Amid resurgent geopolitical fissures and in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, there is a growing awareness in the sector of the need for, and concern about, national and international collaboration in archaeological projects. This article reflects on present-day challenges for international collaboration in central Eurasian archaeology and furthers a much-needed discussion about (re)integrating local narratives with inter-regional trends in future research. Responsible and practical proposals for bridging collaborator differences in institutional or publishing obligations, language capacities and access to resources are discussed.

Services offered by genealogy companies are increasingly underpinned by computational remediation and algorithmic power. Users are encouraged to employ a variety of mobile web and app plug-ins to create progressively more sophisticated forms of synthetic media featuring their (often deceased) ancestors. As the promotion of deepfake and voice-synthesizing technologies intensifies within genealogical contexts – aggrandised as mechanisms for ‘bringing people back to life’ – we argue it is crucial that we critically examine these processes and the socio-technical infrastructures that underpin them, as well as their mnemonic impacts. In this article, we present a study of two AI-enabled services released by the genealogy company MyHeritage: Deep Nostalgia (launched 2020), and DeepStory (2022). We carry out a close critical reading of these services and the outputs they produce which we understand as examples of ‘remediated memory’ (Kidd and Nieto McAvoy 2023) shaped by corporate interests. We examine the distribution of agency where the promotion by these platforms of unique and personalised experiences comes into tension with the propensity of algorithms to homogenise. The analysis intersects with nascent ethical debates about the exploitative and extractive qualities machine learning. Our research unpacks the social and (techno-)material implications of these technologies, demonstrating an enduring individual and collective need to connect with our past(s), and to test and extend our memories and recollections through increasingly intense and proximate new media formats.

New Zealand has committed to a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) from 2005 levels by 2030. Dietary changes within New Zealand could simultaneously improve population health and contribute towards the nation’s emissions reduction target, as agricultural emissions are estimated to account for half of New Zealand’s GHGEs(1). This research aimed to quantify the GHGEs associated with household purchases of major food groups in New Zealand and identify the sociodemographic characteristics that are associated with per capita household dietary emissions. Household dietary emissions were estimated using the NielsenIQ Homescan(R) consumer panel — a large sample of households within New Zealand who report purchasing data of take-home food and beverages. The sample is nationally representative in terms of broad geographical regions and selected key demographic characteristics. Carbon emission estimates were assigned to 1,908,485 total food and beverage purchases from 1,775 households over one year (2019) using a process-based life cycle assessment (LCA) dataset initially constructed in the United Kingdom (UK) and adapted for New Zealand(2). This LCA dataset contains estimates of greenhouse gas emissions generated over the life cycle of the production of food products from the following stages: farming and processing, transit packaging, consumer packaging, transport, warehouse and distribution, refrigeration, and overheads. Greenhouse gas emissions are expressed in kg of carbon dioxide equivalents per kg of food product over a 100-year time horizon. Total emissions from purchases of major food groups were then estimated. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the relationships between household variables and per capita dietary emissions. Overall purchases of red and processed meat (35%) and dairy products (19%) were responsible for the greatest proportion of emissions. The age group of the primary household shopper as well as household size were predictors of per capita dietary emissions — households with primary shoppers > 65 years had, on average, 33% (95% CI: 20% to 49%) higher per capita dietary emissions, compared to households with primary shoppers 34 years; and every additional household member was associated with, on average, 11% (95% CI: 9% to 13%) lower per capita dietary emissions. We have shown in this large representative sample of New Zealand households that purchases of just two food groups — red and processed meat, and dairy — were responsible for approximately half of dietary greenhouse gas emissions. Larger households had lower per capita dietary greenhouse gas emissions, and older shoppers had relatively higher greenhouse gas emissions. Whilst similar associations have been reported elsewhere more research is needed to confirm these latter findings. With enhanced understanding of the observed association between age of a household’s primary shopper and per capita dietary emissions, interventions may be devised that encourage shoppers to purchase lower-emitting foods, particularly less meat and dairy.

This study explores vulnerability narratives used in relation to older adults and others during the COVID-19 pandemic. A mixed-method content analysis was conducted of 391 articles published in two major newspapers in Canada and the USA during the first wave of the pandemic. The findings indicated that during the early months of the pandemic, limited attention was directed towards its impact on older adults or other ‘vulnerable’ subpopulations in both countries. Where evident, intrinsic (individual-level) risk factors were most consistently used to frame the vulnerability of older adults. In contrast, vulnerability was more likely to be framed as structural with regard to other subpopulations (e.g., ethno-racial minorities). These narratives also differed somewhat in Canadian and US newspapers. The framing of older adults as intrinsically vulnerable reflects ageist stereotypes and promotes downstream policy interventions. Greater attention is needed to the role of structural factors in influencing pandemic-related outcomes among older adults.