight in 10 (81%) believe it has increased in the last year.

“With retailers on average suffering losses of around £60,000 a year as a result of theft, the results of this survey will concern the industry.

“And the impact of this ongoing crime wave clearly extends way beyond a cost perspective, with a worrying number saying incidents have had a negative impact on their mental health and others constantly living in fear they will be targeted.

“What is clear, and important to see, is people are making a huge effort to protect their stock, staff and premises. While it does come at a cost, we would urge all retailers to do everything they can to deter thieves to feel as protected and supported as they can, should the worst happen.”

The most common type of crime retailers have suffered was the theft of goods from the shopfloor or stockroom in working hours (48%), with verbal violence or assault against staff and customers (38%), overnight theft (23%), criminal damage (20%) and theft of money from tills or safe (13%) also featuring highly.

The British Retail Consortium’s (BRC) crime survey, revealed in February, further highlighted the issue and the action that needs to take place to tackle incidents in the sector.

Tom Ironside, Director of Business & Regulation at the BRC, said: “Violence and abuse take a huge toll on retail workers, their families, and their friends. While incidents might be over in a few minutes, victims can carry these experiences with them for a lifetime – and can have a severe impact on victims physical and mental health.

“Everyone has a right to go to work without fearing for their safety, and we must stamp out this scourge in retail crime once and for all for the sake of all the hardworking people in retail.”

NFU Mutual Risk Management Services’ advice for retailers to protect against shoplifting:  

  • Use customer service as a tool to deter thieves – greeting them lets them know they have been acknowledged and may deter them as they have been identified 
  • Make sure store layouts are organised and tidy, placing high-value or items which are more desirable for thieves in monitorable areas. Consider adding mirrors to the store to reduce blind spots 
  • If possible, limit the number of high value items on display and secure remaining stock within a robust, lockable area 
  • Train staff to recognise shoplifting tactics and ensure they know how to keep themselves safe from the risk of violence 
  • Consider displaying signage in-store notifying thieves that they will be prosecuted 
  • Try to minimise cash takings and use counter caches to deposit cash during opening hours. Install a good quality compliant safe which is fixed in place and preferably kept in an alarm protected area 

NFU Mutual Risk Management Services’ advice for retailers to protect against break-ins:   

  • Ensure all doors and windows have good quality locks (to BS3621) which cannot be opened from the outside or from the inside without the use of a key 
  • Always keep keys to doors, windows, and safes, in a secure location. Always remove them from your premises outside of business hours and limit their distribution amongst managers or staff.  
  • Consider investing in good shutters, grilles and bars on doors and windows. 
  • If investing in an intruder alarm, ensure it is installed by a NSI or SSAIB approved company, compliant to EN1350-1 and provides remote signalling to an alarm receiving centre 
  • If investing in surveillance (CCTV) ensure it provides good quality images, is recorded to the cloud with links to mobiles and/or remote monitoring, and meets requirements of GDPR 
  • Be aware of cyber threats and make sure you have cyber insurance in place should the worst happen 
  • Consider hiring data protection specialists to provide ongoing security of your data 
  • Have a robust policy in place for responding to intruder alarm activations – i.e. don’t let a keyholder turn up on their own 

Find out more about NFU Mutual’s information for retailers: https://www.nfumutual.co.uk/insurance-for-retailers/

CASE STUDY – BRADBEERS DEPARTMENT STORE

For Bradbeers Department Store, the issue of theft has been a problem which has cost thousands in both stock loss and prevention.

Over the last seven years, Bradbeers – which has five department and furniture stores in Hampshire and Wiltshire – has seen thousands of pounds worth of stock stolen and thousands of pounds spent on various deterrents.

A family-owned, independent retailer, Bradbeers stocks male and female clothing brands including Barbour, Gant, Joules, Ben Sherman, Hobbs and Phase Eight, while also selling high-end fragrance and beauty products, fashion accessories and homewares.

The most recent incident in December saw thieves smash through a toughened window in the early hours of the morning and make their way to steal men’s stock, including Gant and Barbour.

