Författare: Milad Haghani Senior Lecturer of Urban Risk Resilience UNSW

Exactly 50 years ago, on Christmas Eve 1974, Cyclone Tracy struck Darwin and left a trail of devastation. It remains one of the most destructive natural events in Australia’s history.

Wind speeds reached more than 200 kilometres per hour. The cyclone claimed 71 lives and injured nearly 650, and left 70% of the city’s buildings flattened.

If you are about 60 or older, chances are you remember that day, even if the cyclone did not directly affect you.

The 50th anniversary of this disaster offers a crucial opportunity to reflect on how Cyclone Tracy not only reshaped Darwin but marked a turning point in Australia’s approach to disaster resilience.

Cyclone Tracy marked a turning point in Australia’s approach to disaster resilience.
AP

The nightmare before Christmas

Cyclone Tracy was initially a relatively small, slow-moving system. But after meandering around the Arafura Sea for three days, it rounded Bathurst Island and headed towards Darwin, getting more ferocious as it approached the coast.

Some Darwin residents later reported not knowing a cyclone was approaching. They included Keith and Christine Pattinson, whose daughter Courtney Zagel later recounted their story:

They told me […] the rain started coming sideways through the louvered windows. The power went out, and everything turned black.

Keith stood against the doors to try and keep them shut, then suddenly there was a huge explosion. The roof of the house flew off and the walls fell in. Christine was thrown back into a glass cabinet. Keith was trapped beneath one of the fallen walls.

The couple spent the night in the neighbour’s house. Christine was later evacuated for urgent medical treatment.

Resident Andrea Mikfelder would later write of the cyclone’s aftermath:

our house […] was still standing. It was a brick home, but the roof was gone. The neighbour’s house looked like a dollhouse, split in half, while the next house was completely flattened.

Cyclone Tracy destroyed 10,000 homes.
AP

The Bureau of Meteorology would later estimate peak wind gusts of between 217 and 240 kilometres an hour. A report published in 2010, employing more advanced techniques, suggested even higher speeds.

Tracy left about 10,000 houses destroyed and 40,000 people homeless from a city population of 47,000. The damage bill at the time totalled A$800 million.

More than 30,000 residents were evacuated, about 60% of whom never returned. The airlift operation remains the largest in Australia’s history.

Darwin residents being evacuated on a US Air Force plane after Cyclone Tracy. About 60% of residents airlifted out of Darwin never returned.
AP

What has changed since?

In the 50 years since the tragedy, authorities have become much better able to forecast tropical cyclones. They can now warn of a cyclone’s projected path, and the likelihood of it reaching land, several days in advance.

Cyclone Tracy reshaped Australia approach to disaster response and preparedness. The Natural Disasters Organisation – today known as Emergency Management Australia – had been established a few months before the cyclone, to coordinate national-level disaster relief efforts.

In the 50 years since the tragedy, authorities have become much better able to forecast tropical cyclones.
Bureau of Meteorology

But its role and authority were still evolving. Tracy served as a “reality check” for the young organisation.

Cyclone Tracy revealed weaknesses in disaster response at all levels of government. The scale of the damage quickly outstripped local and state resources. The federal government was forced to step in to oversee mass evacuations of over 30,000 people and lead recovery efforts.

However, the Commonwealth lacked clear powers to intervene in national emergencies at the time, complicating its response effort. Its powers have since increased.

Cyclone Tracy also gave impetus to disaster management legislation, such as Queensland’s State Counter-Disaster Organisation Act, established in 1975. Such reforms set the stage for the more structured and integrated approach to disaster response now in place across Australia.

Building back better

Darwin’s devastation prompted more stringent building codes across Australia.

Even though Darwin is naturally prone to cyclonic winds, few structures had been built to withstand them.

Afterwards, regulations requiring all reconstruction to adhere to updated cyclone-resistant building standards were introduced. It meant, for example, screws rather than nails must be used to hold down corrugated iron roofing, and buildings must be clad to withstand airborne debris.

Thanks to different building rules, Cyclone Marcus caused relatively little damage in Darwin in 2018.
Glenn Campbell

Similar regulations were implemented for new construction in other cyclone-prone areas of Australia.

Today, Darwin is a far more resilient city. In 2018 it was hit by Cyclone Marcus, the most powerful storm since Tracy with wind gusts of 130 kilometres per hour. No lives were lost, and relatively few structures were damaged.

Getting to grips with the mental toll

Cyclone Tracy had a deep psychological impact on survivors.
AP

Cyclone Tracy left deep mental scars on survivors.

A study of residents who were evacuated to Sydney after Tracy revealed 58% displayed signs of psychological disturbance in the days following the cyclone. Women and older individuals were particularly affected.

