Organisational challenges in understanding and implementing effective buiness continuity management strategies in a complex and critical organisation : an airport case study

With the increasing complexity of modern day threats and the growing sophistication of interlinked and interdependent operating environments, Business Continuity Management (BCM) has emerged as a new discipline, offering a strategic approach to safeguarding organisational functions. Of significant interest is the application of BCM frameworks and strategies within critical infrastructure, and in particular the aviation industry. Given the increased focus on security and safety for critical infrastructures, research into the adoption of BCM principles within an airport environment provides valuable management outcomes and research into a previously neglected area of inquisition. This research has used a single case study methodology to identify possible impediments to BCM adoption and implementation by the Brisbane Airport Corporation (BAC). It has identified a number of misalignments between the required breadth of focus for a BCM program, identified differing views on specific roles and responsibilities required during a major disruptive event and illustrated the complexities of the Brisbane Airport which impede the understanding and implementation of effective Business Continuity Management Strategies.

Announcement and legislation enactment improve children’s seating position in regional areas

New legislation requires all children 7 years and younger to use child-specific Australian Standards approved restraints suitable to their age and restricts seating young children in the front of cars. Observations of child seating position and restraint use were undertaken in Toowoomba and Rockhampton before the Queensland legislation was announced (T1), after the announcement but before it was enacted (T2) and after it came into force (T3). From T1 to T2, the percentage of children seated in the rear increased (69% to 75%), with a further increase from T2 to T3 (75% to 77%). This pattern was clear when there were one or two children in the car, but not when there were 3 or more. The effect on restraint use was more complex. After the announcement (T2) the percentage of children using adult seatbelts significantly increased regardless of the number of child passengers. However, once the legislation was enacted (T3) there was a significant increase in the percentage of children using child seats/boosters where there was one or two child passengers. Where there were three or more children in the vehicle there was little change in restraint choice between pre (T1) and post (T3) legislation.

Use of electronic travel diaries and vehicle instrumentation packages in the year 2000 : Atlanta Regional Household Travel Survey

The Georgia Institute of Technology is currently performing research that will result in the development and deployment of three instrumentation packages that allow for automated capture of personal travel-related data for a given time period (up to 10 days). These three packages include: A handheld electronic travel diary (ETD) with Global Positioning System (GPS) capabilities to capture trip information for all modes of travel; A comprehensive electronic travel monitoring system (CETMS), which includes an ETD, a rugged laptop computer, a GPS receiver and antenna, and an onboard engine monitoring system, to capture all trip and vehicle information; and a passive GPS receiver, antenna, and data logger to capture vehicle trips only.

Researching with the Aboriginal Community, MPH2057- Aboriginal Health Course (Monash University), delivered by the Victorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (VACCHO) & The Burnet Institute at The Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, 29 September 2010

A copy of the slide presentation titled 'Researching with the Aboriginal Community'. It was presented by Bronwyn Fredericks for the Master of Public Health Program (MPH2057- Aboriginal Health Course) at Monash University. The Monash University Aboriginal Health Course (MPH2057) is delivered in partnership by the Victorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (VACCHO) & The Burnet Institute. The 2010 Aboriginal Health Course was run on Level 3 of The Burnet Institute, 89 Commercial Road, Prahan, Melbourne, Victoria, 29 September 2010.

Ramifications of development projects deemed “state significant”

Purpose, Design/methodology / approach The acknowledgement of state significance in relation to development projects can result in special treatment by regulatory authorities, particularly in terms of environmental compliance and certain economic and other government support measures. However, defining just what constitutes a “significant project”, or a project of “state significance”, varies considerably between Australian states. In terms of establishing threshold levels, in Queensland there is even less clarity. Despite this lack of definition, the implications of “state significance” can nevertheless be considerable. For example, in Queensland if the Coordinator-General declares a project to be a “significant project” under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971, the environmental impact assessment process may become more streamlined – potentially circumventing certain provisions under The Integrated Planning Act 1997. If the project is not large enough to be so deemed, an extractive resource under the State Planning Policy 2/07 - Protection of Extractive Resources 2007 may be considered to be of State or regional significance and subsequently designated as a “Key Resource Area”. As a consequence, such a project is afforded some measure of resource protection but remains subject to the normal assessment process under the Integrated Development Assessment System, as well as the usual requirements of the vegetation management codes, and other regulations. Findings (Originality/value) & Research limitations / implications This paper explores the various meanings of “state significance” in Queensland and the ramifications for development projects in that state. It argues for a streamlining of the assessment process in order to avoid or minimise constraints acting on the state’s development. In so doing, it questions the existence of a strategic threat to the delivery of an already over-stretched infrastructure program.