“Staff are called, and police alerted by the alarm monitoring company as soon as an incident happens, which can be at any time of the night,” Mark Hall, Bradbeers’ Property and Procurement Manager, said.

“The problem isn’t just the stock loss but it’s the whole process afterwards – getting the glass cleared, boarding up and re-securing, police reporting and forensics, quotations for repairs, alarm resetting – it is a time-consuming process.

“Attempted theft in our geographical area has been on the increase from what we have noticed. It could well be to do with the cost of living with thieves trying to get expensive goods they can then sell on easily – some stock has been recovered by police, but it’s often been the sort of items that criminals can move on fairly quickly, that never get found.”

A further incident in December last year highlighted another increasing issue in the industry – violence towards staff, as thieves engaged in an altercation with shop workers who tried to stop them from stealing vacuum cleaners.

“It was an afternoon incident and thieves took four vacuum cleaners and tried to run out with them,” said Mark. “Two of our female members of staff managed to recover some items after trying to fight them off.

“Staff safety is paramount, but sometimes the adrenaline kicks in. We are an independent, family business and people that work here feel upset that others would come in and try to steal from us.”

The company has installed metal roller shutter doors and smoke cloak fogging devices among a host of other protection measures, and extensive CCTV which has proved useful to police in identifying perpetrators.

“It really is a big issue and not just for us, but for the retail sector as a whole,” said Mark.  “However, we have certainly seen the benefit of the investments we have made to minimise incidents.”

Pensions: people on lower incomes can be confused and disadvantaged by defined contribution pensions

New research released finds defined contribution (DC) pension schemes, which do not automatically offer a secure, guaranteed income for life, can lead to poor outcomes for those on lower incomes.

Since the introduction of ‘pension freedoms’ in 2015, the vast majority of consumers are opting against a guaranteed income, resulting in them facing significant threats to their retirement security.

Researchers from the University of Birmingham, supported by abrdn Financial Fairness Trust, conducted in-depth interviews with DC pension consumers and gained insights from industry stakeholders to shed light on the experiences, risks and challenges of pension decision-making in the new retirement landscape.  

They concluded that the existing system disadvantages people who are already vulnerable to poor pension outcomes.

Those from more disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to have access to networks of friends and family who can help them with their decision-making. In addition, the support available for those without access to regulated financial advice (typically those with smaller pension pots and/or low-to-middle incomes) remains largely limited to written information and checklist-based guidance.

This means many people do not have access to the kind of support they need – i.e. a personal recommendation on the best course of action.

Researchers found:

1. Consumers feel confused and overwhelmed by the DC withdrawal decision. Many people feel ill-prepared for making the ‘right’ decision about accessing their DC pension savings. They are often overwhelmed by its complexity and feel they need more help in the form of personalised advice, however, the cost of this advice is unaffordable for those on lower incomes.

2. Consumers (particularly non-advised consumers) do not know who to trust when they need support with their decision. This leads to poorer outcomes for those from less affluent backgrounds, who do not have social networks of people who can recommend trustworthy advisers.

3. Consumers have to manage high levels of confusion and uncertainty about the future when making a decumulation decision. Consumers are aware they have to manage multiple risks when deciding what to do with their DC pension pot. This includes several highly unpredictable aspects of the future, such as their health and longevity, the need for care, and stock market performance. This ‘individualisation’ of risk creates a sense of insecurity and adds to the discomfort and difficulty of the decision-making process.

Researchers have called for government, regulators and employers to do more to protect low-income DC scheme holders.

They make the following recommendations:

  • Better value products – Government and regulators must ensure industry works harder to meet the needs of people on low-to-middle incomes by creating more flexible, better value products. For example, by introducing a charge cap for DC investment pathways and drawdown arrangements to prevent consumers paying unnecessarily high charges, and help rebalance some of the responsibility for achieving good consumer outcomes
  • Price-capping – There should be Government-funded, price-capped, financial advice services so that lower income people can access regulated financial advice to support their pension decisions.  
  • Reducing risk – Access to affordable, trustworthy regulated financial advice should be expanded as an option for all DC pension consumers. Through the introduction of pension freedoms, Government has created a situation where individuals are taking on too much responsibility and risk for securing an adequate retirement income. Government therefore needs to redress this balance by taking responsibility for providing appropriate protection and support. More regulation is needed of DC pensions to ensure value for customers.