Decades on, survivors described ongoing anxiety and depression, often triggered by the sounds of wind and rain.

Today, the psychological impact of natural disasters – on survivors, volunteers and first responders – is much better understood.

Initiatives such as the National Disaster Mental Health and Wellbeing Framework reflect this progress. It recognises that mental health needs after extreme events are complex, and support is needed at the individual and community level.

Volunteers are key

Cyclone Tracy also showed how community efforts and volunteers are essential in disaster recovery.

In the cyclone’s aftermath, local emergency services were overwhelmed. Volunteers quickly became the backbone of the relief effort, setting a precedent for future disaster responses.

Today, volunteers – alongside established relief organisations – still provide food, shelter, medical care and other crucial aid after disasters. As extreme weather becomes more frequent and severe under climate change, the need for community mobilisation will only grow.

The recent Senate inquiry into Australia’s Disaster Resilience recognises the ongoing need to strengthen volunteer participation and management in disaster scenarios.

Volunteers help clean out a home damaged by Cyclone Jasper in 2023.
NUNO AVENDANO

A more resilient Australia

Under climate change, tropical cyclones conditions may occur less frequently. This means Australia is expected to experience fewer tropical cyclones in future.

But a greater proportion of those that do hit are expected to be high-intensity, with stronger winds and rain.

The tragedy of Cyclone Tracy means Australia’s disaster preparedness is more advanced than it might have been. However, building a disaster-resilient nation requires continuous efforts to strengthen infrastructure, refine evacuation plans, and address vulnerabilities in communities.

Achieving this is a responsibility which should be shared between governments and communities alike. Läs mer…

The holidays are coming, airports are packed and emotions are running high. You’ve probably seen it or even been part of it: that tense moment when a passenger snaps at a flight attendant, or a near-meltdown over a seat reclining too far. Why does flying seem to bring out the worst in us?

Airplanes are, quite literally, a pressure cooker for emotions. For many, airports and airplanes are synonymous with anxiety, which often begins well before they step into the terminal.

These environments combine stress, discomfort and a loss of control, often leaving even the calmest travellers feeling on edge.

Planes also make inequalities bleedingly obvious. We’ve all experienced the envy of walking through first-class cabins to reach economy.

It’s easy to see why air rage has become so common. In fact, reported incidents have skyrocketed in recent years, exacerbated by pandemic-related anxieties.

So, let’s have a look at the science behind why we get so cranky when we fly. But more importantly, what we can do about it.

Air rage is getting worse

In recent years, reports of unruly passenger behaviour around the world have surged. Perhaps the most comprehensive indicator is the data compiled by the United States’ Federal Aviation Administration, which show a clear connection to the pandemic effect.

In 2021, the administration recorded 5,973 incidents of unruly passenger behaviour. This is a staggering 492% increase compared to the year before.

Crowded airports and long queues can contribute to air rage.
Shutterstock

To put this in perspective, the four-year average of such incidents for the period 2017–2020 was 901.75 (2017: 544, 2018: 889, 2019: 1,161, 2020: 1,009).

While the numbers have decreased since their peak in 2021, they remain significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels.

In 2022, the administration reported 2,455 incidents, followed by 2,076 in 2023, and 1,954 so far in 2024 (with final numbers for the year still pending).

These incidents in the US alone have led to 402 enforcement actions initiated in 2023, compared to a pre-pandemic high of 83 in a single year. Since 2021, fines totalling more than US$21 million (A$32 million) have been levied as a result of such incidents.

The issue is not limited to the United States (although the US seems to have a higher share of such cases).

The International Air Transport Association reported an increase in unruly passenger incidents globally, with one incident per 568 flights in 2022 – up from one per 835 flights in 2021.

The most common types of incidents include non-compliance, verbally abusive behaviour and intoxication. Notably, while non-compliance incidents initially fell after mask mandates were removed on most flights, the frequency began to rise again in 2022, ending the year 37% higher than in 2021.

Examples of non-compliance include:

smoking cigarettes, e-cigarettes, or vapes in the cabin or lavatories
failing to fasten seatbelts when instructed
exceeding carry-on baggage allowances or failing to store when required
consuming personal alcohol on board.

What’s behind the air rage phenomenon

Scholarly research has highlighted that the phenomenon arises from an interplay of stressors unique to aviation.

Environmental stressors

Research consistently identifies the physical environment of airplanes as a significant contributor to passenger frustration and antisocial behaviour.

Factors such as cramped seating, limited personal space and high-density cabin configurations exacerbate discomfort and feelings of confinement.

