Bushfire sustainability : Strategies for reconciling bushfire and biodiversity with daily life

This exhibition and catalogue provides a visual record of student work exhibited at the Australian Institute of Architects offices in Brisbane from November 15 to 29, 2010. The exhibition features the final design outcomes of the inaugural Bushfire Sustainability unit conducted at QUT in semester two, 2010. The core objective of this unit was to develop our students’ skills in collaborative practice in design, research and presentation. The theme of ‘bushfire sustainability’ was chosen because living sustainably in bushfire prone landscapes presents a number of problems, the nature of which might only be resolved via multidisciplinary collaboration among the design disciplines. The students involved represent the disciplines of Interior Design, Landscape Architecture, Industrial Design, Architecture and Sustainability – all from within the School of Design at QUT. 55 students, mostly in their third year of study, worked in teams of five (one from each discipline) to design one of a number of homes in highly bushfire prone sites in either Western Australia or SE Queensland. This year level and the interdisciplinary mix are perhaps the best placed to resolve these problems: being unrestrained from the burdens of professional practice and technical overload they retain the potential for innovative, lateral thinking across the range of spatial scales and philosophical perspectives associated with inhabitation of bushfire prone landscapes. It is envisaged that, through the ‘vehicle’ of this design research, that the students’ work will contribute to understandings of how creative design disciplines might respond to this significant national problem, which hitherto has been attended to primarily by engineering and the sciences.

Independent review of ACT Corrective Services Alexander Maconochie Centre [Interim Report]

Under a Services Agreement dated 16th April 2010 the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) engaged Knowledge Consulting Pty Ltd to conduct an independent review of operations at the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC) in the ACT. The Review was commissioned following a motion passed in the ACT Legislative Assembly as follows: “That this Assembly: (1) notes: (a) concerns regarding the operation of the AMC; (b) the unanimous findings of the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety report, Inquiry into the delay in the commencement of operations at the Alexander Maconochie Centre; and (c) the Government’s intention to have a review into the operation of the AMC after its first year of operation; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) commission an independent reviewer to conduct the one year review into the AMC; (b) ensure that the review be open and transparent and public, and include input from community and non-government groups with an interest or involvement in the AMC, including on the terms of reference for the review; (c) ensure the review is completed in a timely manner and be tabled in the Legislative Assembly immediately upon completion; and (d) report upon the progress of the review in August 2010;”

Book Review: "Mark Considine, Jenny Lewis and Damon Alexander Networks, Innovation and Public Policy : Politicians, Bureaucrats and the Pathways to Change inside Government Houndsmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009"

Having wrung the most from workforce and workplace productivity initiaitves, innovation has come to the fore as a key goal and directive for public sector organisations to become more efficient. This clarion call for innovation can be heard all around the world, with public services everywhere taking up the message to develop better, smarter, novel, more innovative processes, programs and policies. In the current push for innovation, networks are considered to be a superior vehicle through which collective knowledge can be shared and leveraged; replacing or at least supplementing the role function previously provided by inventive leaders...

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

Background The Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factor study 2013 (GBD 2013) is the first of a series of annual updates of the GBD. Risk factor quantification, particularly of modifiable risk factors, can help to identify emerging threats to population health and opportunities for prevention. The GBD 2013 provides a timely opportunity to update the comparative risk assessment with new data for exposure, relative risks, and evidence on the appropriate counterfactual risk distribution. Methods Attributable deaths, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) have been estimated for 79 risks or clusters of risks using the GBD 2010 methods. Risk–outcome pairs meeting explicit evidence criteria were assessed for 188 countries for the period 1990–2013 by age and sex using three inputs: risk exposure, relative risks, and the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL). Risks are organised into a hierarchy with blocks of behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks at the first level of the hierarchy. The next level in the hierarchy includes nine clusters of related risks and two individual risks, with more detail provided at levels 3 and 4 of the hierarchy. Compared with GBD 2010, six new risk factors have been added: handwashing practices, occupational exposure to trichloroethylene, childhood wasting, childhood stunting, unsafe sex, and low glomerular filtration rate. For most risks, data for exposure were synthesised with a Bayesian meta-regression method, DisMod-MR 2.0, or spatial-temporal Gaussian process regression. Relative risks were based on meta-regressions of published cohort and intervention studies. Attributable burden for clusters of risks and all risks combined took into account evidence on the mediation of some risks such as high body-mass index (BMI) through other risks such as high systolic blood pressure and high cholesterol. Findings All risks combined account for 57·2% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 55·8–58·5) of deaths and 41·6% (40·1–43·0) of DALYs. Risks quantified account for 87·9% (86·5–89·3) of cardiovascular disease DALYs, ranging to a low of 0% for neonatal disorders and neglected tropical diseases and malaria. In terms of global DALYs in 2013, six risks or clusters of risks each caused more than 5% of DALYs: dietary risks accounting for 11·3 million deaths and 241·4 million DALYs, high systolic blood pressure for 10·4 million deaths and 208·1 million DALYs, child and maternal malnutrition for 1·7 million deaths and 176·9 million DALYs, tobacco smoke for 6·1 million deaths and 143·5 million DALYs, air pollution for 5·5 million deaths and 141·5 million DALYs, and high BMI for 4·4 million deaths and 134·0 million DALYs. Risk factor patterns vary across regions and countries and with time. In sub-Saharan Africa, the leading risk factors are child and maternal malnutrition, unsafe sex, and unsafe water, sanitation, and handwashing. In women, in nearly all countries in the Americas, north Africa, and the Middle East, and in many other high-income countries, high BMI is the leading risk factor, with high systolic blood pressure as the leading risk in most of Central and Eastern Europe and south and east Asia. For men, high systolic blood pressure or tobacco use are the leading risks in nearly all high-income countries, in north Africa and the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. For men and women, unsafe sex is the leading risk in a corridor from Kenya to South Africa. Interpretation Behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks can explain half of global mortality and more than one-third of global DALYs providing many opportunities for prevention. Of the larger risks, the attributable burden of high BMI has increased in the past 23 years. In view of the prominence of behavioural risk factors, behavioural and social science research on interventions for these risks should be strengthened. Many prevention and primary care policy options are available now to act on key risks.