Dr Louise Overton, Assistant Professor in Social Policy and Director of CHASM from the University of Birmingham, said: “Seven years on from the introduction of pension freedoms, too many people are facing poor retirement outcomes because industry and government aren’t doing enough to protect them.

“Our research shows that Pension Wise (set up as ‘a first port of call for DC consumers, offering free and impartial information and guidance) does not offer adequate support, and those without access to good quality regulated financial advice (those with smaller pension pots and lower incomes) are particularly at risk of adverse outcomes.

“We call on government, industry and the regulator to expand the scope of money guidance, widen access to regulated advice, and prioritise product innovation.”

Karen Barker, Head of Policy at abrdn Financial Fairness Trust, said: ““The current ‘one size fits all’ system is not suitable for those on lower incomes. Whilst the new pension freedoms introduced by the government have benefitted many, this research shows they cause a great deal of confusion.

“It’s not practical to expect those with smaller pension pots to pay a lot of money for advice on how to manage those pots.

“However, it’s vital that those on low-to-middle incomes are properly advised if we are to avoid a return to high levels of pensioner poverty.”

Puzzle of plastics: why do some people recycle but others don’t?

Researchers at Queen’s University Belfast have been interviewing people across the region to try to crack the puzzle of why some people recycle and others don’t.

The experts carried out 18 in-depth interviews with people living in Northern Ireland during Autumn 2019.

The findings suggest that some of the reasons that people aren’t recycling plastics are being so busy they don’t get round to recycling, they aren’t clear on what can be recycled, and they can’t see the impact that their recycling could have on the environment. 

The study was part of a larger interdisciplinary grant ‘Advancing Creative Circular Economies for Plastics via Technological-Social Transitions (ACCEPT Transitions)’ led by Professor David Rooney from the School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at Queen’s. The researchers are also involved in the ‘Clear on Plastics’ campaign, which is being run by the sustainability not-for-profit organisation WRAP.

Dr Emma Berry from the School of Psychology at Queen’s co-led the project alongside Professor Martin Dempster and Dr Debbie Roy. She explains: “In Northern Ireland, people recycle twice as much as they did 15 years ago and 10 per cent of this is plastic.

“For many people, recycling has become part of their everyday routine – we have the bins and collection service, so it’s much easier to do now. Most of us also know its ‘good’ for the environment, so we try to follow the guidelines on putting recyclable products in the right bins. However, while most people recycle, some households do not, so it’s important to understand why this might be.”

Following the research, the experts say there are three common barriers to recycling in Northern Ireland. Firstly, some people felt that with such busy lifestyles, family life, and competing priorities, recycling was often simply at the bottom of the daily agenda – it did not feature in their long list of important day-to-day tasks.

Secondly, people felt that with the enormous range of products and materials available in shops, it can also be tricky to know which products can be recycled and in which bin. Likewise, it is not always clear how to recycle some products if they are made up of multiple materials, such as a cardboard sleeve on a plastic yogurt pot, which need to be separated.

The final common barrier reported was that individuals feel that it’s often difficult to see the impact that small actions such as recycling at home or while out and about, can have on the environment, making small efforts feel pointless.

Dr Bronagh Millar from the Polymer Processing Centre at Queen’s was also involved in the project. She says: “Based on our findings, it’s understandable why many people find recycling baffling. The good news is that recycling does not have to be difficult and time consuming and small efforts do make a difference to our local environment and society.

“Taking small actions like recycling at home, not only helps reduce the amount of waste in local landfill and which gets washed up on beaches, but it is also helping our local economy because recycling supports the generation of local industries and jobs. Old and used packaging isn’t waste, it’s material that can be reformed and used to make more of the same packaging or something different.”