Psychological factors such as anxiety, claustrophobia and aviophobia (fear of flying) can also trigger an unusual behaviour that the passenger may not show in other social contexts.

Fighting for use of the armrests is a common source of annoyance among plane passengers.
Shutterstock

In some studies, physical discomfort, such as encroachments into personal space, has been found the leading trigger for anger among passengers.

Emotional triggers such as frustration over delays, long queues at the security check or unmet service expectations, can escalate minor grievances into disruptive outbursts.

Noise and hunger could further compound the situation. It can create a volatile atmosphere even before passengers acted out.

Research has also suggested that low-cost carriers, while not directly responsible for air rage, create environments conducive to disruptive behaviour due to reduced service levels, inadequate facilities and passenger stress from automation and cost-cutting measures.

Social stressors

The role of inequality within the cabin environment is another potent factor.

Research shows that airplanes serve as a microcosm of class-based society, with physical inequality (the presence of first-class cabins) and situational inequality (boarding through first-class sections) increasing the sense of frustration.

Interestingly, situational inequality can even affect first-class passengers, by highlighting their privileges, sometimes fostering a sense of entitlement that may lead to antisocial behaviour.

Alcohol use and nicotine withdrawal

Alcohol is a dominant precipitant of air rage incidents. Some studies have found that more than half of reported air rage cases involved alcohol intoxication, often fuelled by liberal airport alcohol policies and in-flight consumption.

Similarly, nicotine withdrawal was another factor, with nearly 9% of incidents attributed to smokers unable to satisfy their cravings during long flights.

Maybe think twice before opting for the alcoholic options in-flight.
Shutterstock

Sociodemographic influences

Empirical data suggest sociodemographic factors play a significant role in air rage incidents.

One study examining 228 air rage cases found nearly 90% of incidents involved male passengers, with younger adults, particularly those aged 30–39, being the most frequently implicated.

Cultural norms and expectations around air travel also influence behaviour. They shape how passengers respond to delays, discomfort, breaches of etiquette or perceived inequities.

What can be done?

In the UK, airlines and airport authorities have implemented measures, such as Edinburgh’s “No Excuse for Abuse” campaign, to address the rise in disruptive behaviour. Such initiatives remind passengers to treat staff and fellow travellers with respect, while emphasising a zero-tolerance approach to aggression.

But tackling air rage requires more than just slogans.

De-escalation techniques and early recognition of disruptive behaviour can help diffuse situations before they escalate. Studies suggest experienced and well-trained crew members are better equipped to handle such incidents.

Nothing like the scuffle to get into overhead lockers to flare already high tensions.
Shutterstock

There are also simple things you can do to improve the flying experience.

You may choose to avoid overindulging in alcohol before or during the flight, even if it feels like a way to relax. Staying hydrated and opting for non-alcoholic beverages can help keep emotions in check.
Be mindful of others when reclining your seat, storing baggage, or navigating the aisle. A little courtesy can go a long way.
Reduce stress by arriving early, ensuring your documents are in order. Avoid rushing through the airport, which is often a recipe for heightened anxiety and irritability.
Travel can be stressful for everyone. Showing empathy and being polite, even in frustrating situations, can help de-escalate potential conflicts.

Ultimately, it may be helpful to remember that air travel isn’t always glamorous. Acknowledge that delays, discomfort and inconveniences are often part of the experience and accepting this reality can help reduce frustration. Läs mer…

Soccer’s global allure is unmatched, yet its history is shadowed by tragedies.

At a recent soccer match in Nzérékoré, Guinea, a controversial refereeing decision led to unrest, resulting in crowd violence that claimed more than 50 lives.

In 2022, violence at Indonesia’s Kanjuruhan stadium during a match led to the deaths of 135 people, as security forces responded to pitch invasions with tear gas, triggering chaos and ultimately a crowd crush.

These incidents are stark reminders of the risks tied to violence in sports crowds. They stem from structural failures, poor crowd management, and often complex group dynamics that lead to violent behaviour.

Soccer crowds are especially prone to violence, which raises a pressing question: what is it about soccer and its fan culture that makes such incidents more likely to occur?

Read more:
Dedicated Roman gladiator superfans were the football hooligans of their day

Soccer fan violence: a recurring pattern

Catastrophic incidents rooted in fan violence have been intertwined with the history of this sport.

Perhaps the most extreme case is the Soccer War (more commonly known as the Football War) of 1969, when World Cup qualifiers between El Salvador and Honduras inflamed existing political tensions. Clashes between fans added to the animosity, and within days, the two nations were at war. More than 2,000 people died in the brief conflict.