An interesting example of this is Cherry Pipes – a company that manufactures the land drainage pipes that are found in new housing developments, road construction, sports stadia and beyond all made from 100 per cent recycled plastic.

Recycling at home supports this business and the jobs created there and it will also continue to support economic growth as new businesses are formed and flourish in the sector.

Dr Millar adds: “Recycling at home is the best place to start and it’s where most waste comes from – in fact almost 90 per cent of all waste collected in 2019/2020 came from households!

“It’s easy to think that as one individual or family, your recycling won’t make a difference when you feel like loads of other people and companies are not recycling. But if every individual household just increased its recycling even a little bit, it would make a huge difference over time.”

Expert tips to make recycling easier at home:

  1. Place a second bin or a ‘bag for life’ beside your general waste bin (this not only makes recycling easier, but it helps remind you/others in your household to recycle).
  2. Use visual and automatic reminders to give you a nudge to recycle e.g., daily/weekly phone reminders and post-its/signs on or around your indoor bins.
  3. Likewise, create visual reminders of what goes where (visit www.recyclenow.com/local-recycling to find out what you can recycle in your area, or check out your local authority website.
  4. When you aren’t sure about whether certain packages can be recycled, look for the on-pack recycling label which is usually on the bottom or sides of packages and tells us what plastics most local authorities accept. As a rule of thumb, tins/cans, cardboard, and most hard plastics can be recycled.

Vaccines are ‘highly effective’ against Indian variant

New study shows that 2 doses of the COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective against the B.1.617.2 variant first identified in India

Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 variant is similar after 2 doses compared to the B.1.1.7 (Kent) variant dominant in the UK, and Public Health England expect to see even higher levels of effectiveness against hospitalisation and death.

The study found that, for the period from 5 April to 16 May:

  • the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 88% effective against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 variant 2 weeks after the second dose, compared to 93% effectiveness against the B.1.1.7 variant
  • 2 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were 60% effective against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 variant compared to 66% effectiveness against the B.1.1.7 variant
  • both vaccines were 33% effective against symptomatic disease from B.1.617.2, 3 weeks after the first dose compared to around 50% effectiveness against the B.1.1.7 variant

The analysis included data for all age groups from 5 April to cover the period since the B.1.617.2 variant emerged. It included 1,054 people confirmed as having the B.1.617.2 variant through genomic sequencing, including participants of several ethnicities. Data published on Thursday 20 May for vaccine effectiveness covered the period since December for those aged over 65.

The difference in effectiveness between the vaccines after 2 doses may be explained by the fact that rollout of second doses of AstraZeneca was later than for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, and other data on antibody profiles show it takes longer to reach maximum effectiveness with the AstraZeneca vaccine.

As with other variants, even higher levels of effectiveness are expected against hospitalisation and death. There are currently insufficient cases and follow-up periods to estimate vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes from the B.1.617.2 variant. PHE will continue to evaluate this over the coming weeks.

Health and Social Care Secretary Matt Hancock said: This new evidence is groundbreaking – and proves just how valuable our COVID-19 vaccination programme is in protecting the people we love.

“We can now be confident that over 20 million people – more than 1 in 3 – have significant protection against this new variant, and that number is growing by the hundreds of thousands every single day as more and more people get that vital second dose. I want to thank the scientists and clinicians who have been working around the clock to produce this research.

“It’s clear how important the second dose is to secure the strongest possible protection against COVID-19 and its variants – and I urge everyone to book in their jab when offered.”

Dr Mary Ramsay, Head of Immunisation at PHE, said: “This study provides reassurance that 2 doses of either vaccine offer high levels of protection against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 variant.

“We expect the vaccines to be even more effective at preventing hospitalisation and death, so it is vital to get both doses to gain maximum protection against all existing and emerging variants.”

Minister for COVID-19 Vaccine Deployment Nadhim Zahawi said: Almost every day we get more and more encouraging evidence about the difference our COVID-19 vaccines are making to people’s lives – with 13,000 lives saved and 39,100 hospitalisations prevented overall.

“Today’s data is astounding and a true reflection of just how important it is to get both your jabs when offered.

“I encourage all those offered an appointment to get their jab booked in as soon as possible and take full advantage of the high levels of protection the vaccines bring.”

New study reveals British Indian voting patterns and political disconnections

  • Data suggests British Indians are likely to vote Conservative, despite voting Labour in 2019
  • Research finds younger voters are more inclined to vote for Conservative, despite previously supporting Labour
  • Only 8% of British Indians feel accurately represented by policymakers and detail their political priorities for local and national Government

Ahead of Thursday’s elections, a new report from the 1928 Institute, a University of Oxford backed think-tank focused on researching and representing the British Indian community, has analysed the political alignment and priorities of British Indians from across the United Kingdom.

Analysis of over 2,300 British Indians across a broad spectrum of migration paths, religious identities, and geographical locations in the United Kingdom found that despite the majority (36%) voting Labour in the 2019 General Elections, the 2021 local elections will see a shift, with British Indians now showing support for Conservative party (33%) and Labour falling behind at 31%.

Demographic split 

The report (with fieldwork conducted in August 2020 and December 2020), which investigates and compares the relationship between the political party inclined to support and key demographics: age and location – found that the most sizeable change in voting preference is from those aged between 21 to 50, with 45.9% respondents moving away from Labour resulting in the Conservative party picking up the majority of these voters (48.8%). 

However, the analysis found the narrowest gap by age group is 26-30, with just a 2% margin in the Conservative party’s favour. However, further analysis between August and December found a significant increase in those unlikely to vote in this week’s election.

Analysis by location found that in August 2020, British Indians were more likely to vote Labour across most regions, except Scotland, where the Conservative Party took the lead, highlighting that the manifesto of the SNP did not align with the political needs and wants of British Indians.

The regions with the narrowest difference in support between the Labour and Conservative Party are the East of England (4%), followed by Greater London (6%) and the South East (8%).

In December 2020, the majority of British Indians were inclined to vote for the Conservative Party. Although Labour retained support in the North West, South East, West Midlands, British Indians across Yorkshire and Humber are inclined to the Conservative and Labour Parties equally (35% respectively). In addition, in the South West, the Liberal Democrats emerged as the strongest party. 

Political disconnect and priorities 

When asked if British Indians feel accurately represented by policymakers, only 8% agreed. Many went on to state that historically, the British Indian Diaspora were not vocal about their needs and instead focused on settling into their communities. As a result, feel that current and future generations will continue to be overlooked.

The report highlights five key policy areas British Indians would like to see prioritised by the Government: education (54%), health (52%), environment and climate change (44%), domestic poverty (36%), and equalities and human rights (33%).

When asked why British Indians felt these five areas were important, respondents explained that these areas align with their cultural values of giving back to society, or “Seva”, along with the importance of taking care of the vulnerable.

In addition, 4 in 5 British Indians (84%) want the UK Government to prioritise tackling racism and colonialism.

British Indians stand in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement calling for resources and capital to promote equality and human rights across all ethnic minorities. Respondents described that they do not find “BAME” a useful concept as the generalisation incorrectly informs the distribution of resources and identity.

Kiran Kaur Manku, Co-Founder of the 1928 Institute and Researcher Fellow at the University of Oxford, said: “This report provides empirical evidence on has found clear patterns between the needs and wants of British Indians.

“Given that almost three in four British Indians do not feel accurately represented by policymakers at and the 1928 Institute, we would like to see the policy priorities and recommendations urgently be implemented. 

“British Indians contribute significantly outlined move from conversation to action. The recently issued ‘race report’ whilst finding no institutional racism in the UK and are calling for rational actions to support society: the national curriculum to include Britain’s colonial legacy and impact, and ethnic minorities task-force the United Kingdom has synergies with embedded ethics our research.”