There are other cases throughout the history of the game:

Estadio Nacional Disaster (1964, Peru) – Riots broke out after a disallowed goal during a Peru-Argentina match in Lima. Police used tear gas, causing chaos as fans tried to escape through locked exits. More than 300 people died.

The Heysel Stadium Disaster (1985, Belgium) – Clashes between Liverpool and Juventus fans before the European Cup final caused a wall to collapse. Thirty-nine people were killed and more than 600 were injured.

Port Said Stadium Riot (2012, Egypt) – After a match between Al-Masry and Al-Ahly, fans attacked each other with weapons while exits were blocked. Seventy-four people died and hundreds were injured.

The most notable case in Australia was the chaotic Melbourne Derby in 2022, when fans stormed the pitch at AAMI Park after a flare was thrown back into the stands. Melbourne City’s goalkeeper, Tom Glover, was struck with a metal bucket, leaving him concussed and bleeding.

Further back, in 1985, a National Soccer League match between Sydney Olympic and Sydney Hakoah erupted into chaos following a controversial referee decision. The chaos remains one of the most notorious examples of soccer crowd violence in Australia’s history.

In 1985, bitter rivals Sydney Olympic and Sydney Hakoah clashed in a NSL match at Pratten Park.

Soccer fan violence can take many forms

Soccer’s immense popularity means larger, more diverse fanbases with deeply ingrained rivalries.

Fans often see their team as a core part of their identity, with this strong group affiliation sometimes heightening “in-group versus out-group” dynamics. At times, this can lead to hostility.

And it’s not just fan-on-fan violence: soccer fan violence takes many forms. Violent and antisocial acts range from verbal abuse and offensive chants to property damage, vandalism, pitch invasion and physical assaults.

In some countries, soccer fan violence has worsened since the pandemic.

In the United Kingdom, recent police statistics reveal a 59% increase in arrests compared to pre-pandemic levels, with incidents of disorder reaching an eight-year high. Notably, 70% of offences were committed by people aged 18–30.

Players can be affected, too. A 2023 workplace safety report from the International Federation of Professional Footballers highlighted the escalating issue of violence against professional players, emphasising its detrimental impact on their physical and mental wellbeing.

The report reveals a significant number of players have experienced abuse, including threats and physical assaults, both on and off the field. Data shows fan violence against players is most common in Europe (particularly the UK, Italy and Germany) followed by Africa.

What’s behind the trend?

1. Social identity

Soccer fan violence is often deeply tied to social identity dynamics.

Studies from Germany and Brazil emphasise the role of identity fusion, where fans experience an intense bond with their teams and fellow supporters.

This fusion creates a “warrior psychology”, making threats to the group feel personal, to the point that it can drive fans to defend their identity aggressively.

High-stakes rivalry games exacerbate this: violence surges up to 70% during derby matches in Germany. These studies show that match-day violence is driven more by rivalry and group dynamics than game outcomes.

In Brazil, the same identity fusion has been shown to drive hostility, especially toward rival fan groups, as fans perceive out-group threats as existential.

2. Sociodemographic characteristics

Studies have highlighted how “fanatic” supporters – often young, unemployed, and with lower levels of education – are more likely to engage in violence, which is shaped by group norms and accepted aggression levels.

Studies in the UK have revealed historical shifts. While hooliganism once thrived in working-class and hyper-masculine cultures, better crowd management and gentrification have reduced in-stadium violence, though confrontations still occur away from arenas.

3. Drug and alcohol use

Substance use can magnify aggression.

In the UK, cocaine use among fans is higher than the national average.

The combination of the growing fan drug culture in soccer with identity fusion can develop into aggressive behaviour, particularly during intergroup conflicts.

Alcohol, while not universally causal, can also fuel confrontations by lowering inhibitions and amplifying territoriality.

What can be done?

Despite these patterns, some regions have seen significant improvements.

In the UK, decades of reforms, such as CCTV, all-seater stadiums, and higher ticket prices have fostered a more “sanitised and gentrified” fan culture, with fans themselves often regulating violent behaviour.

However, such measures can also displace violence to less-visible spaces, where rival groups arrange confrontations to avoid police detection.

Reducing soccer-related violence requires a multifaceted approach addressing both structural and psychological drivers. Evidence suggests creating positive group dynamics, rather than simply suppressing fan identity, is key.

Further strategies could also include:

initiatives to reframe rivalries as positive and reciprocal

better policing tactics using dialogue and de-escalation rather than force
improvements in managing crowd flows and reducing friction points, such as minimising counterflows of rival fans during departures
substance use interventions, particularly targeting drug use.

The challenge, however, lies in implementing these solutions while preserving the unique passion and energy that make soccer the world’s most beloved sport. Läs mer…